Part 3 of a multi-part series on why you should avoid Msc. Applied Cybersecurity at Queen’s University Belfast, collaboratively written by students on the course.
Block Teaching Model
In previous years students were taught a variety of different subjects in parallel. This provided students an opportunity to experience a range of subjects simultaneously and receive feedback on their coursework and labs. Queen’s then moved to a Block Teaching Model in which only one subject is taught each month.
QUB explains on its own website and marketing materials that this model makes the programme a more attractive offer as a part-time course for companies which may wish to up-skill their staff in Cybersecurity whilst working. It does not appear to make any such claims that there are advantages of the model for full-time private students. Quite rightly.
I would imagine they’re still feeling the pain of that reorganisation {into block mode teaching} but it there was a noticeable drop in the quality of the course between my first and second year. — Anonymous Student
Each month is structured as follows: week one is reading week, week two is taught classes and labs while weeks three and four are coursework weeks where students work on module coursework in isolation.
A problem with this model is that because the labs occur during the taught classes week, feedback is not given to students until the module has been completed — at the very earliest. This year students were not given feedback or marks on lab work or in-class exams in most cases for many months and in some cases not until after well after the end of semester exams, a time after which feedback can have little to no impact. After speaking to past students, I can confirm that this prolonged feedback loop is typical.
I only did {Redacted} modules in the new system but I pretty much had the same experience, did labs in week 2 and didn’t get results back before submitting coursework so I didn’t know if I had made any mistakes. Some coursework I didn’t get results back before I did the exam. — Anonymous Student
Students can then go through an entire module — reading week, classwork, coursework, and final exams without being given the essential feedback that they need. Without finding out if students may have misunderstood something in class or during the reading week, or to understand areas around which they may need to focus further study on, there can not be any semblance of a functional feedback loop. Students must therefore be expected to know subjects mainly if not wholly through self-study in advance and without expectation or realisation of feedback from lecturers or course coordinator(s). On a taught MSc programme such an approach is more than simply non-intuitive, or counter-productive, it is simply wrong.
Students are lead to believe that assessments and exams in week two are not intended to be summative — that is to say that they are not tested on their mastery of a subject at this stage but rather the assessment serves to be influential on their understanding of the topic and the course in general. Yet it is difficult to reconcile such claims that the second week assessments are merely formative whilst there are multiple instances of assessed labs requiring prior knowledge of the problem domain in advance of a subject being covered in class — in at least one instance there were labs which tested students on course content which was not covered until the following day. In addition, it seems somewhat disengenous to expect that the learning of something is primarily if not solely in the doing of it — when feedback is often not available until the module has finished, then in what manner can such tasks be considered ‘formative’.
A further side-effect of the block mode teaching model is that often the sum of lecturer contact hours with students can amount to little more than those hours in which they share a classroom. In practice this means that the only opportunity that students may have to discuss a subject one-on-one is during tea and coffee breaks between lectures, if at all. Often lecturers have been unavailable to even so much as respond to emails before or during the coursework weeks when students may have needed the most guidance of all.
Additionally, this model means you have only done 3 modules by the time you have to choose your project, which is an opportunity to show some in-depth knowledge of a subject. While this is fine for students who already know which area of Cyber Security they wish to pursue, for those who are still unsure it naturally means they only feel comfortable taking on a project from the first few modules. At least one student says they have now ended up with a project which is entirely outside of the area of Cyber Security they are now wanting to work in, and feel it is a completely wasted opportunity.
In summary, the Block Mode Teaching Model does not appear on the face of it to have been implemented to the advantage of students. Companies however, may feel that it is less of a strain on their workflow to have staff out only for one week every second month instead of more intensive training. The question remaining is what then if not to improve the quality of the course, does such a scheme remain for? One might argue financial motivations. It is difficult to argue any other.
Next in the series:
Students ask, Are parts of the course plagiarised?
