Module Description s2

KV727 Page 1 of 4 sSept 2010 Module Description

Title Reflective Journal (1)

Code KV727

Level 7

Credit rating 10 points (points) Prerequisites None

Type of module Optional

Aims The aims for this module are set into the context of the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications and they relate to the SEEC level descriptors for level 7 study.

This module enables students to analyse critically their current professional development needs in order to select an appropriate professional development activity for evaluation. Students will use this evaluation as the basis for analysing the subsequent impact of the activity on their own learning and professional practice.

Learning outcomes In relation to the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications and the SEEC level descriptors for level 7 study, by the end of the module students should be able to:

1. analyse their own professional development needs in relation to their current professional context; 2. identify, through negotiation, an appropriate professional development activity for evaluation; 3. demonstrate a systematic understanding of the nature and role of learning in professional development; 4. critically evaluate a professional development activity; 5. discuss the impact on own practices and on student learning.

Content Within the participants’ own practical and professional contexts: (for contact time and non- . the nature and role of professional development within an contact time) educational context . self assessment and self evaluation . role of reflection in professional development . evaluation of learning in a professional context KV727 Page 2 of 4 Sept 2010

Learning and teaching This module will be delivered through a variety of different activities, strategies which will be agreed between the participant and the professional development tutor. Strategies are likely to include:

 Meetings of professional development cluster groups  Attendance at LEA/school-based taught courses, conferences or other professional development activities  Activities and discussions with work-based teams and colleagues

Non-contact Time:  Internet searches  Personal reflection and research  Writing  Reflecting and evaluating

Learning support Books (indicative): Bailey, K. (2001) Pursuing professional development: the self as source United Kingdom Heinle & Heinle Bolton, G. (2001) Reflective practice: writing and professional development London Paul Chapman Bryan, H., Carpenter, C. and Hoult, S. (2010) Learning and Teaching at M-Level : A Guide to Student Teachers London: Sage Publications Carr, D. (2000) Professionalism and Ethics in Teaching London: Routledge Carnell, E. and Lodge, C. (2002) Supporting Effective Learning London: Paul Chapmen Illeris, K. (2007) How we Learn London: Routledge. Jarvis, P., Helford, J., Griffin, C. (2004) The Theory and Practice of Learning London: Kogan Page Poulson, L. and Wallace, M. (2003) Learning to Read Critically in Teaching and Learning London: Sage

Journal: Reflective Practice

Electronic sources (accessed July 2010) Institute of Reflective Practice http://www.reflectivepractices.co.uk/cms/index.php ERIC Digests http://www.ericdigests.org/2001-3/reflective.htm It’s Life (Teaching & Learning but not as we know it) http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/bib_145.htm Teachernet http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/ KV727 Page 3 of 4 Sept 2010

Assessment task Assessment will be in the context of the University of Brighton Assessment Policy and the Faculty Code of Practice in Assessment, and students will be required to complete the following task:

An evaluative report on a professional development activity undertaken by the participant. The report should include:  an explanation of the professional development activity and its expected outcomes;  the rationale for undertaking the professional development activity with reference to the pertinent literature;  an analysis of the actual outcomes for the participant and impact on their learning and understanding;  an evaluation of the subsequent impact on the participant’s own practices.

(2,500 words or equivalent)

The task will be marked on a percentage basis. The module pass mark is 50%.

Referral task: Rework original task

Assessment criteria General criteria for assessment are framed by the SEEC descriptors for level 7. Against specific criteria, credit will be awarded for:

 analysis of participant’s own professional development needs in relation to current professional context (LO1);  identification of an appropriate professional development activity for evaluation (LO2);  demonstration of a systematic understanding of the nature and role of learning in professional development (LO3);  critical evaluation of a professional development activity (LO4);  discussion of the impact on own learning and professional practice (LO5).

All learning outcomes must be achieved in order to pass the module at the threshold level.

Brief description of This module enables students to analyse critically their current module content and/or professional development needs in order to select an appropriate aims for publicity professional development activity for evaluation. Students will use this evaluation as the basis for analysing the subsequent impact of the activity on their own learning and professional practice.

Area examination board MA Education / PG Cert PES Joint Area and Course Examination to which module relates Board Module team/authors/co- Irena Andrews ordinator Normal duration One semester

Site where delivered Various

Date of first approval September 2010 KV727 Page 4 of 4 Sept 2010

Date of last revision N/A

Date of approval of this September 2010 version Version number 1

Replacement for previous Formerly coded KVM29 module Route for which module is Faculty Framework for Taught Postgraduate Courses acceptable and status in that route Course(s) which module MA Education (FDL module of study) – optional is acceptable and status PG Cert Professional Education Studies (FDL module of study) – in course optional

School home School of Education

External examiner(s) Helen Scott and Helen Mitchell