**3. Modules**

#### **3.1 Module writing**

The PGDHE is a new program that, according to the program document [17] is modularized. Therefore, teaching in the PGDHE program necessitated the availability of modules. It was therefore mandatory to develop modules to use in the teaching of courses, such as *Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: PGDHE-502.* Yet, at the initial stage, there were no modules to guide the teaching. Most importantly, the program facilitators had a very short training on developing modules.

Most difficult is that the program facilitators not only lacked experience in teaching online but they also lacked skills for using modules for this mode of teaching. This means that the National University of Lesotho (NUL) did not have a guide for developing a postgraduate program module for an online teaching. However, search for information on writing a module revealed that there are module guides and Rhodes University pamphlets on writing a module. The attractive modules and module guides were of the following universities and institutions: University of the Free State, University of Namibia—Center for Teaching and Learning; Dublin-Ireland University, and an All-Ireland Society for Higher Education Academic Practice Guides (AISHE academic practice guides) by Huntley-Moore and Panter [18].

All the module guides had good practical examples. However, reflecting-inaction, there was a realization that the Ireland AISHE academic practice module and the Technological University Dublin module guides would provide a good guide for drafting the National University of Lesotho module guide for postgraduate programs. Nevertheless, the AISHE academic practice module guide proved to be the best since it entailed topics that seemed familiar to higher education educators.

Therefore, on the bases, of the course outlines, modules were drafted. However, there were numerous challenges encountered in producing such modules. Modularizing programs are not a common activity in the institution. Nevertheless, the use of the module guide for developing the draft module and for teaching the courses proved helpful. It took at least 3 months to draft the module on teaching and learning in higher education. Reflecting on producing this draft module, it can be noted that it required time to develop and have these edited before they could be used for teaching. However, draft modules were adopted by the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) and they served as good guides at the initial stages of teaching in the program. A credible module is one that has been professionally edited; yet, these program modules were not. Hence, the need for engaging program participants in assessing the modules.

#### **3.2 Evaluation of the module**

Teaching using the draft module provided an opportunity to consider revising and improving the draft module. The plan to engage in reviewing the module means *reflecting-for-action* in the context of module production. Continuing to use the module having not assessed, it has serious implications for the quality of the program. There is a need to engage in ensuring that the modules meet the quality standard for teaching online.
