Programme development, approval and review for partner colleges

1
Programme development, approval and review for
partner colleges

• Tanya Izzard
• Partnership Manager
• 01273 643901 t.izzard_at_brighton.ac.uk

2
Aims and audience

• to introduce college staff to the stages and
  requirements of programme development, approval
  and review
• to outline the documentation required at each
  stage
• for any college staff involved in the development
  or review of programmes

3
Development stages

• Stage 1 proposal. Approved by
• college
• School Board
• Faculty Academic Board
• Academic Development Committee
• Stage 2 outline. Approved by
• college
• School Board
• Faculty Academic Board
• Academic Standards Committee
• Stage 3 validation event
• validation panel convened by Chair of ASC

4
What decisions does ADC make?

• Approves the proposal for further development
• Approves the title for inclusion on the courses
  database
• ADC approval means the programme can be
  advertised and students made offers, subject to
  validation
• ADC also approves changes to titles and
  withdrawal of programmes

5
What evidence does ADC need?

• ADC01A form
• viability in market
• resource base
• institutional support
• sources of funding
• suitable title
• Programme Specification Part 1
• programme titles
• location of delivery
• awards available
• modes of study

6
What decisions does ASC make?

• Approves the course to proceed to a validation
  event
• Considers validation arrangements
• Identifies issues for the validation panel to
  address
• Recommends issues to be addressed by the course
  team before the validation event

7
What evidence does ASC need?

• Programme specification Parts 1 and 2
• aims and learning outcomes
• programme structure and regulations
• learning, teaching and assessment methods
• learning support
• Any other relevant information specific to the
  course development
• Issues raised by Faculty Academic Board or ADC

8
Validation

• Panel will test
• conforms to Common Academic Framework
• aims learning outcomes
• clear, coherent, appropriate level
• learning, teaching and assessment strategies
• student support
• learning, staffing and physical resources
• quality assurance processes
• engagement with
• Academic Infrastructure
• Career Planning Agreement

9
Validation documentation

• Will be confirmed by Chair and officer to the
  event, but will include
• agenda and list of participants
• programme specification
• module descriptors for all modules
• minutes of the development process
• rationale for programme
• assessment schedule
• details of course management arrangements
• evidence of consideration of external reference
  points
• information on learning resources and staff CVs

10
Validation event

• Panel will be chaired by a senior member of UoB
  staff, and will include
• an external advisor (nominated by the course
  team)
• representatives of the relevant Faculty Academic
  Board
• representatives of ASC
• a member of the college senior management team
• a senior member of staff from a central
  department at the University or a School not
  linked to the development
• a member of staff from Registry (Academic
  Standards and Partnership)
• Chair may request private panel meeting to
  identify lines of enquiry (some Chairs involve
  the course development team in this meeting)
• Course Leader will present the background and
  rationale to the programme
• Panel and course development team discuss agreed
  lines of enqury
• Chair holds private meeting of the panel to agree
  conclusions
• Conclusions communicated to course development
  team

11
Validation outcomes

• Approval
• Approval subject to conditions and/or
  requirements and recommendations
• standard conditions include publication of final
  programme specification and student handbook
• conditions must be fulfilled before the course
  commences
• requirements must be fulfilled, but not
  necessarily before the course commences
• recommendations must be considered by the course
  team and a formal response provided
• Withhold approval subject to further development

12
Validation outcomes

• Programme officially validated when Chair of
  panel confirms that conditions have been
  fulfilled in a satisfactory manner
• Programmes remain in validation in perpetuity
• Periodic review happens every five years

13
Periodic review

• critical review of all aspects of validated
  provision
• evaluates curriculum content, pedagogic approach,
  subject developments, student experience
• students participate
• programmes may be grouped together for review

14
Periodic review

• Faculties determine review schedules and agree
  groupings
• Review conducted by a panel drawn from relevant
  Faculty Academic Board
• External advisors join the panel
• Students may be panel members or participate in
  discussions
• ASC representative on panel

15
Periodic review

• Faculties define documentation required
• Panel will agree outcomes, normally
  recommendations for quality enhancement
  activities
• Panel will identify good practice for
  dissemination across the University
• Faculties monitor implementation of actions
  arising from periodic review

16
Sources of information

• Course approval and review handbook
• GEAR
• Staffcentral
• http//www.qaa.ac.uk