Centre for Higher Education
Research, Teaching and Learning
(CHERTL)
POSTGRADUATE DIPLOMA
IN HIGHER EDUCATION
PGDip (HE)
For Rhodes University staff members
Course Guide
2016
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
2
POSTGRADUATE DIPLOMA IN HIGHER EDUCATION
(PGDip (HE))
Table of Contents
1.
Purpose of the course
2
2.
PGDip (HE) and the HEQSF
2
2.1
Entrance level requirements
2
3.
Nature of the course
3
4.
Time commitment
4
5.
Assessment of the course
4
6.
Registration
5
7.
Recognition of prior learning (RPL)
6
8.
Exit level outcomes for the PGDip (HE)
6
9.
Structure of the course
6
Module 1:
Learning and teaching in higher education
7
Module 2:
Curriculum development
8
Module 3:
Assessment of and for student learning
8
Module 4:
Evaluation of teaching and courses
9
10.
Materials for the course
13
11.
Facilitators of the course
14
12.
Contact details
17
Appendix 1:
Portfolio assessment criteria
18
Appendix 2:
22
Appendix 3:
Critical cross-field education outcomes
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
23
1
1. Purpose of the course
The purpose of the Postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education (PGDip (HE)) is to facilitate
the professional development of lecturers as reflective practitioners in higher education by
developing their knowledge of Higher Education (HE) as a field of study. The programme is
designed to assist lecturers to enhance their ability to facilitate, manage and assess students’
learning, and provide professional accreditation for HE practitioners.
The purpose of the Postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education is to facilitate the professional
development of lecturers as reflexive practitioners in higher education by developing their
knowledge of Higher Education (HE) as a field of study. The programme is designed to assist
lecturers to enhance their ability to facilitate, enhance and assess students' learning, and
provide professional accreditation for HE practitioners.
Shifts in higher education around massification, globalisation and the discourse of 'high
skills' have brought a changed workplace for academics in which we have to negotiate new
expectations, identities and challenges. Whilst these changes are international, they have
particular nuances and urgency in the South African context where historical disadvantage,
social justice, decolonisation and transformation are challenges to be addressed. This course
aims to contribute towards lecturers' ability to respond to these challenges and to meet the
real learning needs of their students.
2. PGDip (HE) and the HEQSF
The Diploma is registered as a 120 credit honours level (level 8) course on the Higher
Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF). Rhodes University is a registered
provider for the course and the qualification is awarded by the Rhodes Education Faculty.
Participants must complete normal registration procedures through the Faculty of Education
at the beginning of each year.
2.1
Entrance level requirements
Lecturers applying for the course must normally hold at least a Bachelor’s degree or
equivalent and should preferably have a minimum of one year’s higher education teaching
experience (at time of registration). Course participants must be proficient in both oral and
written formal English. Participants must be computer literate and have reliable access to the
Internet to ensure access to the on-line Learning Management System (RUconnected) and
other online learning platforms used to support the teaching and learning experience.
2.2
Structure of the Diploma
In order to obtain the qualification participants are required to meet the outcomes of four
compulsory modules and one elective module.
1. Learning and teaching in Higher Education
2. Curriculum development
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
2
3. Assessment of and for student learning
4. Evaluation1 of teaching and courses
5. Elective
Modules 2,3 & 4 have been designed to support lectures in fulfilling the requirements of
the Rhodes University policies on teaching and learning.
Elective module: Research in Higher Education
Participants are required to choose an area of their practice for specific investigation. For
example:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Design and implement eLearning
Design and implement experiential learning
Supervision of research in Higher Education
Leadership in Higher Education
Internationalisation in Higher Education
Research elective
Design and implement Service-Learning
Social inclusion in Higher Education (e.g. integrating HIV-Aids, race and gender
issues etc. into the curriculum)
The elective module is to be completed through self-study although CHERTL staff
members are available to assist participants.
3. Nature of the course
In developing the course, the concern has been to:




focus on work-based learning, i.e. lecturers' everyday practice
allow the teaching portfolio to be used as a means of assessing participants' attainment of
the learning outcomes set for the course
allow prior learning to be accredited
recognise the capacity of participants to work as independent and mature students.
The term ‘evaluation’ is used to denote discerning the quality of teaching and courses, while ‘assessment’
refers to the processes related to the judgement of and for student learning.
1
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
3
Some of the key features in the programme are2:









critical engagement with the field of higher education
critical engagement with the role and practice of the lecturer in their teaching context
rather than to "teach" them a set of generic skills or techniques
to develop contexts in which lecturers meet to draw upon the insights that their different
disciplines offer to issues of teaching and learning
to help lecturers to consider not only disciplinary knowledge but also theory regarding the
way students construct that knowledge
to help lecturers to develop strategies for encouraging active learning
to encourage lecturers to take into account issues of transformation, diversity and social
inclusion
to encourage lecturers to be cognisant of, and take into account in their teaching, students
language and literacy needs
to encourage reflection on the processes that take place in the PGDip (HE) group and to
consider how they may provide a model for lecturers' work with their students
to offer lecturers opportunities to experience the use of ICTs in teaching and learning.
4. Time commitment
Participants are required to attend all contact sessions. Classes are one and a half hours to
two hours long and are held weekly during term time. Session times are scheduled in
consultation with participants. Between sessions participants will be required to complete
readings and tasks and to participate in discussion forums via various elearning platforms.
RUconnected is used to manage the readings and tasks designed to help participants to meet
programme outcomes.
Participants will be required to complete tasks and engage with set readings before sessions.
In addition, they will be asked to keep an on-line reflective document in which they reflect on
the processes that occur during the sessions and in which they self-assess how what they
learn influences their practice.
As the course is work-based, lecturers’ normal teaching practice is regarded as part of their
reflective learning in the course. Participants are expected to engage in self-directed learning
and to use their own initiative in sourcing material relating to teaching and learning in their
disciplines.
5. Assessment of the course
The course as a whole will be assessed by means of an integrated teaching portfolio.
Participants will be required to submit an assignment on completion of each module.
The submission of these assignments constitutes a DP requirement for the course. The
objective of the assignments is to provide formative assessment to support the participants in
the building of the teaching portfolio and meeting the outcomes of the qualification.
2
Adapted from and based on, Rowland, S (2000), The Enquiring University Teacher. The Society for Research
into Higher Education & Open University Press: Buckingham.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
4
Appendix 1 contains a list of criteria that are appropriate to the purpose, exit level outcomes
and HEQSF level of the PGDip (HE) qualification. Appendix 2 relates to the grade
descriptors used in the summative assessment of the portfolio.
Participants are urged to make use of the opportunities for formative assessment on written
work offered by CHERTL staff members.
Those participants not choosing to Participants are required to submit two suitably bound
hardcopies as well as an electronic (PDF) copy of their Teaching Portfolios by the middle of
January 2017 in order to graduate in April 2017. The portfolio will be subject to internal, as
well as external, examination. A defence of the portfolio may be required.
6. Registration
6.1
PGDip (HE)
Application forms for the PGDip (HE) can be accessed from the Rhodes University webpage
or via this link:
http://www.ru.ac.za/media/rhodesuniversity/content/registrar/documents/forms/PG%20Dip%
20(HE)%20application%20form%20Form_2015%20.docx
Those who have not studied formally at Rhodes Univesrity, the completion of this additional
form is required:
http://www.ru.ac.za/media/rhodesuniversity/content/registrar/documents/forms/2015%20Exte
rnal%20Hons%20Applications.pdf
Please be sure to complete these electronically, and email copies to the course coordinator (d.belluigi!@ru.ac.za and the administrator (n.siqwede!ru.ac.za).
The qualification is designed to be completed over the course of two years. If participants are
unable to submit a Teaching Portfolio for summative assessment by the middle of January
2018, they are required to apply to the Dean of Education for an extended DP to enable them
to submit the following year.
Rhodes lecturers who register for PGDip (HE) are not required to pay course fees. However,
as the course draws a government subsidy, if the course is not completed within three years,
participants will be required to reimburse the University. Participants from other institutions
are required to pay course fees as outlined in the Rhodes University Schedule of Fees which
is published each year.
6.1 MEd
MEd participants are required to register as per the Rhodes University Calendar (both
academic and administrative registration). MEd participants are reminded that they are
required to re-register at the start of each academic year for the duration of the qualification.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
5
Prior to initial registration, participants are required to discuss supervision of the research
component of the qualification with the CHERTL MEd co-ordinator.
MEd participants who are employed in full time, permanent positions by the University are
entitled to apply for the normal staff rebate on academic fees.
It is highly recommended that MEd participants attend the Research Design course offered by
the Education Faculty prior to embarking on the research component of the qualification.
Your portfolio will be assessed at a different level to the PGDIp (HE) participants, though
you will participate in the weekly sessions with those participants as your peers.
7. Recognition of prior learning (RPL)
Since the focus of the PGDip (HE) is on the ability of participants to demonstrate outcomes,
lecturers with previous teaching experience could elect to prepare a teaching portfolio
without following the formal programme. This portfolio could then be submitted for
assessment and the Diploma awarded if assessment criteria are met. Portfolios submitted for
Diploma purposes would be subject to external, as well as internal, examination. A defence
of the portfolio may be required.
8. Exit level outcomes for the PGDip (HE)
As a result of engaging with the course processes and materials participants should be
able to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Evaluate the influence of the higher education context (at global, national,
regional, institutional and disciplinary levels) and apply insights to their
professional practice
Provide evidence of teaching practices that respond to the need for social justice
and transformation in the South African context
Use critically reflective practice to examine and develop their teaching and
learning activities
Use theoretical understandings of the nature of learning and teaching in higher
education to facilitate student learning in their disciplines
Use relevant theory to inform the design, interpretation and implementation of
higher education curricula
Use relevant assessment theory and principles to implement assessment of student
learning in higher education
Use relevant theory to design and implement evaluation of teaching and courses in
higher education
9. Structure of the course
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
6
COMPULSORY MODULES
CREDITS
1. Learning and teaching in higher education
40
2. Curriculum development
30
3. Assessment of and for student learning
30
4. Evaluation of teaching and courses
10
5. Elective
10
Total
120
The section that follows outlines the purposes and outcomes for each module. Participants
will receive a document for each module containing detailed information regarding session
programme, module assignment, assessment criteria, list of references, etc.
Module 1:
Learning and teaching in higher education
Purpose
The purpose of this module is through participants’ reflection and critical practice to:

deepen their theoretical understanding of the nature of learning in higher education

gain a practical understanding of ways in which to facilitate students' access to
learning in the various disciplines in higher education
Credits: 40
Specific Outcomes
As a result of engaging with the course processes and materials participants should be
able to:
1. describe their approach to teaching and learning as part of the development of their
teaching philosophy
2. contextualise their teaching and their students’ learning within the changing higher
education context
3. mediate and facilitate the initiation of students into their discipline
4. recognise and respond to student diversity
5. use interactive teaching methods to encourage active learning
6. facilitate the holistic development of students within the context of a teaching and
learning environment
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
7
7. use multiple resources to mediate and facilitate learning successfully
Module 2:
Curriculum development
Purpose
The purpose of this module is to increase participants’ theoretical understanding of the
different approaches to curriculum development in higher education and to enable them to
design, interpret and implement curricula within an outcomes-based framework.
Credits: 30
Specific Outcomes
As a result of engaging with the course processes and materials participants should be
able to:
1. critically analyse and evaluate the approach to curriculum development used in own
practice
2. critically analyse and reflect on the global, national, regional and institutional HE
contexts in order to inform curriculum decisions
3. use theories and concepts from the higher education literature to critically analyse and
evaluate their curriculum development practices
4. use insights from curriculum theory and contextual understandings to (re)design
courses/modules which are aligned with outcomes and which enable epistemological
access for students.
Module 3:
Assessment of and for student learning
Purpose
The purpose of this module is to develop participants’ theoretical understanding of
assessment and to enable the informed implementation of assessment principles and
processes into their practice.
Credits: 30
Specific Outcomes
As a result of engaging with the course processes and materials participants should be
able to:
1. align their assessment practices with specific outcomes set for the course
2. use assessment to make valid and reliable judgements about students’ performance
3. respond appropriately to diversity within their assessment practices
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
8
4. use continuous assessment in a manner which promotes learning
5. use a range of approaches to enhance assessment (for example, self, peer, group,
computer assisted assessment)
6. use a range of appropriate methods of assessment (for example, essays, tests, projects,
portfolios, etc.)
7. plan and implement assessment and moderation processes informed by national and
institutional guidelines and policies.
Module 4:
Evaluation3 of teaching and courses
Purpose
The purpose of this module is to engage with the theories and principles of evaluation in
higher education thus enabling participants to evaluate their own practice as educators.
Credits: 10
Specific Outcomes
As a result of engaging with the course processes and materials participants should be
able to:
1. use critically reflective practice to examine and develop their teaching and courses
2. articulate their beliefs and values in relation to evaluation practices
3. integrate knowledge gained from the literature on evaluation into their practice
4. use national and institutional policies on evaluation to inform evaluation and quality
assurance practices
5. select and implement appropriate methods for eliciting students’ perceptions of teaching
and courses
6. engage in peer review processes
7. analyse data gained from a number of sources and use the results to enhance and develop
all aspects of their practice
3
We use the term "evaluation" to describe all the activities which a lecturer engages in to examine his/her own
practice whereas we use "assessment" to describe ways in which lecturers judge the worth of their students'
work.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
9
8. document evaluation processes in a way that is accessible to others.
Module 5: Research elective
Credit: 10
Purpose
The purpose of the elective module is to enable participants to select an area of their practice
for specific investigation. Details need to be negotiated in advance with the Course Coordinator. The following are examples of electives to consider:
Design and Implement eLearning
Purpose
The purpose of this module is to enable participants to design and develop eLearning
resources (content and activities).
Learning Assumed to be in Place
Participants entering this module should have keyboard and mouse skills, be able to manage
files, do word processing, communicate electronically (log onto a network, send a message,
search and retrieve data from the Internet), have an elementary familiarity with HTML
editors, have the ability to upload and download files from the Web, and be able to
manipulate graphics. Note: Participants should have reliable access to a computer connected
to a network with access to the Internet.
Specific Outcomes
Participants will be able to:
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
10
1. contextualise eLearning as a delivery mode within their own disciplines, departments
and/or learning units
2. design and develop effective eLearning resources (content, processes and activities)
3. select and use appropriate tools available in a learning management system (LMS)
4. evaluate processes and products of eLearning.
Design and Implement of Experiential Learning
Purpose
To enable participants to design and implement experiential learning that is integrated into
the curriculum.
Specific Outcomes
Participants will be able to:
1. analyse the outcomes for a specified course and identify those outcomes that can best be
acquired through experiential learning (with reference to theory on experiential learning)
2. design, structure and implement an experiential learning event to facilitate the attainment
of these outcomes
3. integrate values and ethics relevant to the workplace into the learning experience where
appropriate
4. integrate experiential learning with classroom learning and monitor the integration on a
continuous basis.
Postgraduate Supervision
Purpose
The purpose of this module is to enable participants to guide students in the understanding,
planning, designing, management and writing up of research projects. Participants will
develop the competence to assess and moderate research products.
Participants who register for this module must be involved in or have experience of
supervising postgraduate students.
Specific Outcomes
Participants will be able to:
1. guide students to acquire the knowledge and skills to conduct research
2. guide students to identify, plan and design a research project
3. monitor the quality of the research process and product in line with institutional policy
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
11
4. support students in the research process
5. assess research reports
6. evaluate their own supervision.
Leadership in Higher Education
Purpose
The purpose of this module is to enable participants to explore the processes and implications
of academic leadership in higher education4.
Specific outcomes
Participants will be able to:
1.
articulate the roles and responsibilities of a university / departmental leadership
position
2.
reflect on and respond to the challenges inherent in academic leadership within their
context
3.
document the processes involved in the leadership role
4.
evaluate their leadership role in relation to institutional and/or departmental
requirements
Internationalisation in Higher Education
Purpose
The purpose of this module is to equip lecturers with the background knowledge and the
competencies that will enable them to internationalise their curricula and to play a role in
the process of internationalisation at the University.
Specific outcomes
Participants will be able to:
1.
articulate issues, debates and theories in internationalisation, globalisation,
Africanisation and cultural diversity, and to defend their own views
2.
design new curricula or adapt existing ones to satisfy accepted criteria for a fully
internationalised curriculum.
4
For example, heads of department, course, tutorial, practical programme co-ordinator, curriculum review coordinator, etc.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
12
Design and Implement Service Learning
Purpose
The purpose of this course is to enable participants to enable participants to develop, facilitate
and assess Service Learning within their disciplines.
Specific outcomes
Participants will be able to:
1. identify areas of the curriculum that are appropriate for the implementation of Service
Learning.
2. design appropriate Service Learning teaching and learning activities.
3. facilitate the integration of reflective learning within a disciplinary context.
4. design appropriate assessment tasks that integrate reflective and disciplinary learning
5. evaluate a Service Learning component of the curriculum.
Social Inclusion in the Curriculum
Purpose
The purpose of the course is to enable participants to examine the nature of social inclusion
and exclusion in HE and to examine the relationship between physical and epistemological
access. In addition, participants will examine various mechanisms for facilitating
epistemological access to HE.
Specific outcomes
Participants will be able to:
1.
2.
3.
critically examine the notion of social inclusion.
identify and examine the factors that impact on social inclusion in HE
consider ways in which epistemological access can be enhanced within the context of
his/her institution or discipline.
10. Materials for the course
The facilitators will, for each module, provide participants with a few core readings as well as
a reading list for those who are interested in pursuing certain topics. The readings are
provided in order to give participants an opportunity for criticism, a perspective against
which they can try out their own ideas, rather than a basic knowledge that the course aims to
“teach".
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
13
Recommended texts
Biggs, J. & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: what the student
does. 4th edition. McGraw-Hill/SRHE/OUP: Maidenhead.
Brockbank, A. & McGill, I. (1999). Facilitating Reflective Learning in Higher Education.
Open University Press: Buckingham.
D'Andrea, V. & Gosling, D. (2005). Improving teaching and learning in higher education. A
whole institution approach. Berkshire, Society for Research into Higher Education and Open
University Press.
Gravett, S. & Geyser, H. (eds). (2004). Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Van
Schaik: Pretoria.
Hunt, L & Chalmers, D. (eds). (2013). University teaching in focus: A learning-centred
approach. 2nd edition. Routledge: Abingdon.
Leibowitz, B., Van der Merwe, A. & Van Schalkwyk, S. (eds). (2009). Focus on First-Year
Success. Perspectives emerging from South Africa and Beyond. Sun Press: Stellenbosch.
Makoni, S. (Ed.). (2000). Improving Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: A
Handbook for Southern Africa. Witwatersrand University Press: Johannesburg.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. Routledge: London.
Toohey, S. (1999). Designing courses for higher education. OUP: Philadelphia.
Additional resources and reference lists will be made available via the Learning Management
System.
11. Facilitators of the course
There are no 'best practices' in teaching; no fixed data of evidence. All is open to
interpretation and re-interpretation as contexts shift and as we learn from further
experience and reflection. This is why anyone committed to enquiring into their
teaching will be suspicious of those claiming to bring solutions
(Rowland 2000:98).
The course will be facilitated by members of the Rhodes Centre for Higher Education
Research, Teaching and Learning (CHERTL). People from outside of the CHERTL may be
invited to facilitate sessions. PGDip (HE) course facilitators:
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
14
Jo-Anne Vorster
J.Vorster@ru.ac.za
Jo-Anne has been working in the field of Academic Development
since 1992. She has been involved in the curriculum development
and teaching of the PGDip (HE) since its inception. She also works
in the areas of teaching and course evaluation, assessment and
curriculum and teaching development. Jo-Anne’s Master’s degree
was in Psychology in the area of collaborative learning processes.
She completed her PhD in 2009. It is entitled: ‘A social realist
analysis of collaborative curriculum development in an academic
department at a South African university”. She is interested in the
roles of knowledge and identity curriculum development,
academics’ learning on formal courses on teaching, and formal
programmes for inducting the next generation of academic
developers. Jo-Anne is co-ordinator for the PGDip (HE) for the
national course.
Amanda 'Mandy'
Hlengwa
a.hlengwa@ru.ac.za
Mandy has worked in the field of Academic Development since
2004. She co-ordinated Durban University of Technology's
Extended Studies for three years before joining Rhodes University's
Centre for Higher Education Research Teaching and Learning
(CHERTL). Since joining the centre, she has focused her attention
on Community Engagement in the higher education context with a
specific focus on service-learning. Mandy's interest on
disciplinary knowledge and the impact on curriculum infusions was
the topic of her PhD entitled "An exploration of conditions enabling
and constraining the infusion of service-learning into curriculum at a
South African research led university".
Dina Zoe Belluigi
d.belluigi@ru.ac.za
Dina
Dinahas
hasbeen
a Masters
researching
in Higher
a range
Education
of areas,
degree
primarily
for which
from she
assessment
researchedto
theevaluation.
relationship
Herbetween
Mastersassessment,
in Education
and
thesis
espoused
explored
and
the
hidden
disjunctions
curricula.
between
Her current
the espoused
areas of and
interest
the practiced
include the
in critical
the case
studied,
rethinking
considering
of evaluation
issuesprocesses
of student
within
agency,
higher
intentionality
education,and
student
ethical
agencyrelations
and authorship,
betweenassessors’
teacher and
interpretative
student. In addition,
frameworks,
she has
and
particular
curricula interest
of creative
in teaching
arts disciplines,
and learning
which
infeed
the creative
into her arts
disciplines.
consultations
Herwith
doctorate,
fellow through
academics.
Kingston
Dina also
University
has a Masters
(UK), looks
in Fine
atArt
interpretative
and previously
frameworks
taught Fine
utilised
Art Studio
in assessment,
Practice.toShe
what
is currently
extent
these
reading
consider
towards
student
her PhD
intentionality,
at Kingstonand
University,
their significance
UK.
for
student experiences. Her current areas of interest include the critical
rethinking of evaluation processes within higher education, student
agency and authorship, assessors’ interpretative frameworks, and
curricula of creative arts disciplines, which feed into her
consultations with fellow academics. Dina also has a Masters in Fine
Art and previously taught Fine Art Studio Practice.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
15
Lynn Quinn
L.Quinn@ru.ac.za
Lynn is Head of Department of CHERTL. She has been involved in
the field of Academic Development since 1995. Her first career was
as a high school English teacher. When she first started working in
the CHERTL her work mainly involved supporting students in terms
of academic writing. Her MA research project focused on students'
writing in HE. From 1999 CHERTL at Rhodes began to focus more
on academic staff development. 2000 saw the introduction of the
first version of the Postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education. The
qualification has been designed and is taught by most of the staff in
the CHERTL. Aside from the formal programmes, she does other
work to support lecturers at Rhodes University, particularly in
relation to the evaluation of teaching and courses. At the end of
2006 she completed her PhD which is entitled: 'A social realist
account of the emergence of a formal academic staff development
programme at a South African university'.
Mel Skead
m.skead@ru.ac.za
Mel has been working in Higher Education since 1988, first
lecturing English at Vista University and then moving into the field
of Academic Development at Rhodes in 2003. She focused on
student development programmes after being transferred to the
University of Fort Hare in 2004. From 2005 she served as Manager
of the Learning Advancement Unit in the Fort Hare Teaching and
Learning Centre taking responsibility for designing and developing a
wide range of initiatives for enabling student learning though SI,
Language and Writing Advancement, Computer-Assisted Language
Learning and Peer-Assisted Student Services across UFH campuses.
In 2010, she was appointed in the NMMU Centre for Teaching,
Learning and Media where she served as Head of Teaching
Development. Mel graduated Cum Laude (April 2013) as part of the
first cohort of Rhodes University graduates in the new PGDip (HE)
for Academic Developers. She holds a first degree in Music,
Honours, Masters and PhD in English, as well as an HED and
PGDip (HE). She has published in the field of writing and academic
development in Higher Education and is currently pursuing further
research focusing on knower constructions among academic
developers as well as on-going exploration of an integrated Teaching
Development Project with Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at
its core. She was awarded the NMMU Teaching Excellence Award
2013 (team category), serves as liaison for HELTASA Special
Interest Groups as well as Deputy-chair on the Executive and joined
CHERTL as Senior Lecturer in January 2015.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
16
Nompilo Tshuma
n.tshuma@ru.ac.za
Nompilo has a PGDip (HE) (Rhodes) and an MSc in Computer
Science (NUST). As a lecturer in Education Technology at
CHERTL, she is primarily responsible for staff development related
to educational technology applications. Nompilo is currently
working on her PhD which focuses on modelling the use of teaching
and learning technologies to academic staff.
Sue Southwood
Sue has been in educational development for over 20 years. Building
on her doctoral research Sue is passionate about developing spaces
for learning for, with and between professionals in the field. Her
current focus is on the orientation of academics to the context of
teaching and learning at Rhodes University. She currently
coordinates and facilitates the RU Assessors’ Course and is working
on the development of more holistic approaches to academic
orientation informed by recent research she coordinated at Rhodes
University. In addition to this Sue supports processes of evaluation,
consults with staff about teaching and learning, coordinates the MEd
programme and supervises postgraduate research in higher
education. Sue’s work is strongly influenced by appreciative inquiry,
a positive approach to development which builds on strengths to
provoke achievement.
s.southwood@ru.ac.za
12. Contact details
Centre for Higher Education Research,
Teaching and Learning
Rhodes University
P O Box 94
Grahamstown
6140
Phone
Email
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
046 603 8171/3
CHERTL-admin@ru.ac.za
17
Appendix 1:
Portfolio assessment criteria
The purpose of the portfolio is twofold:


To show that you have met the outcomes of the qualification
To document your on-going development as a teacher in higher education.
While we encourage participants to consider innovative ways of presenting the portfolio so as
to reflect their discipline and personal interests and practice, it is necessary to ensure that the
portfolio has regard for academic practice (see additional criteria toward the end of this
appendix).
Overall assessors of portfolios will be looking for evidence of reflexivity, criticality and
praxis.
Outcomes
Criteria for competent
Criteria for highly competent
Portfolio must provide evidence of: Portfolio must provide evidence of:
Evaluate the
 Identification of at least
 Identification of the contextual
influence of the
national, disciplinary,
factors which could include
changing higher
institutional and contextual
international, national,
education context
factors including
institutional, disciplinary,
and apply
o Analysis and evaluation
departmental and teaching
insights to your
of relevant SA
context. This should include
professional
legislation for your
o Critical analysis and
practice
practice
evaluation of relevant
o Ways in which
SA policy and
institutional policies
legislation for your
affect your practice
practice
o Ways in which
 An explanation of the influence
institutional policies
of these factors on all aspects of
affect practice
the curriculum design process
(including teaching
 An in-depth examination of the
methodology, assessment and
influence of these factors on all
evaluation).
aspects of the curriculum
design process (including
teaching methodology,
assessment and evaluation)
 Evidence of curriculum,
 Evidence of teaching practices
teaching and assessment
that respond to the need for
practices that respond to the
social justice and
need for social justice and
transformation in the South
transformation in the South
African context.
African context.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
18
Use critically
reflective
practice to
examine and
develop your
teaching and
learning
activities



An awareness of the underlying
assumptions informing your
curriculum design processes,
choices of teaching, assessment
and evaluation methods
Reflexive use of evaluation
data to develop practice
Reflexivity as a result of
engagement with the course
and the course processes to
develop teaching practice (self
reflection)




Use theoretical
understandings
of the nature of
learning and
teaching in
higher education
to facilitate
student learning
in your
disciplines








Description (informed by
current HE theory) of your
understanding of student
learning
Description of teaching
methods used (including active
learning methods)
Supporting evidence for the use
of active learning methods
An explanation and
justification for the teaching
methods used and the way in
which these have contributed to
the holistic development of
students
A description of the way
diversity has been addressed in
your teaching practice
Evidence of how the literature
on teaching and learning has
informed reflection and
development of teaching
practice
Understanding of implications
of your view of learning and
teaching (philosophy)
Appropriate use of technology
to enhance learning







A critical engagement with the
underlying assumptions and
philosophy informing your
curriculum design processes,
choices of teaching, assessment
and evaluation methods
Critical reflection on the fit
between assumptions and
practice (including
understanding of student
learning)
Reflexive use of evaluation
data to develop practice
Reflexivity as a result of
engagement with the course
and the course processes to
develop teaching practice (self
reflection)
Critical engagement with a
range of literature (general, HE,
and discipline specific) on
teaching and learning, and how
this has informed reflection and
development of your teaching
practice
Description of teaching
methods used (including active
learning methods)
Supporting evidence for the use
of active learning methods
A critical examination of the
teaching methods used, and the
way in which these have
contributed to the holistic
development of students
An analysis of the implications
of diversity for higher
education teaching practice
An illustrated explanation of
the way you have addressed
diversity in your teaching
practice
Appropriate use of technology
to enhance learning
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
19
Use relevant

theory to inform
the design,
interpretation and
implementation

of higher
education
curricula



Use relevant
assessment
theory and
principles to
implement
assessment of
student learning
in higher
education





A description of the principles
of curriculum development
used in practice (informed by
relevant HE theory)
Evidence that the needs of the
stakeholders have been
considered in the design of
curricula
An analysis of your approach to
curriculum development
Your understanding of the
principles of curriculum
alignment (coherence between
all elements of your curricula
e.g. purpose, outcomes,
assessment, teaching methods)
Curriculum documentation in
accordance with institutional
and national policies on
teaching and learning

Assessment methods and tasks
that are aligned with outcomes
and assessment criteria for
courses
Assessment practices which are
valid, reliable, transparent and
fair
Appropriate implementation of
criterion-referenced marking
Formative feedback which
develops student learning
Reflection on assessment used
to develop student learning and
inform curriculum design
decisions










An in depth examination of the
principles of curriculum
development used in practice
(informed by relevant HE
theory)
Evidence that the needs of the
stakeholders have been
considered in the design of
curricula, and a critical
consideration of stakeholder
influence on the curriculum
A theoretically supported
analysis of the your approach to
curriculum development
Your understanding of the
principles of curriculum
alignment (coherence between
all elements of your curricula
e.g. purpose, outcomes,
assessment, teaching methods)
Curriculum documentation in
accordance with institutional
and national policies on
teaching and learning
Assessment methods and tasks
that are aligned with outcomes
and assessment criteria for
courses
Assessment practices which are
valid, reliable, transparent and
fair
Appropriate implementation of
criterion-referenced marking
Formative feedback which
develops student learning
Reflection on assessment used
to develop student learning and
inform curriculum design
decisions
Examination of theory and
literature relating to assessment
in higher education, with
evidence of reflection on your
own practice in the light of
such theory
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
20
Use relevant
theory to design
and implement
evaluation of
teaching and
courses in higher
education





A description and examples of
a range of instruments used to
evaluate your practice
A rationale (based on an
understanding of the principles
of evaluation) for your choice
of evaluation instruments
Evaluation data gathered from a
range of sources
Interpretation of the data
gathered
Developing practice in the light
of reflection on the
interpretations of the data





A critical description and
examples of a range of
instruments used to evaluate
your practice
A theoretically informed
rationale (based on higher
education literature) for your
choice of evaluation
instruments
Evaluation data gathered from
a range of sources
Theoretically informed
interpretation of the data
gathered which leads to
development of practice
Congruence between your
teaching philosophy and
evaluation practices
In addition the following criteria should be taken into account:
Use of appropriate language
and style
Integration of formal language and style with a more personal
and reflective style of writing
Use of appropriate
referencing system
Consistent and appropriate use of referencing system of
choice
Coherence of structure
Portfolio must be coherent, with clear links between different
elements of the portfolio
Evidence of innovative and creative thinking in terms of practice and/or the portfolio
Evidence of development of competencies described in the Critical Cross-Field outcomes
PGDip (HE) participants are advised to consider the NQF Level 8 descriptors (pp. 9-10) and
the requirements for completion outlined on p.32 of the HEQSF5.
See SAQA’s Level Descriptors for the National Qualifications Framework (2012) at
http://www.nqf.org.za/download_files/Level-Descriptors-for-the-NQF-2012.pdf and CHE’s Higher Education
Qualifications Sub-Framework at
http://www.che.ac.za/sites/default/files/publications/Higher_Education_Qualifications_Framework_Oct2007.pd
f
5
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
21
Appendix 2:
Grade descriptors for the summative assessment of the teaching
portfolio
Distinction
85 – 100 % for the PGDip (HE)/ Distinction 75- 100 % for the M. Ed
 Significant (creative, original) changes in thinking and practice related to teaching and learning or
detailed support from literature and practice for maintaining current practices and/or innovative
practice has led to significant change beyond the individual lecturer, e.g. colleagues, department,
institution. Strong potential to make a significant contribution to the field of teaching and learning in
HE and/or the discipline. Strong potential to be publishable in appropriate journal/s.
Distinction 75- 84 % for the PGDip (HE)/ Highly competent 70-74% for the M. Ed








Sophisticated and consistent evidence of comprehensive engagement with theory and literature in
the field of Higher Education plus ability to apply these to specific contexts.
Consistent and thorough integration of theory with description of past and current practice.
Widespread evidence of use of major course readings plus extra discipline-specific readings sourced
by the candidate themselves
Constructive and well supported evaluation/ criticism of principles and /or concepts and/or
research on teaching and learning in HE
Well supported suggestions for critique of theory/ principles/concepts to account for context factors.
Practice comprehensively contextualised at individual, disciplinary, course, departmental,
institutional, national and international levels
Evidence of critical reflection (and reflexivity). For example, questioning of own assumptions about
teaching and learning and ideas presented in the literature as well as during the design,
implementation and evaluation of practice.
Excellent use of appropriate genre for writing up the TP (blend of academic and personal reflective
styles, coherent structure, signposting, readability, presentation, etc).
Highly competent 70 - 74% for the PGDip (HE)/ Competent 60- 69% for the M. Ed









Significant changes in thinking and practice or detailed support from literature and practice for
maintaining current practices.
Consistent evidence of comprehensive understanding of teaching and learning principles
Good links between theory / practice in significant areas. Innovation grounded in theory.
Offers some critique of aspects of theory and/or principles of alternative approaches. Some
suggestions for how principles could be adapted.
Good contextualisation, description and justification of practice.
Major course readings used significantly and as part of cogent argument and some evidence of
reading literature and research on teaching, learning and assessment in their discipline.
Evidence of critical reflection and reflexivity at all stages of the process. For example, questioning of
own assumptions about teaching and learning and ideas presented in the literature as well as during
the design, implementation and evaluation of practice.
Very good use of appropriate genre for writing up the TP (blend of academic and personal reflective
styles, coherent structure, signposting, readability, presentation, etc).
Has potential in terms of innovative ideas or /innovative context to make a contribution to the field of
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
22
teaching and learning in HE and/or the discipline.
Competent 60- 69% for the PGDip (HE)/ Adequate pass 50 – 59%
for the M. Ed

Some changes in thinking about teaching and learning and practice; or support from the literature for
maintaining current practices.
 Evidence of reflection on and critique of practice.
 Evidence of good understanding of some of the theory and literature in the field of higher education.
 Offers critique of aspects of theory and/or principles of alternative approaches.
 Competent engagement with theory but not necessarily fully integrated with practice.
 Main course resources used but not necessarily significantly integrated into cogent argument.
 Contextualisation, description and justification.
 Good use of appropriate genre for writing up the assignment (blend of academic and personal
reflective styles, coherent structure, signposting, readability, presentation, etc).
Adequate pass 50 – 59%








Adequately applies ideas in the higher education literature to practice. Some evidence of change in
thinking and practice.
Understanding of some of the theory and principles, and evidence of attempts at application to
context.
Little critical appraisal of HE literature or theory.
Engagement with theory but theory is treated largely separately from practice.
Few resources used and/or not significantly integrated into cogent argument.
Some critique of own practice. Does not go into reasons why x might have worked or not worked.
Provides brief contextualisation, description, justification for practice.
Genre adequate with some difficulties with integrating personal, reflective writing style with
academic writing. Parts of the TP presented separately rather than as a coherent whole/ few clear
links between different parts of the TP.
Appendix 3:
Critical cross-field education outcomes
1.
Identify and solve problems in which responses display that responsible decisions
using critical and creative thinking have been made.
2.
Work effectively with others as a member of a team, group, organisation, community.
3.
Organise and manage oneself and one’s activities responsibly and effectively.
4.
Collect, analyse, organise and critically evaluate information.
5.
Communicate effectively using visual, mathematical and/or language skills in the
modes of oral and/ or written presentation.
6.
Use science and technology effectively and critically, showing responsibility towards
the environment and health of others.
7.
Demonstrate an understanding of the world as a set of related systems by recognising
that problem-solving contexts do not exist in isolation.
8.
Reflect on and explore a variety of strategies to learn more effectively.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
23
9.
Participate as responsible citizens in the life of local, national and global
communities.
10.
Be culturally and aesthetically sensitive across a range of social contexts.
11.
Explore education and career opportunities.
12.
Develop entrepreneurial opportunities.
© CHERTL, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 2015
24