"Sociology in Modules, sixth edition, bridges the essential sociological theories, research, and concepts and the everyday realities we all experience. The program highlights the distinctive ways in which sociologists explore human social behavior and how their research findings can be used to help students think critically about the broader principles that guide their lives"--
Aus der Gegenüberstellung der europäischen und der nationalen Dimension der modularen Berufsausbildung nimmt der Verfasser eine Positionsbestimmung vor. Für einen Teil der EU-Mitgliedstaaten stellen Module einen wichtigen ersten Schritt zum Aufbau oder einen Ansatz zur Weiterentwicklung ihres nationalen Bildungssystems dar. In Deutschland sollte grundsätzlich an einer auf dem Berufskonzept basierenden dualen Ausbildung festgehalten werden. Das duale System vermittelt auf der Grundlage eines klar definierten Ausbildungsberufs eine Berufsqualifizierung mit Abschluß. Module können diese Transparenz nicht herstellen; sie sollten als Zusatzqualifikationen in der Weiterbildung und für bestimmte Zielgruppen bedarfsorientiert ausgebaut werden. (BIBB)
Modularity is a fundamental doctrine in the cognitive sciences. It holds a preeminent position in cognitive psychology and generative linguistics, as well as a long history in neurophysiology, with roots going all the way back to the early nineteenth century. But a mature field of neuroscience is a comparatively recent phenomenon and has challenged orthodox conceptions of the modular mind. One way of accommodating modularity within the new framework suggested by these developments is to go for increasingly soft versions of modularity. One such version, which I call the "system" view, is so soft that it promises to meet practically any challenge neuroscience can throw at it. In this paper, I reconsider afresh what we ought to regard as the sine qua non of modularity and offer a few arguments against the view that an insipid "system" module could be the legitimate successor of the traditional notion. ; This research was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship.
During the past fifty years third level education has expanded and diversified and the demands and expectations being placed on Higher Education Institutions are now formidable, with changes in the student body and increased pressure from government on costs, procedures and results. For academic staff, there are increased pressures through increased teaching loads, growing reporting and administrative requirements and pressure to develop and strengthen their research profile. Amongst academic staff surveys consistently report that teaching is a source of reward but staff say that they are working longer hours and dealing with a more diverse student group (McInnis, 2000). At the same time, they still wish to improve and innovate their practice by designing and delivering effective courses and modules. The increased size and diversity of the student group has impacted on the process of course design. Biggs (1999) offers valuable suggestions for course design strategies in the context of a growing student population and Knight (2002) argues for courses in higher education to be designed in order to maximize the chance that learners will experience coherence, progression and deep learning.