HES712, THEME 1 & 2 PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT/QUALITY ASSURANCE: CAPSTONE PROJECT MARKING RUBRIC

MAY/JUNE 2012

STUDENT NUMBER: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Instructions for the assessor of the Summative Programme Development/Quality Assurance Capstone Project: In the rubric below, assess the candidates performance in completing/compiling the relevant tasks/sections and the entire project document by firstly only marking the relevant performance level for each sub-criterion in the rubric with a tick (). Secondly, on the basis of the pattern of the levels of performance demonstrated for the sub-criteria in each of Major Criteria 1 to 14 (for Task 1) and 1 to 7 (for Task 2) below, award a generic mark in the relevant right hand side box for the particular Major Criterion. In the end, add all the marks for the different Major Criteria to eventually obtain a total mark for the summative project document. Provide comments in the spaces provided for this purpose. Note: The following performance level descriptors apply for all the assessment criteria in the rubric, as well as for the different sections in the rubric: Performance level descriptors for all assessment criteria in this rubric (compare with the SOLO taxonomy): F (Inadequate/Criterion not mastered/Pre-structural or Uni-structural level): The candidate either did not perform the task OR performed the task incorrectly. There is no real demonstration of understanding of the phenomenon/phenomena and the candidate uses irrelevant or incorrect information and no proper conclusion is possible OR there is very limited evidence of understanding because the task is performed through a mere descriptive reproduction of content from the literature and there is very little basis for any conclusion. The candidate is not yet able to perform the task correctly and independently. In future, he/she will still need a lot of assistance to perform this task correctly and independently. 0%-49% B (Adequate/Minimal to sufficient mastery of the criterion/Multi-structural or relational level): The candidate did the task and has provided evidence that he/she is he/she is able to perform the task independently. He/she has demonstrated limited understanding of the phenomenon/phenomena through the coverage of a number of aspects/characteristics but in a piecemeal way and has ignored inconsistencies (MINIMAL MASTERY). OR The candidate has demonstrated considerable understanding of the phenomenon/phenomena through selective use of relevant data from the literature. Explained relationships are clear and logical conclusions are made which are consistent with the relevant literature and policy documents (SUFFICIENT MASTERY). 50%-74% A (Mastered beyond normal expectations/Extended abstract level): The candidate did the task and has demonstrated more than sufficient evidence that he/she is able to perform this task independently. He/she has provided evidence of a deep understanding through a high level of abstract thinking about the data from the literature. Relevant ideas have been generalised and applied in new contexts where possible. The possibility of alternative conclusions has been recognised. There are no inconsistencies. 75%-100% RUBRIC: THE SUMMATIVE PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT/QUALITY ASSURANCE CAPSTONE PROJECT DOCUMENT CONTAINS THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE OF LEARNING:
Performance levels: F: Criterion Not Mastered (Pre-structural OR Uni-structural) B: Criterion Minimally to Sufficiently Mastered (Multi-structural OR Relational) 50-74% A: Criterion Mastered Beyond Expectations (Extended Abstract) 75-100% Mark earned for Major Criterion

Sub-criteria:

0-49%

TASK 1 (PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT)

MAJOR CRITERION 1: THE CANDIDATE PROVIDES A CONCISE, LOGICAL AND CLEAR OUTLINE OF THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THE PARTICULAR PROGRAMME WHICH SATISFIES THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA:

It is concisely formulated. It is logical, clear and easy to understand The process is in line with national legislation/policy directives The process is evident from all the other documentation included

01
Comments:

1.5 2

2.5 3

/3

MAJOR CRITERION 2:

THE INSTITUTIONAL, DoHET, HEQC, SAQA & PROFESSIONAL BOARD ACCREDITATION FORMS AND DOCUMENTS INCLUDED CLEARLY, CONSISTENTLY AND CORRECTLY IDENTIFY THE BASIC PROGRAMME INFORMATION ACCORDING TO THE SUB-CRITERIA PROVIDED BELOW

Type of programme and qualification are provided Designator(s) and qualifier(s) (as applicable) are sufficient CESM category/categories is/are correct Mode(s) of delivery are indicated and is/are practicable The correct NQF level is provided Total credits for the qualification are appropriate Duration of the qualification is appropriate Admission requirements/Learning assumed to be in place is appropriate for this qualification Site(s) of delivery is/are appropriate PQM status (at the relevant institution is indicated

/3 01 1.5 - 2 2.5 3

Comments:

MAJOR CRITERION 3:

THE PROGRAMME DESIGN ADHERES TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA

It is consonant with the HEIs vision and mission It forms part of the HEIs planning and resource allocation It includes a clear and logical rationale and justification which takes into account student and other stakeholder needs In the SAQA submission the international comparability of the programme is also concisely argued The programme articulates well with other relevant programmes (as applicable and where possible) The curriculum is clearly outlined in terms of its major building blocks (either

modules or unit standards) The exit level outcomes of the programme are clearly aligned with its purpose Appropriate Associated Assessment Criteria for the exit level outcomes are provided in the SAQA submission The exit level and module/unit standard outcomes and associated assessment criteria are all clearly and correctly formulated (i.e. OBE rules of formulation) The rules of combination and progression of the constituent modules/unit standards and are clearly and logically outlined The competences to be developed in the programme are correctly aligned with the appropriate NQF level(s) and their descriptor(s) The programme meets all the relevant national, professional and vocational requirements (as applicable) The modes of delivery and learning activities planned for the programme are appropriate All the evidence attachments required by the different authorities application/accreditation documentation are provided

03
Comments:

3.5 5

5.5 7

/7

MAJOR CRITERION 4:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUT CONCISE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO STUDENT RECRUITMENT, ADMISSION AND SELECTION FOR THE PROGRAMME AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA::

Admission of students to the programme is commensurate with the programmes academic requirements, institutional regulations and national legislation The recruitment, admission and selection of students in the programme occur within an appropriate framework of widened access and equity Recruitment documentation informs prospective students accurately and sufficiently The enrolment plan (including the no of students) takes into account the programmes ILOs, its capacity to offer good quality education and the needs of relevant stakeholders/profession, etc. The programme makes provision for appropriate recognition of prior learning (RPL) All the evidence attachments required by the different authorities application/accreditation documentation are provided

01
Comments:

1.5 - 2

2.5 3

/3

MAJOR CRITERION 5:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUT CONCISE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO STAFF QUALIFICATIONS, SIZE AND SENIORITY AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA:

Staff with the appropriate minimum qualifications, teaching, assessment and research experience and competence A trained and informed programme coordinator with leadership abilities has been identified Academics staff will have opportunities for enhancing, developing and growing their relevant academic and professional competences Provision will be made for appropriate and equitable staff workload: appropriate ratio of full time staff to part time staff Academic and support staff will be of sufficient size and seniority for the nature & field of the programme Academic and support staff will be of sufficient size and seniority for the size of the student body: appropriate staff:student ratio Staff recruitment & employment according to relevant legislation and make provision for redress & equity Support staff will be adequately qualified and their knowledge & skills will be regularly updated

01
Comments:

1.5 - 2

2.5 3

/3

MAJOR CRITERION 6:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUT CONCISE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE PLANNED TEACHING & LEARNING STRATEGY (AND PORTGRADUTE SUPERVISION PRACTICES AND/OR DISTANCE TUITION, IF APPLICABLE) AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA:

The teaching, supervision & learning strategies (as applicable) reflect the institutions vision and mission The teaching, supervision & learning strategies (as applicable) are all aimed at promoting student learning The teaching, supervision & learning strategies (as applicable) are appropriate for the site(s) and mode(s) of delivery, NQF level and student composition The teaching & supervision methods, mode of delivery & learning materials development are aimed at the achievement of all the ILOs There are appropriate support and assistance programmes for students on all the programme sites (including quality learning guides and materials) There are appropriate mechanisms in place to monitor student progress, evaluate programme impact and effect improvement There are processes in place to identify and support inactive and underperforming students The documents include information about implementation plans for all the above-mentioned programmes and mechanisms There are clear guidelines and/or regulations governing the roles & responsibilities of lecturers, supervisors and students, as well as procedures

for quality assurance, complaints, grievances, plagiarism, etc. In case of postgraduate education, there are appropriate policies and procedures governing the appointment of supervisors There are appropriate opportunities for staff to develop their own teaching and supervision competences All the evidence attachments required by the different authorities application/accreditation documentation are provided

0 1.5
Comments:

2 2.5

34

/4

MAJOR CRITERION 7:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUT CONCISE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE PLANNED ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING (AND PORTGRADUTE SUPERVISION PRACTICES AND/OR DISTANCE TUITION, IF APPLICABLE) AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA:

All assessments in the programme are aimed at promoting student learning and the achievement of the relevant ILOs There are appropriate policies and procedures for internal assessment and moderation There are appropriate policies and procedures for external moderation of assessment There are appropriate policies and procedures for monitoring student progress There are appropriate policies and procedures for monitoring explicitness, validity and reliability of assessment practices There are appropriate policies and procedures for the recording and reporting of assessment results and providing feedback to students There are appropriate policies and procedures for settling of assessment disputes There are appropriate policies and procedures for the rigour and security of the assessment system There are appropriate policies and procedures for assessing and recognising prior learning (RPL) There are appropriate policies and procedures for the development of staff competence in assessment (assessment training) There are appropriate policies and procedures for managing formative & summative assessment There are appropriate policies and procedures for the assessment of experiential learning (if applicable) There are appropriate policies and procedures governing the use of appropriate forms, methods, instruments & tools of assessment In case of postgraduate education, there are appropriate policies and procedures governing the assessment and approval of research proposals, reports, dissertations and theses All the evidence attachments required by the different authorities application/accreditation documentation are provided

0 1.5
Comments:

2 2.5

34

/4

MAJOR CRITERION 8:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUT CONCISE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE AVAILABLE INFRASTRUCTURE AND LIBRARY RESOURCES AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA:

There are adequate venues available for offering this programme Adequate provision has been made for laboratories and/or special equipment that is needed for offering the programme effectively All the venues and equipment comply with health, safety and/or clinical regulations (as applicable) Sufficient and adequate IT infrastructure and equipment are available to both staff and students Library and other resources required for the programme are readily available, adequate and properly managed and maintained Sufficient training is provided to both staff and students in the use of IT, library and other relevant resources

01
Comments:

1.5 - 2

2.5 3

/3

MAJOR CRITERION 9:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUT CONCISE INFORMATION PERTAINING TO PROGRAMME ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA:

There are effective administrative services & systems for providing and managing information There are effective administrative services & systems for dealing with the needs of a diverse student population There are effective administrative services & systems for ensuring the integrity of certification of the qualification

01
Comments:

1.5 - 2

2.5 3

/3

MAJOR CRITERION 10:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT BUT CONCISE EVIDENCE THAT THE FOLLOWING CRITICAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL OUTCOMES HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED AT MASTERS LEVEL:

Communicating information effectively using language/visual skills Solving a problem using creative & critical thinking

Working independently by taking sole responsibility for this task Collecting, analysing and critically evaluating information (research) Using science & technology effectively, critically & responsibly Providing proof that a lot has been learned in this theme/module Showing cultural & aesthetic sensitivity in this exercise Developing a macro-vision of programme development (showing understanding of programme development as a system

0 1.5
Comments:

2 2.5

3 3.5

/3.5

MAJOR CRITERION 11:

THE ACCREDITATION APPLICATION DOCUMENTS PROVIDE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION THAT THE FOLLOWING THEME/ MODULE OUTCOMES HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED:

The student has shown that he/she is acquainted with, can apply and/or can critically reflect on (as required in this exercise) the following: Contemporary perspectives on and key concepts in curriculum and programme development OBE as a basis for programme, qualification, module and unit standard development The nature, differences & similarities of academic programmes, qualifications, modules and unit standards Relevant institutional and national legislation, policy and guideline documents on programme, qualification, module & unit standard development Planning and accrediting academic programmes Implementing and evaluating academic programmes (IMPLICITLY) Doing all of the above with confidence & enthusiasm

0 1.5
Comments:

2 2.5

3 3.5

/3.5

MAJOR CRITERION 12:

THE CANDIDATE CONCLUDES THE PROJECT WITH A CRITICAL REFECTION ON THE FOLLOWING ASPECTS AND ACCORDING TO THE SUB-CRITERIA AS INDICATED:

The candidate provides a critical reflective but concise account of what he/she has learned in Theme 1 of the module (with reference to what was experienced positively and what has been experienced negatively) He/she critically reflects on how the theories of curriculum development, OBE & constructive alignment, as well as the learning activities performed during the semester have/have not assisted him/her in designing this programme (Reference to positive & negative experiences) The critical reflection bears evidence of the candidates reflexive competence

0 1.5
Comments:

2 2.5

34

/4

MAJOR CRITERION 13:

THE PROJECT DOCUMENT IS ALSO CONCLUDED BY PROVIDING A COMPLETE LIST OF REFERNCES CONSULTED IN THE PROCESS OF DESIGNING AND APPLYING FOR THE ACCREDITATION OF THE PROGRAMME AND ACCORDING TO THE 6 FOLLOWING SUB-CRTERIA:

All literature documents consulted are acknowledged in the texts and also included in the list of references A generally accepted method of referencing is used (preferably the Harvard method). The referencing technique is consistently applied in the same manner Typing and punctuation errors are kept at a minimum

01
Comments:

1.5 - 2

2.5 3

/3

MAJOR CRITERION 14: THE FINAL PROGRAMME DEVELOPMENT PROJECT DOCUMENT WAS COMPILED STRICTLY ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDED I.E. ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA: All the components as prescribed in the project instructions are included, i.e. a title page, table of contents, outline of the accreditation process, the relevant letters and application documents or forms, a final critical reflection & a complete list of references The candidate did not unnecessarily deviate from the instructions provided All the information was provided in a concise way as requested The technical and aesthetic quality of the entire project document is of a high quality and bear evidence of diligence, hard work & neatness

01
Comments:

1.5 - 2

2.5 3

/3

GENERAL COMMENTS:

TOTAL MARK OBTAINED FOR TASK 1:

______________

out of 50

TASK 2 (QUALITY ASSURANCE)

Performance levels: F: Criterion Not Mastered (Pre-structural OR Uni-structural) B: Criterion Minimally to Sufficiently Mastered (Multi-structural OR Relational) 50-74% A: Criterion Mastered Beyond Expectations (Extended Abstract) 75-100%

Mark earned for Major Criterion

Sub-criteria:

0-49%

MAJOR CRITERION 1: THE CANDIDATE PROVIDES A CONCISE, LOGICAL AND CLEAR OUTLINE OF THE SCOPE AND RELEVANCE OF THE SELFEVALUATION REPORT, WHICH SATISFIES THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA: It is concisely formulated and conveys the core message of the report. It is logical, clear and easy to understand The report is in line with national legislation/policy directives The report is evident from all the other documentation included

02
Comments:

2.5 3

45

/5

MAJOR CRITERION 2: THE QUALITY ASSURANCE CRITERIA TO ASSURE QUALITY TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT ADHERE TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA QUALITY TEACHING AND LEARNING ACCORDING TO FOLLOWING CHE/HEQC CRITERIA: Self-evaluation of teaching as means of enhancing reflective practice Constructive self-evaluation of teaching Support of self-evaluation teaching Recognition and reward of teaching excellence Staff appraisal system Improved teaching practices QUALITY ASSESSMENT ACCORDING TO FOLLOWING CHE/HEQC CRITERIA: Academic and professional standards in the design, approval, implementation and review of assessment strategies for subject /course /programmes/ qualifications awarded Ensure validity, reliability and integrity of programmes/qualifications awarded Handling of RPL within the institution To what extent academics responsible for official decisions on assessment (recorded and documented securely, accurately and systematically overtime) Staff development opportunities for assessment Constructive alignment of teaching, learning and assessment Collecting, analysing and critically evaluating information (research) Developing a macro-vision of quality assurance (showing understanding of quality assurance as a process) All the evidence attachments required by the external reviewer/panel are provided

07
Comments:

7.5 11

11.5 15

/15

MAJOR CRITERION 3: GOOD PRACTICE DESCRIPTORS TO ASSURE QUALITY TEACHING, LEARNING AN DASSESSMENT ADHERES TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA GOOD QUALITY TEACHING AND LEARNING PRACTICES ACCORDING TO FOLLOWING CHE/HEQC CRITERIA: Evaluation mechanisms (Policy and guidelines): Teaching and learning policies, procedures and regulations (plan and strategy) The institution has specific mechanisms to manage and assure the quality of teaching and learning activities Documents, guidelines needed, ethical considerations (employment contract) PMS, Excellence policy, Staff development, Tutoring Teaching portfolio, peer review, incentives, counseling, consultation fee, preassessment, VC excellence awards, sharing good practices, bridging programme, career office Peer reviewing Teaching portfolio, student feedback QUALITY ASSESSMENT ACCORDING TO FOLLOWING CHE/HEQC CRITERIA: Evaluation mechanisms (Policy and guidelines): Institutional assessment policies, procedures and regulations (including RPL) adherence and rights/responsibilities. As well as structures to implement (accountability), monitor and review thereof. The institution has specific mechanisms to manage and assure the quality of assessment of teaching and learning (valid, reliable and transparent practices). Moderation system: Assessment of students at course level Assessment of students at exit of qualifications Validation of programmes assessment strategies Guides for external examiners/programme evaluators External examiner/ programme evaluators reports Correspondence with external examiners/ programme evaluator Staff development strategy for assessment training Staff handbooks /list of prescribed material Assessment plan (schedule with dates and times) Continuous assessment and feedback Programme and subject/course/module templates Description of assessment strategies and related student hand-outs

Assessment instruments/rubrics (tasks) with explanatory/supporting documents provided to students Examples of students work with feedback, as well as marked examination and assignment scripts Mark sheets and marking guides Self-evaluation and improvement from academics Student opinion surveys that include both indirect and direct comment on assessment Student database Collecting, analysing and critically evaluating information (research) All the evidence attachments required by the institution/department/school/unit are provided

07
Comments:

7.5 11

11.5 15

/15

MAJOR CRITERION 4: THEME/

THE SELF-EVALUATION REPORT DOCUMENT (TASK 2) PROVIDES SUFFICIENT INFORMATION THAT THE FOLLOWING MODULE OUTCOMES HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED:

The student has shown that he/she is acquainted with, can apply and/or can critically reflect on (as required in this exercise) the following: Contemporary perspectives on quality assurance in higher education Quality assurance systems and mechanisms, with specific reference to the core functions of universities and colleges, i.e. learning design, facilitation and assessment; research; and community engagement Reviewing academic programmes

0 1.5
Comments: MAJOR CRITERION 5:

2 2.5

34

/4

THE CANDIDATE CONCLUDES THE CAPSTONE PROJECT (TASK 2) WITH A CRITICAL REFECTION ON THE FOLLOWING ASPECTS AND ACCORDING TO THE SUB-CRITERIA AS INDICATED:

The candidate provides a critical reflective but concise account of what he/she has learned in Theme 2 of the module (with reference to what was experienced positively and what has been experienced negatively) He/she critically reflects on quality assurance criteria and good practice descriptors and how it assisted/not assisted him/her in analysing this programme (Reference to positive & negative experiences) The critical reflection bears evidence of the candidates reflexive competence

0 1.5
Comments: MAJOR CRITERION 6:

2 2.5

34

/4

THE CAPSTONE PROJECT DOCUMENT (TASK 2) IS ALSO CONCLUDED BY PROVIDING A COMPLETE LIST OF REFERNCES CONSULTED IN THE PROCESS OF SELF-EVALUATING TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRAMME AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRTERIA:

All literature documents consulted are acknowledged in the texts and also included in the list of references A generally accepted method of referencing is used (preferably the Harvard method). The referencing technique is consistently applied in the same manner Typing and punctuation errors are kept at a minimum

0 1.5
Comments:

2 2.5

3 4

/4

MAJOR CRITERION 7:

THE SUMMATIVE CAPSTONE PROJECT DOCUMENT (TASK 2) WAS COMPILED STRICTLY ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDED AND ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SUB-CRITERIA:

All the components as prescribed in the project instructions are included, i.e. a title page, table of contents, outline of the assessment criteria and good practice descriptors, relevant and applicable examples provided, a final critical reflection & a complete list of references The candidate did not unnecessarily deviate from the instructions provided All the information was provided in a concise way as requested The technical and aesthetic of the entire project document is of a high quality and bear evidence of diligence, hard work & neatness

01
Comments:

1.5 - 2

2.5 3

/3

GENERAL COMMENTS:

TOTAL MARK OBTAINED FOR TASK 2:

______________ out of 50

FINAL MARK FOR HES712: _______

out of 100

SIGNATURES:

____________________________ ASSESSOR ____________________________

____________________________ INTERNAL MODERATOR ____________________________

____________________________ EXTERNAL MODERATOR ____________________________

DATE

DATE

DATE