MODULE REVIEW FORM (MRF)

Faculty/School:	Science / Computing
Session:	2011-12
Module Title:	Games Project: Design and Plan
Module Code:	COMP09012
Module Coordinator:	Dr John N Sutherland
Other staff involved in delivery:	Dr Tom Hainey, Mr Brian McGhee

Trimester 1	Trimester 2	Trimester 3 /Resit Diet	Overall
No. of Students Enrolled	51	-	4	55
No. of Staff Teaching on Module	3	-	0	3
% Pass Rate	93%	-	50%	96%
Corresponding Pass Rate in Previous Session	83%	-	0%	77%
Mean Mark	52%	-	42%	51%

Guidance Note

Module co-ordinators may choose to begin completion of MRFs following each diet to ensure that a qualitative evaluation is undertaken at a timely stage within the process. Thereafter, MRFs should be completed as soon as possible after the module runs for the last time in a session with a final submission deadline of 5 October 2012. Quantitative data provided later in the process may result in slight refinements nearer the submission deadline.

Module co-ordinators have responsibility for ensuring that the module moderator and the Subject Panel Chair are in agreement and comfortable with the content of the completed MRF.

Completed MRFs should be lodged on the UWS Staff Portal. Please forward an electronic copy to:

School of Computing MRFs	Morag Bratchie

School of Engineering MRFs	Claire Campbell

School of Science MRFs	Claire Campbell

PART 1 – ASSURANCE

Delivery & Attendance This was the first time the module was delivered on more than one campus and the second time the Computer Games technology students took the module. At Paisley students were grouped together into streams based on previous year’s aggregate mark. This worked fairly well, stretching strong students, encouraging the middling ability students, and smoking out those who were cruising in too low a gear. There was no feedback from Ayr campus except for final marks and some student project discs. Attendance was good in all cases.
Assessment (Co-ordinators comments) There was some tension between the coursework for the two games degree cohorts and the module leads into two different modules in second term for Computer Games Development and Computer Games technology students respectively. However, this was dealt with early on and both groups at Paisley went on to achieve well.
Assessment (Moderators comments)

PART 2 – EVALUATION AND ENHANCEMENT

Where appropriate, module co-ordinators should evaluate modules by taking full cognisance of external examiner comments, pass rates, making use of statistical data available to inform developmental changes and enhancement. Reflection on changes from previous years may also be useful.

Teaching & Learning Approaches This is the same as in previous years at Paisley. Students are put into groups and work closely with the lecturer in the role of Producer. Again, no feedback was received from Ayr
Assessment This went well and pass rates were good.
Student Feedback As students were in close contact with lecturers any need to deal with issues was dealt with at the time.
Multi-campus delivery/Multi-mode delivery (CRNs) and Collaborative Delivery There is a need to get a better handle on knowing what is going on on other campuses as there was no effective feedback from Ayr.
Personal Development Planning Students build strong portfolio pieces during this module and the following respective module in 2nd term.
Virtual Learning Environment (Blackboard) Does the module have a Blackboard presence? (tick as appropriate) Yes □ No □ If yes, does the Blackboard module meet the minimum specification? (tick as appropriate) Yes □ No □ We’ll just have to see how it goes with Moodle.
Action Changes will be made in order to try to keep better contact with Ayr.
Additional Comments including any module amendments The Computer Games technology students are still going on as suits their career prospects. The Computer Games Development students will be encouraged to consider development in HTML5 as well as Unity3D.