A structural reflection on the Bologna module concept should be realized more or less independently from the specific content of the modules in question.
It shouldn’t happen that a paradox situation like this happens: “What's your module is my course; and what is your course might be my module." Avoid chiasm in hierarchical systems! Respect the hierarchical order of:
Hierarchy: course ==> module ==> topic ==>section ==> paragraph
.
Is this reasonable within a trans-disciplinary approach? Obviously not.
A strict hierarchy of modules might be possible in a (mono)disciplinary and to some degree in a multi-disciplinary paradigm of research. Even with inter-disciplinarity, chiastic exchanges between the whole and the part (course/module/topic) can easily and reasonably happen.
A simple chiasm between modules and topics might be constructed by the following diagram.
Such a chiastic interplay between a whole and its parts (course/module) is reasonably realizable only within the epistemological presupposition of world-model IV.
Hence, the first and most sever violation of the Bologna rules would be to allow to play with chiasms between wholes and parts. It seems, that this violation is of such a gravity that it is not even mentioned in the guidelines of modular education in the sense of the Bologna reform.
In words, the formula says : For all modules Mod: If Mod is an element of a chiasm χ, then Mod doesn’t exist.
