Ndagire Kizito (kizitrn@unisa.ac.za)Philemon Mahlangu (MMahlang@unisa.ac.za)University of South Africa

The set of principles and guidelines by which records of learner achievement are registered to enable national recognition of acquired skills and knowledge, thereby ensuring an integrated system that encourages life-long learning.

HEQF – Higher Education Qualifications Framework, the higher education sub-framework within the NQF.

To what extent are Unisa lecturers using the NQF (HEQF ) guidelines to design and develop learning programmes, qualifications, modules?

Meso-Lev el

• College planning• Team/Tuition • Policies (tuition)• Market niche• HR/staff needs• Rationalisation• DCLD recommendations• Form 1 & 2

Micro-Level

Analysis, Design, Dev elopment, Implementation• CPL • Team approach• Purpose, outcomes,

assessment, Form 3• Exemplar/house style • To-and-f ro

Macro Level

• National imperativ es• DoHET• Industry needs/markets• Constitution• International practices• HEQF

Phase 1• Academic planning• PQMs

Phase 2• Recurriculation• SAQA/DoHET/HEQC• Industry/Societal needs• New programmes

Phase 3• Modules

College ConsultantsResearch: success rates, retention

Quality FrameworkHEQC criteriaCPL

ResearchEv aluations

External Processes (non-negotiable)International

ODL

DCLD

Design Down Tuition policy

Learner Support/ Tutors

HEQC

QUALITY ASSURANCE

Scheduling

• Editorial

• Dispatch

• Sending

• Usage

Internal Processes (AD model + other models)

PLOTTING PROCESS FLOW CHART: CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

Gather information based on actual lecturer experiences of designing teaching and learning in order to better inform the curriculum design processes. Done in the context of the current Unisa drive to implement an institutionally-wide and team-based approach to curriculum design. David Merrill’s First principle of designing instruction framework was used as the underlying theory for developing the interview questions and interpreting the results. A qualitative analysis of the responses was carried out using the constant-comparison method.

The questions addressed four issues:

A. The use of module, Form 3 to design a module.B. How level descriptors assist in the alignment of

programmes with the NQF.C. The benefits of a team approach to designing

ModulesD. How UNISA’s Tuition policies help in guiding

and ensuring compliance to HEQF .

To what extent does the Module form (Form 3) document help you to plan and implement in presenting and teaching this module?Have you used it to guide your writing of the study guide? If so, how? [structure, alignment, weighting, credits, duration]Have you used it to formulate the assignments, both formative and summative?Would you continue using this form in the future?Are there any specific challenges, problems?What problems are you finding?

How does the Level Descriptor document help you to align the first, second and third year level modules, etc. Does it enable you to pitch the course at the correct level?What is your understanding of the following terms:

o Foundational competencieso Reflexive ando Practical competencies?

What challenges/problems are you facing still?

Do you prefer to work alone or in teams when developing your learning materials? (team approach)Is stakeholder involvement useful in the design process?What makes teaching effective at UNISA ?◦ Do you base your assignments on real world

problems? (Explain).◦ How do you integrate student’s previous learning

experience into the development ?◦ How do you make sure that your students

demonstrate actual learning activities?

What is your experience of teaching and learning at UNISA in terms of:

o Guidance given to you (policies)o The UNISA contexto The processes

How do you include sufficient opportunities for practicing/mastering the intended skills/competencies?How do you ensure that your learners can reflect and transfer what they have learnt into the real world?

Link to findings

Lecturers ( academics )’s knowledge of the NQF is limited Unisa support systems and processes are not adequate to address lecturers needsLecturers ( academics ) prefer individualised and staggered support.DCLD (our unit’s) support provision could beImproved if it were designed to suit individuals as well as groups.

Lewis Elton: {Centre for the Advancement of teachingand Learning, University College of London}

Contrast between school and university with regards to ‘scholarship’.CPD ( Continuous Professional Development ) in HE and its role in the development of (SoTL) Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.[Humboldt, 1810]

Lewis Elton: {Centre for the Advancement of teachingand Learning, University College of London}

the “Humboldtian principle”

Student at centre

“...school is concerned with agreed and accepted knowledge” (Elton, 2009,p. 248 from Humboldt (1810),

teacher

“...university treats scholarship in terms of not yet completed solved problems, whether in research or teaching” (Elton, 2009,p. 248 from Humboldt (1810),

Student-centred”

teacher collaborates with student

Karin Crawford: {School of Health and Social Care, University of Lincoln, UK}

Reports on a study set out to investigate views and perspectives of academics concerning CPD.Proposes to start investigation by asking academics, what they do, why and the contextual influencesIdeological assumptions: uses activity theory to frame a possible investigatory framework.Suggests tapping into academic voices experiences: influenced by CPL and their engagement.Points to challenges related to academic involvement.

NQF Principles

(1) Integrated assessment

(2) Recognition of achievements

(3) Access, progression and portability

(4) Recognition of Prior Learning

(5) Legitimacy and credibility

(6) Flexibility

(7) Guidance of learners

David Merrill - First principle of designing instructionFramework for designing learning & framing questions

(1) Activation of prior experience

(2) Demonstration of skills(3) Application of

skills

(4) Integration of skills into real world problems of prior experience

Problem /task

Tensions betweenNeed for structure, standardisation and accountability versus flexibility and level of academic freedom in higher educationNQF framework does not provide clear answers of how to balance academic rigour, accountability with flexibility and issues related to access, progression and portability.Within Unisa, the systems and processes overtake /outweigh meaningful Interpretation of NQF guidelines.

If we are to consider CPD related to NQFat Unisa :

Which principles shall we use to for CPD development?What teaching/learning approach will shape this

CPD?On what academic choices will this CPD be based ?

The academic/lecturer should have has some choice with regards to the training and support they require.

The proposed system also includes monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for continuous tracking of these interventions in order to identify problems and make the suggested improvements.

A degree of institutional support will be required to guarantee the future success of this propose intervention.

Proposed strategy for aligning the requirements of the NQF and the internal Unisa curriculum design processes :

Providing for the lecturers a series of CPD support and training options (not the one-size-fits-all ), which includes :oindividual face-to-face sessionsogroup workshops supported with a series ofoprint based and online support tools uploaded onto and internal Unisa website.

Crawford, Karin(2008) 'Continuing professional development in higher education: the academic perspective', International Journal for Academic Development, 13: 2, 141 — 146URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13601440802076657

Elton , Lewis (2008), Continuing Professional Development inHigher Education :The role of the scholarship of teachingand learning, ‘Arts and Humanities in Higher Education’ 2009 8;

247URL: http://ahh.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/8/3/247.

Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. ‘Educational Technology Research and Development’, 50(3), 43-59. URL: http://id2.usu.edu/Papers/5FirstPrinciples.PDF