For the purposes of this guidance a ‘significant’ revision of an existing module is one which makes substantial changes to more than about half of the content (N.B. Subject Group approval is still normally expected for more minor changes).

Required information for the proposal:

1. The rationale for the module.
2. The syllabus, which should comprise:
   1. the module title;
   2. details of the proposed assessment method (including a description of any coursework if relevant);
   3.  a schedule of examples papers;
   4. the booklist;
   5. details of any pre-requisites or limits on numbers.
3. Details of any additional computing software required to deliver the module.
4. For modules that include an examination, a sample examination paper should be provided if possible (if not, a sample paper must be made available to students before the start of the module).
5. An outline of how the teaching duties for the module should be divided between Principal and Second Assessors, noting that it is normally expected that a Second Assessor (who may be from outside the Department) would be able to teach and assess the module if necessary.

NB. the total workload per module for a student should be approximately 80 hours, including lectures, private study and revision, conducting and writing up any coursework, and the examination (as applicable).  The 25% coursework element (if relevant) should not exceed 20 hours.

See the module leaders’ notes for further information.

Approval process

1. Relevant Subject Group(s) endorse the proposal before the Lent Term meeting of the Teaching Committee.
2. Teaching Committee approves the proposal at its meeting in Lent Term.
3. Faculty Board notes the approved proposal at its second meeting in Lent Term.
4. New/amended Part II modules are included in the list of modules and sets approved by the Faculty Board at its first meeting in Easter Term.
5. Major changes to syllabuses (and any changes to regulations) must be approved by the General Board’s Education Committee and a notice published in the Reporter no later than the Division of Easter Term.

Considerations for Subject Groups

Subject Groups are asked to consider the proposal in terms of:

• academic rationale and likely student interest;
• the fit with the Group’s other modules (ensuring that overlap is minimised);
• staff and student workload, reducing pressure in term where possible;
• resourcing for the module;
• the appropriateness of the proposed assessment method, bearing in mind that the University is encouraging the use of more innovative assessment methods;
• design of coursework to guard against plagiarism, and to enable timely marking and appropriate student feedback;   
• the balance of modules between Michaelmas and Lent Terms (where modules cannot be balanced, they should be weighted towards Michaelmas Term).

NB. it is Teaching Committee policy that each Subject Group can offer a maximum of 10 IIB modules – if the proposal is for an additional module please indicate which module will be rested.  Any changes to the Group’s teaching for the following year must be taken into account at the relevant teaching allocation meetings.

One year review

Module leaders will be invited to meet with the Subject Group Chair and Director of Undergraduate Education to discuss the first run of the module and any changes which they wish to make for following years.  It is particularly important that lecturers/module leaders encourage students to complete the module survey so that the feedback is representative of the views of the cohort.