For a university, the process of changing course structures has many moving parts and is something that should not be undertaken lightly.
However, one university has shown that when implemented correctly, such an endeavour can be transformative.
Victoria University’s (VU) Block Model has proven to have favourable results in terms of student pass rates.
VU, which currently has a 75.4% satisfaction rate in overall educational experience, is ahead of other universities in terms of applying strategies to improve student experience – a key component in the new performance-based funding model.
However, in an article published in The Conversation, University of Western Australia researcher in engineering education Sally Male pointed out that the Block Model also has its pitfalls. Further, an anonymous open letter published in a literary journal claimed that not all students and academics in VU were in favour of the new model.
Male, citing her own study conducted in 2015-2017, said that employing intensive modes of instruction – such as the Block Model – can work so long as it is carefully planned.
This would mean that administrators and university staff should take into consideration the burnout that the model can potentially cause.
Male said that academics from specific disciplines, such as STEM and humanities, had preferred the more intensive model, but had cautioned that the same strategy would not work well in project-based or technical subjects.
The intensive model could also be a hurdle for students who have to balance school with work, have health issues or have poor English skills.
Students could also have a hard time retaining specifically hard concepts. Studies have found that in intensive teaching models, students who fall behind will have a harder time catching up.
Pointers for better implementation
To address this, Male suggests that universities design their curriculum in a way that students will still encounter concepts they have learnt in the succeeding courses and ensure there will be enough breaks in between the scheduling to avoid burnout.
Including sufficient breaks in between courses can also allow teaching staff to give their students feedback, she added.
Students would also have to be reminded that with a shorter span of time only allotted for a course, they would have to “work intensively from the first day”.
Restructuring of curriculum needed
The University of Tasmania (UTAS), on the other hand, has a different strategy.
Last week, the University said it will be redesigning its course offerings by 2021 to make it easier for students to navigate. As much as 2,657 units under 514 degrees are being considered in the restructuring plan.
The 2019 Student Experience Survey revealed that the University has a 77.5% satisfaction rate in terms of overall educational experience.
UTAS Vice-Chancellor Professor Rufus Black said the changes are needed to make the University more attractive for students outside the state. UTAS is also building a more diverse International student community while opening up better pathways for its graduates.
Professor Black said that to do this, the University will be getting rid of the complexity in its course structures. Just last year, the University had 8,422 overrides in their pre-requisite, anti-requisite and co-requisite rules.
The plan to restructure also comes at a time when the education sector is threatened by the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, which has already caused a drop in enrolments for the first semester.
While the aim is to give students more freedom to pick courses, university staff can also benefit from the simplified course structures. However, Professor Black said this would also mean that they would “need less people,” but assured they will try to achieve a “natural turnover.”
The University’s Curriculum Structure Transformation is expected to be settled by mid-2020, just in time for marketing by next year.