DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 386 434 SP 036 183

AUTHOR Dochy; F. J. R. C.; And Others

TITLE Modularisation and Student Learning in Modular
Instruction in Relation with Prior Knowledge.
INSTITUTION Open Univ., Heerlen (Netherlands). Centre for
Educational Technological Irnovation.
REPORT NO ISBN-09-358-0605-0; ISSN-0921-8408; OTIC-RR-8
PUB DATE 89
NOTE 30p.
AVAILABLE FROM Open University, Centre for Educational Technology
and Innovation, P.O. Box 2960, 6401 DL Heerlen, The
Netherlands (20 Dutch guilders).
PUB TYPE Reports Research/Technical (143)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.

DESCRIPTORS College Students; Course Content; *Course Selection
(Students); *Curriculum Design; *Educational Change;
Educational Environment; Educational Practices;
*Elective Courses; Foreign Countries; Higher
Education; *Learning Modules; *Prior Learning;
Student Interests; Universities
IDENTIFIERS *Modularization; Netherlands

ABSTRACT
This report explores the development of modular
education and its application in the Dutch Open University. The
origins of modular education are examined from the first applications
in American higher education and the development of electives and the
credit system to the role of modular instruction as the basis of
higher education curriculum. Advantages of modular instruction
include more choice and self-pacing for students; more variety and
flexibility for teachers and staff; and increased adaptability of
instructional materials. Disadvantages include greater
self-discipline and self-motivation required for students, increased
preparation time and lack of concrete rewards for teachers and staff,
and greater administrative resources needed to track students and
operate multiple modules. Changes in educational practices in the
Dutch speaking world are reviewed, comparing traditional to modular
approaches. The modular education program at the Dutch Open
University, is described, including three modular course models
(study unit model, the textbook-workbook model, and the essay/thesis
model) with the advantages and disadvantages of each one outlined.
Finally, the paper looks at the importance of prior knowledge,
suggesting that in a modular education environment, according to the
changing ideas in today's society on personal development, students
will request a kind of instruction more fully in accordance with and
appropriate to their personal characteristics and their prior
knowledge state resulting in a more efficient and effective education
for the learner. There is also the opportunity for students to skip a
module or to work through it more quickly on the basis of prior
knowledge. (Contains 27 references.) (ND)
Modularisation and student
learning in modular
instruction in relation with
prior knowledge

F.J.R.C. Dochy

L.J.J.M. Wagemans
H.C. de Wolf

U S DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS Office of Eclutaho-,ai Research anc improvement
MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMAPC'N
CENTER (ERIC)
O This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it
O Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality

TO THE EDUCATIONAL r,ESOURCES Points of view or opinions slated in this

document do not necessarily represent
INFORMATION DENTFI-I (ERIC)." official OERI position or policy

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

OTIC RESEARCH REPORTS

The Open University is responsible for developing and

offering open, higher distance education in .which special
attention is paid to innovations in educational technology.
The research in this field is concentrated in "OTICH, that is
the Centre for Educational Technological Innovations
(Onderwijs Technologisch Innovatie Centrum).
OTIC isalso engaged in running projects for other institu-
tes. Here the Centre makes use of OTIC's knowledge and
experience acquired in research and development.
The series of OT1C Research Reports consists of publications
of the OT1C research projects and aims mainly at an audience
of fellow researchers.

RESEARCH PROJECT 'PRIOR KNOWLEDGE STATE'

This research project started from the idea that if the

specific prior Knowledge is taken into account, in a modular
educational system, students will have the opportunity of
following different learning paths in a more efficient way.
The research is directed at a clear definition of the
problems and their solutions.
Educational Technology Innovation Centre

Open University

HODULARISATION AND STUDENT LEARNING IN MODULAR

INSTRUCTION IN RELATION WITH PRIOR KNOWLEDGE

OTIC Research Report 8

F.J.R.C. Dochy
L.J.J.M. Wagemans
N.C. de Wolf
CIP- gegevens koninklijke bibliotheek, Den Haag

Dochy, F.J.R.C.
Wagemans, L.J.J.M.
de Wolf, H.C.

Modularisation and student learning in

modular instruction in relation with prior knowledge/
F.J.R.C. Dochy, L.J.J.M. Wagemans, H.C. de Wolf.
- Heerlen: Open University,
Educational Technology Innovation Centre (OTIC)
- Ill. - (0.T.I.C. research report 8)
Met lit. opg., reg.
ISBN 90-358-0605-0 geb.
ISSN 0921-8408
SISO 450.43 UDC 371.012
Trefw.: Prior Knowledge/Modular instruction/ Modularisation

c 1989, Open University, Heerlen

Save exceptions stated by the law no part of this

publication may be reproduced in any form,
by print, photoprint, microfilm or other means,
included a complete or partial transcription,
without the prior written permission of the
publisher.

OTIC Research Reports are available at:

the Open University

secretariaat OT1C/COP
Postbus 2960
6401 DL Heerlen
Telephone 045-762261 / 471
 CONTENT

Summary 2

Introduction
3

1. The acdularity hypothesis and modular instruction.

3
1.1. The origins of modular instruction
3
1.2. Modules and implementation of modular instruction:
a conmon and a more fundamental point of view.
5
1.3. Options for modular education

1.4. The diadvantages of modularisation.

10
1.5. A comparison between traditional and modular instruc-
tion.
11

2. 14alular education at the Dutch Open University.

15
Modular course models
16

3. Prior knowledge and modular instruction.

19

References
22
StminarY

nodular education is first adopted in American higher

education. From the first introduction of the elective system
in 1869 at Barvard University till now, there has been a
great variety in the definidon and use of modular instruc-
tion and the implementation of modularisation.
TOCay there is a distinction between the common view of
modularisation and a more recent and fundamental view. In
this report we posite this more fundamental view, which
starts fram the fact that implementation of modular instruc-
tion or modularisation is a radical change of the existing
educational setting. This change will be manifested in
consequensces towards the educational program, the study
materials, the students, the teachers, the students and the
organisation as a whole. As with every educational adapta-
tion, modularisation too has its advantages and disadvan-
tages.
Before we give an outline of the way in which modular
instruction is realised at the Dutch Open university, a
coRparision of the characteristics of traditional courses
and nodular courses is made. Modular instruction at the Dutch
Open University has found its shape in the application of
various course models. The main models are described shortly.
The final chapter of this report focusses on the link between
modularisation and the current knowledge state of students:
one thinks of instruction fully in accordance with personal
needs and the prior knowledge of students, opportunities to
work at their own pace, individual stattr paths and multifunc-
tionality of ucdules.
In short, one can call 'flexibility' and 'individualisation'
the core concepts of modularisation, if the prior knowledge
state of students is taken into account at a reasonable
level.
Introduction

There are various reasons for the increasing interest in

mcdular education in the Netherlands in the last few decades.
Cutbacks by the government and the associated restructuring
and reorganization paay a role, as do the.wide range of
student requirements and the demand aum employers for
flexible:graduates. For the consumers of education, mcdulari-
sation means an increase in freedom of Choice; and for those
who provide education, an increased access and/or consumption
of the educational supply.
In this report, we shall examine the origins, significance
and pros and cons of the use of the modules in education.
Mbdular education at the Dutch Open University will then be
described and compared with traditional education. Finally
the importance of the student's prior knowledge state in
modular education and related applications will be exmnined,
as far as relevant for the 'prior knowledge' research
project.

1. The =hilarity hypothesis and nodular instruction

1.1. The origins of mcdular instruction

Nobody seems to be entirely clear about where "modular

instruction" and the "modularity" wave came from.
Some look
for definitions in dactionaries, others mention the first
applications in American and Canadian universities. It seems
that some do look for the roots lf "modularity" in psycholo-
gical research and in those theories which fall under the
heading of the theory of mind or cognitive psychology. The
rationale for mcdular instruction there seems to reside in
the mcdularity hypothesis. According to Brewer and Nakamura
(1984), research has shown that the mind can be looked upon
as mcdular and that it is necessary to develop different
types of theoretical entities to account for the different
cognitive processes (see Chamsky, 1980, for a similar
argument). Of course, next to this hypothesis a lot of other
assumptions stay unnoticed.

Modular education, as we now know it, was first adopted a

century ago in American higher education. Educational
philosophy emoured the growing acceptance of "student-centred
leanninp and of Jdhn Dewey's advocacy of self-realization in
the pursuit of studies adapted to the individual's interest.
Harvard University introduced the elective system in 1869 to
replace the set curriculum. As a result of this students
were able to determine, themselves, which courses they wanted
to take (freedam of learning and increased specialization
options).

By 1884, Harvard students had almost complete freedam of

choice. In the 1890s there was a shift towards measuring
progress towards a degree on the basis of the accumulation of
individual courses rather than the completing of a total
course of study (Burn, 1974). In the meantime other
institutions were adopting similar practices.
The movement towards electives was soon accompanied by
increasing recognition of a need to quantify educational
process, allowing students' progress along the various paths
towards a degree to be assessed.

The first units of measurement were the courses themselves,

defined in terms of hours of classroom contact, with the
measure of achievement across the varied course offerings
based on a common time unit (Heffernan, 1973).
Thus emerged the credit system, the forerunner of modules, as
a means of aggregating the series of varied educational
experiences. Here too, one sees the origins of the view that
American higher education allows students total freedom of
choice, a kind of cafeteria system in which the mcving tray
is heaped with whatever fancy catches the mover's eye.
Such was certainly not the intention. The elective/credit
system's proponents saw it, not as curricular free-for-all,
but as a means of breaking the straaglehold of the classical
curriculum.

However the elective system was not introduced across the

board in higher education, as schools gave preference to
adapting to the entrance requirements /criteria of colleges
ard universities.

By way of compensation, a number of institutions had

introduced a major and minor system, where the student chose
some department or group of studies in which he took a major,
for example a serie of courses presented by that department,
and one in which he took a minor.
Tbday, the credit system has been used to accommodate a whole
range of approadhes undreamt of at its creation: self-paced
courses and independent study (Ziegler, 1972; Allen &
Christensen, 1974); life credits for mature students (Hill,
1975); contract learning (Lindquist, 1975), the forerunner of
our negotiated learning; credit for study abroad (Haas,
1982), and developments in the direction of non-attendance
(Burn, 1974) and towards award of credit by mastery of
content and examination (Lorimer, 1962; Spurr, 1970), and he
abandonment of letter/numerical grades for satisfactory/un-

4
satisfactory (Soihultz, 1973) assessments.
As will be apparent, the credit system is capable of movement
in virtually any direction: towards greater or less student
autonomy, enhanced or reduced institutional control, greater
curricular cohesion or more fragmentation.

1.2. NCdules and implementation of mcdular instruction:

a common and a more fundamental point of view.

Dictionary definitions of mcdule tend to suggest three

underlying concepts : 1) reasurement, 2) a part of a whole,
and 3) repetition. The term module, therefore features in
construction work, especially in the erection of buildings,
and it is employed to designate items of furniture which can
be assembled variously over tine by the purchaser.

In education, there has been a paethora of uses, for example,

in timetabling to indicate a period of teaching/learning
(Allen & Christensen, 1974), and in modular instruction to
represent self-contained sub-courses in a programme of self-
instructional naterial. In the Ubited States, the previous
uses are fairly commonplace. However, more traditional
Jourses are described in terms of credit hours, and the
general structure in which they function is known as the
credit system. In Britain, it should be observed that
"module" is used, most commonly, for credit hours; and
"modular structure/course" for the credit system, noting by
way of caveat that modules go by a variety of other names,
e.g. units, blocks, course units, unit courses, courses
(Theodossin, 1986).

The common and the more fundamental view on modularisation.

The plethora of uses has led, in particular in a complex

situation as is higher education, to several definitions and
views.
In the common poilt of view - one could say the traditional
or perhaps the obsolete point if view - , a nodule can be
described as an independent educational unit of limited scope
provided with a series of educational and learning activi-
ties, which lead to a well described final level (Van Eijl,
1987). At policy level, the module is seen as a useful
programming unit with a predetermined scope and duration. It
says to make educational programmes easier to set up and
change and makes flexible use of education possible. It needs
to be stressed, that this view is very limited. Within the
whole operation of mcdularisation, the module is the central

5
point. Van Eijl (1987) talks about compulsory and non-
compulsory characteristics of modules.

The conviction that the flexibility of education can be

increased by using modules, that the emphasis in this type of
education is on self-instruction systems and on the indivi-
dual learning paths of the students, has induced a new view
on the implementation of modular instruction.

In this more fundamental view, modularisation is much more

than cutting pieces. This recent view starts from the fact
that the implementation of mcdular instruction or modularisa-
tion is a radical change in the existing educational setting,
which has consequences towards the educational program, the
study materials, the teachers, the students en the organiza-
tion as a whole. It must be stressed that intervention into
only one or few of these aspects is insufficient to guarantee
a successful modularisation.
In this view mcdularisation leads to an institution focused
on facilitating individual learning processes (de Wblf,
1989). Mbreover, implementing modular instruction has
consequences for five components of higher education, all of
which are in phase with each other:

1. the educational program will be divided into independent

learning units;
2. the students start from different entry levels, i.e. their
prior knowledge state ,their background and their needs and
can choose different learningroths;
3. the teachers have to prepare and to give their courses in
different ways; they have no longer one year or more to lead
a group of students towards a set of final objectives;
4. the learnimmaterials will paay a more important role;
5. and to make all this possible a lot of organizational
facilities will be necessary.

The difference between the common and the more fundamental

point of view on modularisation is outlined in the following
schemas (figures 1 and 2).

ii
 institutions programme
teachers

subject-matter
domain
arD
ea

Figure 1: Schematical representation of the common, obsolete

view on nodularisation.

availability learning C.
accessibility studying
experiencing

subject-matter aret.
domain

Figure 2: Schematical representation of the new, more

fundamental view on modularisation.

In the cartm iview, a nodule is a concise part of a curricu-

lum with a defined entry-level and exit-level. The teacher
takes decisions about the nedia on the basis of instructional
reasons, typical for this module.

12
The more fundamental view on modularisation stresses that the
student is the determinator in the whole instructional
process. A module is a part of a learning process. The
student is learning, studying and experiencing while moving
towards mastering the subject-matter area. The students takes
thew availability and accessibility of subject matte into
account. He uses the educational materials he finds appro-
priate, he asks for guidance or assessment to a teacher or
subject-matter expert. At the institutional level, the
educational media, the guidance and tutoring can play a role
in different modules related to the same or another domain.

1.3. Options for modular education

The consequences of mcdularisation can be looked upon as

positive or negative, as advantages or disadvantages.
First, in the case of the students, their option for mcdular
instruction would be understandable.
The advantages of modularisation for students can be
identified as being that:

It allows the student to proceed at his own rate. The belief

that self-paoing is desirable is based on the generally
accepted assumptions that learners do not achieve at the same
rate and are not ready to learn at the same time (Burns,
1971).

It allows the student to choose his own learning mode.

Choice among different learning modes is desirable, if we
assume that learners solve .problems and learn, using
different techniques based on unique behavioral repertoires
or prior knowledge (Burns, 1971). Modular instruction may
therefore include a large variety of instructional activi-
ties, such as reading textbooks and articles, examining
photographs and diagrams, viewing videofilms and computer
programs, examiningclemrstration materials, participating in
projects and experiments, and participating in relevant
"extra curricular" activities.

It provides a choice among a large variety of topics within

any given "course" or discipline, if we assume that students
do not possess the same pattern of interest and are not
motivated to achieve the same goals (Burns, 1971).

It allows students to identify their strengths and weakneases

and to "recycle" through remedial mcdules, repetition, or a
change in learning mode (Elingstedt, 1971), if we assume that
it is desirable to save student time (frequent evaluation
permits early diagnosis) and to allow as many students as
possible to attain the stated objectives (Goldschmid and
Goldschmid, 1973). Recycling means also that the student
does not have to restudy large amounts of subject content.

Mbreover students can be tested earlier, progress and

measures can be brought into line (control of duration of
study);

Also, towards teachers and staff some advantages can be

stated:

a variety of instructional modes are possible within

a module;
mcdules are set up by an interdisciplinary team of
experts;
staff work can be reduced by neans of self studycom-
ponents with emphasis on the accompanying written
materials;
concentrated teaching sessions for the staff,
consequently providing more time for other activi-
ties;
the option of developing new mcdules in that time,
adtustingmodules to meet the results of research and
testing or the supply of education;

Advantages for the learning materials can be stated as

follows:

the material can be presented thematically or in an

integrated form;
the material can be divided into functional units;
the material can be adopted to the student's learning
process;
Furthermore, relating to the organizational facilities,
one can say that:

more planning and developing options for programme

designers;
and the rultifunctionality of ncdules can be seen as
profitable;

Finally, the educational program profits from:

- the exchange of mcdules with other institutions;
- and the fact that ncdUles can be multifunctional.

14
1.4. The disadvantages of modularisation.

MCdular instruction can also have a number of possible

disadvantages - or problems perhaps (Goldschmid and Gold-
schmid, 1973).

What students need to and often do not realize beforehand, is

that:

Self-discipline has to be demonstrated in pursuing

independent study;
The shift from the lecture method to
(passive)
modular instruction (active) might be difficult for
students;
Choice among the available resources (e.g. different
instructional modes, modules, etc.) might prove
frustrating;
The self-pacing nature of modular instruction may
have a delicate side-effect. Since same of the
students will be fast and others slaw learners and
students will have more or less prior knowledge,
learning efficiency and student output will be
totally different among students;

For teachers and staff disadvantages could be:

The time required to design mcdules is usually a

major problem. Other professional activities compete
with a professor's teaching and course-preparation
time;
Lack of concrete rewards may be a problem. Attempts
to innovate instruction and, as is the case, to
optimalize learning is often not rewarded;
The professor no longer has "center-stage billing" :
his feeling of authority vis-a-vis the "audience"
(his students) enhancedthrough one-way communication
in traditional imstruction, is diminished or
eliminated. He might result this loss;
The shift fram the lecture method (passive) to
mcdular instruction (active) might also be difficult
for them;

According to the educational materials, the time required to

design mcdules is usually a major problem. EXperience has
thaught that designing and construction of mater:;als (written
and CAI) takes more time and needs more expertise as planned.

10

Li
Aproblem for the program of the institution can be stated as
follows:
- Switching between modules can arise when there is too
little structure in the madam:* trajectories, so that
the student does not see the connectimbetueen them.

Organizational facilities could, in some cases, be an

obstacle:
Additional clerical time might be necessary to record
whidh students have completed what modules, etc.;
Additional personnel may be required to assist in the
setting up and running of eqpipment for several
modules at a time;
Access to the instructional resources has to be
maximized:
Grading and exam procedures must be adapted to
modular instruction;

1.5. A comparison between traditional and nodular instruc-

tion.

From 1960, there was a change in educational ideas too in

the Dutdh speaking world. In educational practice there were
a number of necessary changes. We can characterise these
changes on a theoretical scale. A synopsis of the changed
educational views is given in table 1 (Dochy and Van Luyk,
1987). We emphasize that we are speaking of a theoretical
difference; consequently, in practice the division isn't that
strict.

11

16
Traditional views New views

1. Ehowledge is knowing that Education is knowing that

and knowing haw.

2. First theory than practice Theory and practice in

the curriculum
3. Subject-based education Integrated education

4. Teacher-centred education Student-centred education

5. Transmission of knowledge Acquisition of knowledge

6. Educational programm Study programs

7. Staff direct and teach Staff assist, stimulate

and evaluate

Table 1: Changed educational idPaA (tahan from Dochy and Van

Luyk, 1987).

Most of these new insights are in modUlar

implemented
education. The modular course had from its inception a
configuration which has accorded with the tendency for
change.
An overview of the differences between traditional and
modular instruction is presented in table 2. The differences,
mainly according to Postlethwait and Russell (1971), must be
seen as a general, e.g. applicable for all kinds of modular
instruction, such as open distance education at the Open
university or problem-oriamted education at the Unimersity of
Limburg. Again, the polarisation is a theoretical one. In the
practice of modularisation, some of the characteristics move
on a continuumbetmeen the stated poles.

12
Characteristic Traditional Course Modular Course

Course success Mostly judged Objectives and

subjectively by evaluation assure
the instructor that the instruc-
tor is able to
correct faultly
instructional
materials and
knows when his
course is
successfull in
terms of student-
learning

Instructional Mostly lectures Many different

activities and written instuctional
assignments; media activities are
used on basis of used to optimalize
instructor's learning; media
personal feelings used on efficacy
about them established
through trial use
by students

Learning experience Oriented towards Oriented towards

teacher performan- student performan-
ce, with emphasis ce and individual
on teaching; instruction with
knowledge transfer emphasis on
by the instructor learning;
knowledge
acquisition by the
student

MasterY It is expected All students are

that only a few expected to
students will do adhieve restery of
very well and same the obj ectives at
will fail their own rates

Objectives Usually not stated Stated in terms of

in precise students behaviors
observable terms and presented
before instruction
begins

Participation Passive Active

13

18
Presentation of Grcup-oriented at Biqhly indivi-
materials predetermined dualized materi-
tines an:I places als; eadh student
can any or all of
the instructional
materials,
available at
preferred times
and places

Rate (or pacing) Students must all Each sthdent can

go at the same proceed at his am
rate rate

Reinforcement Utually only after immediate and

examinations frequent, after
small units of
material studied

Role of instructor D1sseminator of Diagnosis,

information prescriber,
motivator and
resource person

Testing Student typically Designed to

takes one or two measure nestery of
tests on the the objectives
materials which stated at the
determine his beginning of the
grade for the course; purposes
entire course are assessment of
prerequisite
skills, diagnosis
of strengbts,
weaknesses and
mastery

Table 2: An overview of differences between traditional and

mcdUlar instruction.

In the following section we will explain briefly the nature

of modular education as it is used till now at the Dutch Open
University. For a more extended and detailed elaboration of
this matter we refer to Van den Boom et al (1988a, 1988b),
Van den Brink (1989) and Van der Linden (1987).

14
2. Modular education at the Eutdi Open University.

The programme offered by the Open University does not

comprise complete pre-programmed disciplinary or year
programmes, but independent courses which can be taken
separately by the student in order to readh a totality of
interrelated objectives. The courses are developed within
fields of study. These areas are interrelated wholes of
knowledge and insight within which the different academic
disciplines are represenbad.

Addstinction is made among fields of study such as Law/Iegal

Studies, Economics, Business and Management Study, Technolo-
gy, Natural Science, The Humanities and Social Science. A
course is developed within a particular field, but will in
many cases include elements from other fields. Furthermore
the structure in which the courses are produced - a matrix
structure in which course teams are brought togethez from
one, or more disciplines supplemented by educational
technologists - chosen so that the courses have a largely
multi-disciplinary character. A course can therefore be
applied to programmes within various fields (multifunctiona-
lity).
A course comprises, two or sometimes three modules which
require 100, 200 or 300 hours of study respectdvely.
There is often a cambination of media, integrated within the
course (written material, video and sound tapes, computer
simulations, computer aided instamiction), in which the
written text has the major pert. The written material is
produced for the greater part by the Open University itself.
In addition to its own texts, use is made of existing
publications, books, parts of them and/or articles, which
are combined to form a course component. The written
material is supplemented in same cases by material for
computer applications, practical instructions and guidance
from the study centres.
The courses are developed at three levels, the first level
comprising the introductory courses, the second level the
acquisition of basic skills and insights and the third level
a further theoretical, methodological and/or content depth.
Each course concludes with official exams. When an exam is
passed, a fixed number (1, 2 or 3) of credits is gained,
depending on the number of modules comprising the course.
In the study guide, a course catalogue, a short description
is given of each course. The description contains the
following elements:
- the primary field of study within which the course has
been developed;
- the number of hours required for the course;
- the level of the course;
- the entry situation, which includes knowledge and

15
 skills on which the course is predicated (the prior
knowledge) and
- learning objectives, the objects of the course, in
terms of knowledge and skills that the student should
possess at the end of the course.

The structure and the organization of the course at the Open

University offers naximum opportunities for a student's
individual choice.
Flexibility is guaranteed by course structure, registration
per course and the credit system. The subdivision of the
courses into broad learning areas and the fact that the
courses frau one field can be part of study programmes in
another im=reasethe options available.
The student can make a highly personal choice fram the
courses on offer which relates to his/her wishes and
preferences, in relation to cccupations, interests, inclina-
tions and/or social involvement.

In the following section, we will shcrtly review the three

main modular course models, used at this university.

Modular =arse modals

The modular coarse mcdels of the first level are mainly based
on the "study unit" model. First, we will describe the
characteristics, the advantages and disadvantages of this
basic model.

In terms of the study unit model a great deal of material is

subdivided into learning units of approximately four hours,
in which "nee' material and revision alternate. A learning
unit is an interrelated whole in terms of subject natter,
instructions and (self)testing. This leads to the achievement
of one or more learning objectives. The (self)testing allows
the students to assess their acquired knowledge and
insights.

The study unit model may be characterized as follows (Van den

Boom, 1988):
- most of the study texts are newlywritten;
- frequent use of didactic tools, sudh as educational
objectives, study hdnts, assignments and tests;
- the texts and didactic tools are integrated;
- the course is highly structured and is divided into a
number of self-contained parts, called study units;
- the study material is put at the student's disposal in
its entirety;
- the electronic media are an integrated part of the
course design.

16
If the object is to transfer information as efficiently as
possible to the students then the learning unit model is
extremely suitable. It makes information as clear as possible
and leads the student through the information systematically
and stage by stage. The chance of the student getting stuck
or lost in the material is mdninal.

The advantages of the learning model are (Am. der Linden, et

al., 1987):
1. students receive optimal guidance by means of the
instructions in the material;
2. at a given time, students know in time what is required
of them;
3. the learning material is selected by the team, in
terms of relevance and need;
4. students don't get stuck so Pasily, because the
information is so clearly and fully presented and
consequently students' problems are anticipated;
5. the study path is clearly indicated;
6. students who still have to learn how to study get a
chance via study instructions etc.;
7. uncertainty on the part of the students about their
progress and perfcrmance is minimalized by the
introduction of didactic tools;
8. students respond positively to a model that allows
them to study independently at the time and pace that
suits them.

The application of the learning unit model has also shown

that there are a number of disadvantages attached to it:
1. as the course is phased as a complete and sequential
whole, the rcdel is extremely linear;
2. students have little freedom, they have to follow the
study path indicated;
3. as the courses are highly prestructured there is a
danger of students becoming dependent on this sort of
material which has consequences for their study
abilities and skills in a efficient seardh for new
information;
4. the model offers no opportunity for the student to
work through large amounts of specialist literature
using his own initiative;
5. everything has to be rewritten, which demands a great
deal of time and creativity of the authors;
6. the model is less suitable for learning skills and
attitudes;
7. as everything is fixed in a course, it is extremely
difficult to adjust it to the needs of individual
students.

17

22
Comparing the advantages and disadlnultages, the Ou educatio-
nalists concluded that this model is fitting to the needs of
students starting with first level courues (van den Boom,
1988). In order to counteract the disadvantages at higher
levels, other models were to be introdtxxxl, such as the
textbook/workbook model, the workbcok-source material model
and the essay/thesis model (Van den Boom, 1988; Van den
Brink, 1989).

The most striking aspect of the textbook-workbook model is

the fact that the subject matter is not offered to the
students as an integrated whole; there is a separation of
contents and didactic tools. The textbook contains the
content-specific information of the course. In addition to
the textbook there is a workbook. The workbook has a wide
range of didactic clues whidh the student ray use when
studying the textbook. The workboak for instance contains an
overview of objectives, self-assessment tests with matching
feedback, cases, comments on the textbook, study hints, an
index, introductions and summaries and a sample test. The
advantage of the textbook-morkbook model over the study unit
model, is that it enables the students to experience the many
ways in which authors present the subject matter in text
books, articles, etc.
Another important characteristic of this course model is that
it gives students a certain freedom in choice cl their (self-
)study strategy. Students are free to use the workbook or
not.
In courses built on the base of the "workbook-source
material" model, the workbook encourages students to use
different information sources such as handbooks readers,
audiovisual productions, etc. From the source material they
extract information necessary to find the answers to
questions, or solve problems, cases, etc. presented in the
workbook. Metly, the workbook only mencions possible
sources, which the student would have to find or purchase
himself. This course model also offers opportunities for a
more problem-oriented approach. One could organize higher-
level courses around the practising ct skills such as
informationprocessing and application.

Finally, the essay/thesis model is most useful when the

objective is to produce a written presentation such as an
essay or a thesis. The course itself may consist of a short
manual and the provision of support facilities by the
university. These facilities may consist of brochures on for
instance: "how to set up a good research project?" or
"writing reports", but also personal supervision by universi-
ty staff umbers or external experts (Van den Boom, 1988).

18

23
3. Priar knowledge and wail ar ins-traction

As we have stated earlier, in mcdularisation it is necessary

to take account of the consequences related to components of
education. One important aspect of education is the learner.
First of all, modularisation is directed towards more
efficient and more effective education in profit of the
learner. According to the changing ideas in today's society
on personal development, students will request a kind of
instruction more fully in accordance with and appropriate
with their personal characteristics and their prior knowledge
state.
Secani, mcdular instruction creates the opportunity for
students to work at their aim pace. Furthermore there is the
opportunity for students to skip a module or to work through
it more quickly on the basis of prior knowledge. This is the
most radical phenomenon in respect of the return on instruc-
tion, both for the student and the institution.
It seems that not all the institutions working on the base of
a nodular structure do profit frc.a these opportunities yet.

Theoretically the approach of modular education always

should include a pretest to determine the level of the
student. According to Goldschmid and Goldschmid this has the
following consequences:

"If the student does not have all required prerequisites, he

may need prior instruction. If he is already competent in
the area of a particular module, he can proceed to a more
advanced module or to one with a different content. taxon
completion of a module the student is again evaluated. If
the post-test indicates that the student has not achieved
mastery of the mcdule's objectives, he might be recycled
through the module or through parts of it or he may take a
remedial module. If he does succeed, he proceeds to the text
(or, to another) module. The pre- and post-test also allow
for empirical validation of the module itself."
The learner's options are charted in Figure 3.

19

24
 HPAIMM NSIWOION

MODULE I 11.. MS1- PE- MODULE 2 -P. POST- PPE.

PRE-
TEST
INSTRUCTIONAL 1 ST TS INSTRUCTIONAL TEST TEST
ACIWITIES ACTIVITIES 2 3

REPEATS mODULE 011 REPEATS MODULE Olt

PART Of It PART Of It

SKIPS THIS MODULE SKIPS THIS MODULE

Figure 3: Flow chart of the learner's options in mcdular

instruction (adapted from Goldschmid and Goldschmid, 1973).

This sort of approach actually makes it possible for students

to follow individual paths as we described above, which
relate to their prior knowledge. In this sense mcdular
education is fleuible and directed at individualization.
Theru is always a spectrum of options offered in which prior
knowledge in principle can be the determining factor in the
choice. In this sense, it does not natter if the prior
know.Ledge deficiencies are filled within the mcdule itsPlf,
within a remedial mcdule or by the presentation of a large
knowledge base.

In this context, and in the light of returns to the institu-

tion and interinstitutional cooperation, the development of
multifunctional mcdules has become a topic (de Wolf, 1988).
From the student's point of view, the domain specificity of
the subject is impartant, and the learning process can be
registered in several categories.
When a student gets information on a subject, the first
question is how much of the information he or she can
understand, i.e. how proficient he is in the terminology.
Science usually has its own jargon which has to be learned.
Secondly, scientific arguments often present technical or

20

2b
scientific intellectual procedures, same even implicit ones,
which have to be studied to be able to follow discussions on
the subject. Thirdly, every discipline has its own knowledge
patterns and views which one can only master through much
pratice. Finally, every discipline requires domain-specific
cognitive and other skills whinh one has ta master.
With the help of these categories, and one can.thihk of more,
it is possible to order and organize study processes. Then
alternative study paths within and betmeen modules are really
possible.
Nevertheless, valid and reliable information on the damain-
specificity and on the student's prior knowledge state are
the primary condition for the design of completely nultifunc-
tional modules.

The view that this type of flexible education on the basis of

the stated flow chart is only rendered feasible by using
computer based courses, may indeed be valid. Most forms of
mcdular education offer a relatively vague indication of the
required entry level. The Ou courses also are limited to
indicating the concepts assumed to be known by students and
the available literature.

A true assessment of the individual level with the resultant

advantages does not occur. If anewants to adjust the return
on education and allow the student to learn as efficiently as
possible then it is neoessary to explore these options. This
last does seam to cause some trouble. Napping a student's
prior knowledge can be approadhed frcm various angles. Prior
knowledge is more than just the knadledge acquired in earlier
training and courses (Dochy, 1989). nTerience which people
acquire can to a degree influence the manner and the speed in
which they learn to command new material. FUrthermore,
attention nust be directed at relevant prior knowledge, in
relation to the objectives to be pursued. Working slowly
towards an ideal situation vis a vis the learning path to be
followed both within and between modules can be adopted as
the basis of a researdh based approach directed more
explicitly at increasing returns.

21

26
References

Allen, D.W. & P.R. Christensen (1974). Using time, space and
people effectively. In: Allen, D.W. & J.C. Hecht (eds.),
Controversies in education, New York, W.B. Saunders.

Brewer, W.F., and Nakamura, G.V., (1984). The nature and

functions of schemas. In: Wyer, R.S., and Srull, T.K.,
Handbook of social Cognition. 1, 119-160. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Boom, W.J.G. van den (1988). Basic models for courses at the
Dutch Open University. In: Enckevort, G. van & Wolf, H.C. de
(1988). The Open University of the Netherlands after four
years: facts and developments. Heerlen, Ou.

Bow, W.J.G. van den, Schlusmans, K. H.L.A. (1988) . Van

afstandsonderwijs naar open onderwijs (From distance learning
to open education),Iriterimmapportage.
Heerlen, Open Universiteit.

Brink, H.J. van den et al., Tekstboek-werkbadk cursusmodel

(rextbook - workbook coursemodel). Open universiteit,
Heerlen, (in preparation, expected publication date 1989).

Burn, B. (1975). 'The American academic credit system'.

Structure of studies and place of researdh in mass higher
education. Paris, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development.

Burns, R. (1971). Methods for individualizing instruction.

Educational Technoloay,11. 55-56.

Chamsky, N.(1980). Rules and representations. New York:

COlumbia University Press.

Dochy, & Van Luyk, S.J. (1987). Handboek vaardig-

heidsondewijs (Handbook on skills education). Lisse: Swets &
Zeitlinger.

Dochy, F.J.R.C. (1989). Indicering van het concept 'Prior

beinvloedende variabelen en een conceptueel
model voor verder onderzoek. Heerlen, Open Universiteit,
Onderwijstechnologisch Innovatie Centrum.

Eij1, P.J. van (1988). Onderwijs in mcdulen. Groningen,

Wolters-Noordhoff.

Goldschmid, B. & Goldschmid, M.L. (1973). MCdulair instructi-

on in higher education: a review. Higher education, 2; 15-32.

22

27
Haas, G. James, (1982) 'Undergraduate transfer credits from
abroad'. Cbllege and University, 57 (Winter), 218-225

Handboek voor c usontwikke1ing (iandbook for course

development), thiru draft, Cpen universiteit, Heerlen, 1983

Heffernan J.M. (1973) 'The credibility of the credit hour:

the history, use and shortcomings of the credit system'.
Journal of Higher Education, 44 (1), 61-72.

Hill, F. (1975) 'Life credits attracting more mature

students'. Times Higher Education Supplement. 21 March.

Elingstedt, J.L. (1971). Developing instructional mcdules for

inavianalized instruction, Educational Technology,11, 73-74.

Linden, C.J.A.M. van der et al., Onderwijskundige aspecten

van cursusontwikkeling van de Open universiteit, Open
universiteit, Heerlen, 1987

Lindquist, J. (1975) 'Strategies for contract learning'. D.W.

Vermilye ed. Learner-centred reform. 75-89. San Francisco.
Jossey-Bass.

Lorimer, M.R. (1962) 'How much is a credit hour?'. Journal of

Higher Education, 33 (6), 302-306.

Postlethwait, S.N. and Russell, J.D. (1971). Minicourses-

The style of the future ? In: J,C, Craeger and ELI,. Murray
(Eds.) The use of mcdules in college biology teaching.
Wadhington: Commission on Undergraduate Education in the
Biological Sciences, The American Institute of Biological
Sciences, pp. 5 -8.

Schultz, R.E. (1973) 'Outreach programmes in the United

States Community Colleges'. Short-cycle higher education, a
search for identity. Paris. Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development

Spurr, S.H. (1970) Academic degree structures: innovative

approaches. New York. McGraw-Hill.

Theodossin, E. (1986). The modular market. Studies in further

education. The Further Education Staff College, Bristol.

H.C. de (1988). Development of courses and quality

control, instruments for educational innovation. In:
Enckevort, G. van & Wolf, H.C. de (1988). The Open University
of the Netherlands after four years: facts and developments.
Heerlen, Ou.

23

28
 H.C. de (1989). Modularisering, een diengaande
oniamijslomliige venandering. Paper gepreserteerd op de
studiedag over modulariseren van het BEA0 op 17 maart in
Bunnik.

Ziegler, W. (1972). 'An approach to the futures - perspective

in American education.' Alternative educational futures in
the United States and in Ebrope: methods, issues and policy
relevance. Paris, Centre for Educational Research and
Innovation.

24

`&
Previous reports published in this series.

The 'Prior Knowledge State' of students

and its facilitating effect on learning
F.J.R.C. Dochy

Variables influencing the indexation of the

'Prior Knowledge State' concept and a
conceptual model for research
F.J.R.C. Dochy

Students' views on Prior Knowledge

F.J.R.C. Dochy, W.H.L. Steenbakkers

Inscript: een scripttaal voor het

systematisch ontwerp van interaktieve
leersystemen
E.J.R. Koper

Boekje open over Hoger Onderwijs

W.J.G. van den Boom, K.H.L.A. Schlusmans

Een didactisch kader voor open hoger onderwijs:

modellen en begripsomschrijvingen
K.H.L.A. Schlusmans, W.J.G. van den Boom

Uitgangspunten voor het gebruik van ervaringsleren

als bron van voorkennis
L.J.J.M. Wagemans, F.J.R.C. Dochy

30