ACADEMIC QUALITY ASSURANCE

APPENDIX 3

COURSE DEVELOPER’S GUIDE

Fourteenth EditionLast updated October 2015

Issued by Academic Quality and Awards©

CONTENTS Page

1. GETTING STARTED WITH A NEW COURSE 1

2. COURSE DEVELOPMENT CHECK LIST 2

3.4.

GUIDANCE ON CURRICULUM DESIGN

ACADEMIC REGULATIONS

5

7

5. COURSE APPROVAL 9

5.1 Purpose 9

5.2 Criteria 9

5.3 Developmental and Initial Evaluation 9

5.4 Documentation for Course Approval 9

5.4.1 Programme Specification 105.4.2 Module Descriptors 105.4.3 Planning Consent Form/Course Resource Audit Form 115.4.4 Student Handbook 125.4.5 Teaching Schemes 125.4.6 Institutional Document 12

5.5 Course Approval Event 13

5.5.1 Course Approval Panel 135.5.2 Authority of the Course Approval Panels 135.5.3 Course Approval Process 145.5.4 Approval of new named Certificates/Advanced Certificates 15

6. ACTION FOLLOWING SUCCESSFUL COURSE APPROVAL 16

6.1 Response to conditions 16

6.2 External Examiner Appointments 16

6.3 Course Information on the web 16

6.4 Course Documentation and Computer Records 16

7. FEEDBACK ON THE COURSE APPROVAL PROCESS 17

8. PROCESS OF CREDIT RECOGNITION OF IN-HOUSE COMPANY COURSES 17

9. COURSE/MODULE AMENDMENT PROCESS 17

10. MAJOR CHANGES TO EXISTING COURSES 17

11. ON-GOING QUALITY ASSURANCE 19

11.1 Annual Monitoring 19

11.2 Interim Review 19

11.3 Periodic Course Review (On-campus Provision) 19

11.4 Periodic Course Review (Partnership) 20

APPENDICES

1. MARKET RESEARCH FOR NEW COURSES

2. COURSE RESOURCE AUDIT FORMS (CRAF)

2A Planning Consent Form for new on-campus provision2B CRAF 1 for off campus provision2C CRAF 2 for UCLan delivery off campus or at new UCLan campus2D CRAF 3 for periodic review2E CRAF 4 for periodic review (UK and overseas collaborative)

3. RESOURCE PROFORMA FOR UK COLLABORATIVE EVENTS THAT DO NOT INCLUDE A TOUR OF LEARNING RESOURCES

4. a. MODULE DESCRIPTORb. MODULE LEVEL DESCRIPTORSc. MODULE DESCRIPTOR GUIDANCE

5. MODULE TEACHING SCHEME

6. GUIDANCE NOTES ON DEVELOPING AND COMPLETING PROGRAMME SPECIFICATIONS and PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION TEMPLATE

7. CURRICULUM VITAE – STANDARD FORMAT

8. SUMMARY OF THE COURSE APPROVAL PROCESS

9. THRESHOLD CRITERIA FOR COURSE APPROVAL

10. DISTANCE LEARNING PROGRAMMES- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR COURSE DEVELOPERS AND COURSE APPROVAL PANELS

11. FOUNDATION DEGREES – ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR COURSE DEVELOPERS AND COURSE APPROVAL PANELS

12. NOMINATION OF EXTERNAL ADVISERS

13. STUDENT HANDBOOKS GUIDANCE ON CONTENTa. Guidance on content for Course Leadersb. Student Handbook

14. RESPONSE TO CONDITIONS PROFORMA

15. COURSE/MODULE AMENDMENT PROCESSAF1A Form for processed change to module(s)AF1b Form for proposed change to course (eg, structural change)AF2 Form for consultation with external examinersAF3 Form for approval of adoption of a module from a different SchoolAF4 Guidance on Consultation with Students

16. WHERE TO GET FURTHER ADVICE

17. APPROVAL TO OFFER EXTERNAL AWARDS

18. GLOSSARY OF TERMINOLOGY

19. FLOW-CHART OF TIME SCALES FOR COURSE DEVELOPMENT

20. REQUEST FOR FAST-TRACK PLANNING CONSENT

21. GUIDANCE ON MODULE ASSESSMENT WORKLOAD EQUIVALENCES

1. GETTING STARTED WITH A NEW COURSE

New ideas for course developments should be channelled in the first instance to your Head of School. The University Course Planning Committee (a sub-committee of Academic Board) is responsible for granting strategic approval for all new course proposals to proceed to course development and inclusion in the Course Approval Schedule. Proposed new courses may not be advertised until approval has been granted to proceed to course development and then must only be advertised as “subject to approval” until final Course Approval has been confirmed. Offers of places may not be made to courses which have not been fully approved, (expressions of interest may be invited). (See Appendix 19 for details of planning timescales). (NB Where there is a strong business need, course planning may be fast-tracked – please consult AQA for further information.)

The main purpose of course planning is to ensure that the overall portfolio of programmes offered by the University is relevant to market needs, reflects the University’s mission, strategic goals, current academic priorities and resources. The Course Planning Committee will consider proposals (a) for the development of new academic courses to be delivered at UCLan campuses and (b) the development of academic courses leading to University awards to be delivered in full or in part at other UK and Overseas institutions.

Once approval has been given to proceed to course development, proposed new courses for delivery at a UCLan campus may proceed to course development and Course Approval (see section 4 for more information on the Course Approval process). It should be noted that following strategic approval by the Course Planning Committee, courses to be offered in collaboration with new UK partners or overseas partners require a formal proposal to be made to the Collaborative Sub-Committee (CSC) and, if delivery at level 7 is involved, then the collaborative proposal also needs to be considered and approved by the Academic Standards & Quality Assurance Committee (ASQAC). (For collaborative proposals, please see the document “Collaborative Provision – Policy and Procedures” (Appendix 11 of the Academic Quality Assurance Manual).

Ideally the development process commences at least two years prior to the planned commencement of a new course so that there is time to: gather market intelligence; consult with central University stakeholders to ensure course proposals are viable; ensure that the curriculum development phase is informed by the latest pedagogic research and

best practice and involves liaison with a wide range of people, including external stakeholders; undertake a course resource audit to ensure that the staffing and resource base is adequate for

the delivery of the course and that there is adequate consultation with services such as Library and Information Services and Facilities Management. (See Section 5 for more information on the course resource audit requirements.)

consult with students; ensure that accurate course information is provided for marketing purposes.

The University encourages innovation in curriculum development and design. Course teams should work together in professional learning communities to design, develop, review and enhance their curriculum and learning, teaching and assessment strategies. A range of resources to support course development and enhancement is available in the pedagogic enhancement section of the CELT’s online resources. There is a wide variety of models for course development and the University places very little restriction on the development model used in individual cases, except that the development must be in compliance with the Academic Regulations and that the quality and standard of provision is assured and is aligned with Part A of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education (Quality Code). Some courses involve collaboration with more than one partner institution, operating as a network of providers to share modules and extend the range of specialist modules. Other courses are developed for distance learning, or modified to include distance learning variants. Courses may also share a common first year or provide access routes from HNC/HND courses or Foundation Degrees to Honours Degree programmes. In terms of course development academic staff are encouraged to be inventive, liaise with colleagues inside and outside the University and talk to Schools/Colleges/other Higher Education Institutions and employers. (See Section 3 for further guidance on curriculum design).

1

The University’s course approval procedures have been mapped against the expectations of the Quality Code to ensure compliance with the external framework.

Appendix 16 of this Course Developers’ Guide provides useful sources from where further advice may be sought.

2. COURSE DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST

(Note: unless otherwise stated all references to Appendices are to Appendices of this Guide)

Establish an academic professional learning community for the proposed course which will start to develop the course, drawing on academic, technical and other support services.

Consider the potential market for the course, and potential entry requirements. This will influence the nature and level of the award, the content of the curriculum, the overall learning outcomes (to meet the needs of the diverse range of students who will be recruited), teaching and learning, and the assessment strategy which will test the learning outcomes. See Appendix 1 of this Guide on market research for new courses.

Refer to the University Academic Regulations which take account of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ), to ensure that the most appropriate level of target award is chosen and that the design of the course takes account of the requirements of that award, and the desirability of any exit awards for students who exit their programme prior to completing their target award. Expected level descriptors for HE qualifications are available from the QAA website: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/quality-code-A1.pdf FHEQ: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/publications/information-and-guidance/publication?PubID=2718#.VIAzMaNFAdV

Consider how the course design and content takes account of relevant Subject Benchmark Statements, the Quality Assurance Agency’s (QAA) published guidance on Qualification Characteristics and other external reference points eg, the needs of local employers, industry, professional/statutory bodies, legislation and in light of the diverse range of students to be recruited, racial equality. See section 3 for further advice on curriculum design.

Consult with staff across the University, as appropriate, who will able to give you advice and guidance to support your course development and its operationalisation eg Tuition Fees team, Resources Planning, Facilities Management, Library and Information Services (including library and IT requirements, technical support, Digital Services), Admissions, Student Accommodation Service. There may be issues you need to consider, particularly if you intend to deliver a course over a non-standard calendar.

Students should be actively involved in the design process. Use surveys, focus group meetings, workshops or formal consultations to elicit feedback. How have students’ views been addressed by the curriculum design?

Views and needs of relevant employers, external stakeholders and professional organisations should be actively sought to inform the course development.

Contact Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT) for support and access to guidance on teaching, learning and assessment; guidance on designing courses and modules, including how to write learning outcomes is available in a free e-publication: First Words – A Guide to Teaching and Learning by David Baume (onlineshop@brookes.ac.uk). (For further advice see section 3.)

Consider ethical issues in delivery, content or assessment, do these need to be referred to the School Ethics Committee?

2

Consider whether Foundation Degree proposals reflect the distinctive identity associated with Foundation Degrees, and take account of the QAA Foundation Degree Qualification Benchmark. (See Appendix 11 for further guidance and supplementary issues)

Consider whether some existing modules can be utilised to contribute to the Course and whether there is anything within these module descriptors which may require to be changed? If the module belongs to the proposing School, the proposal for change could be processed during the Course Approval, although care must be taken to ensure that any changes required to meet the needs of a new course do not adversely affect those courses to which an existing module already contributes. Check whether the existing modules are current in terms of the standards now expected for module descriptors so that (if necessary) they can be updated for submission to the Course Approval Panel. See the current template for module descriptor in Appendix 4.

Consider any new modules which will need to be developed and undertake a course resource audit involving the Learning and Information Services and Facilities Management to ensure that there are sufficient resources in place for the delivery of both new and existing modules.

Elective modules may be incorporated into the structure of full-time undergraduate courses to provide the opportunity for students to study a module from across a wide range of subject areas, and thus acquire new skills (such as a language) or knowledge from outside their main area of study. The course structure within the programme specification should clearly indicate that provision for a free elective module has been accommodated within the course.

Contact the relevant Head of School to seek written permission to use any existing modules which are to be ‘adopted’ from another School. If minor changes are required to existing modules this must be agreed and processed by the relevant Head of School. If a major change is required for an existing or adopted module to meet the needs of a new course, it is likely that a new module descriptor will have to be provided.

Check that sufficient staffing expertise and specialist resources can be made available for all the modules contributing to the Course - see the questions posed in the Planning Consent Form / Course Resource Audit Form which are available on the AQA website. A Course Leader designate should also be appointed prior to Course Approval.

Ensure appropriate guidance is made available to students undertaking work placements, either as part of a sandwich course, professional course or on a voluntary basis. This should include appropriate mechanisms for securing placements of an appropriate quality and on-going support for students whilst on placement, including health and safety. Further guidance is available from the UCLan’s Safety, Health and Environment, and Careers intranet sites via the following links:https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/ou/fm/Pages/Health-and-Safety-Home.aspxhttps://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/ou/fm/Pages/Health-and-Safety-Student-Placements.aspxStructured work experience: https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/ou/sass/Pages/SWE-home.aspx

Courses which require health or social care placements should contact the Placement Learning Support Unit within the School of Health for appropriate guidance: http://www.uclan.ac.uk/about_us/facilities/placement_learning_support_unit.php

Consider the proposed Course title to ensure that it reflects the content and aims of the course, that it is self explanatory, attractive to students and can be found easily within an index of other courses.

Construct a Student Handbook which will be clear and informative for students, and the Course Approval Panel (for Course Leader’s guidance on Student Handbooks see Appendix 13). This will form part of the terms and conditions documentation sent to applicants with offers of a place.

Produce draft promotional material in liaison with Marketing (for contacts see: https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/ou/advancement/Pages/Home.aspx which is attractive to students

3

and accurately and honestly describes the course. All partner institution promotional materials should be produced in liaison with the relevant Schools.

Review the complete set of course documentation for Course Approval to ensure that the information provided is accurate and consistent throughout. The complete set of course documentation is set out under section 4.4 below.

For Collaborative Provision, ensure that the appropriate liaison contacts are established. One of the major factors contributing to successful Course Approval of proposals from Partner Institutions is the link which has been developed with the University School and who is responsible for quality assurance aspects of the development. It is essential for there to be close liaison with nominated representative(s) from this School (known as the host or link School). If the proposal includes adopted modules from other Schools, it is important that the liaison process includes representatives from those Schools. It is the Partner institution’s responsibility to ensure that it receives all the information necessary for the proposal to be approved successfully. Consideration should be given as to whether there are in-country accreditation requirements.For further information on collaborative provision procedures see: https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/process/quality/Pages/AQA-Collaborative-provision.aspx

Consider who you might approach as an External Examiner A nomination form for the appointment of an External Examiner should be submitted to AQA along with the Course Approval Documentation (the nomination will be processed and if confirmed, a letter of appointment will be sent to the nominee by AQA only following confirmation of Course Approval). Guidance on the appointment of External Examiners is available to staff on the AQA intranet site. See Section 6.2.

4

3. GUIDANCE ON CURRICULUM DESIGN

Use the model of constructive alignment (Biggs, 1997) to inform the planning of the curriculum.

Learning Outcomes

Assessment Delivery

Decide on the intended learning outcomes. What should a student be able to do on completion of the course (and modules)? Since learning is about the development of abilities and skills as well as the acquisition of knowledge and its understanding and application, consider what abilities and skills students need to have developed, or be developing, and ensure that these are included in the learning outcomes. These outcomes should initially populate the course outcomes in the programme specification, and should be drawn upon also in identifying learning outcomes for discrete modules. (See Appendix 6 for Programme Specification guidelines and template for completion). It is expected that course outcomes align with the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications. Guidance on level descriptors for HE awards is available from the QAA website – Framework for HE Qualifications. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/publications/information-and-guidance/publication?PubID=2718#.VIAzMaNFAdVhttp://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/quality-code-A1.pdf

(Further guidance on the wording of learning outcomes is available via the AQA intranet site: https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/process/quality/Pages/cdg.aspx .)

Use the Programme Specification as a tool in course development so that the Course Development Team continues to reflect on the broad aims for the course and on the essential overall learning outcomes, and skills development, which all successful students will need to satisfy to gain the relevant course or named exit award. (See Appendix 6 for Programme Specification guidelines and template for completion.)

Use the guidance published by the QAA on the characteristics of qualifications for doctoral degrees and master’s degrees. These documents provide an additional reference point on purposes, content, assessment methods and titles of different types of UK doctoral and masters degrees. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Doctoral_Characteristics.pdf and http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/AssuringStandardsAndQuality/Documents/Masters-Degree-Characteristics-2010.pdf

Personal Development Planning (PDP) is a structured and supported process undertaken by a learner to reflect upon their own learning, performance and/or achievement and to plan for their personal, educational and career development. Planned opportunities to engage in PDP should be designed into the curriculum eg through reflective pieces of assessment, as seminar topics, or as structured conversations with personal tutors.

Course teams should make explicit within the documentation how students will be given the opportunity to study, at some level, material which will benefit them in later life, whether it be in terms of employment, or understanding the world and their role within it.

Employability and Enterprise: To ensure that students understand the relevance to their current and future career development, employability learning needs to be embedded within the subject content and delivery  of the curriculum, rather than as a ‘bolt-on’ to the course.  Further guidance is available from Careers https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/ou/sass/Pages/Careers.aspx

Where the course will need to develop practical, thinking, career/employability and transferable skills; these skills should be included as part of the overall learning outcomes for

5

the Course. Consider how they will be developed and assessed.  If these are not essential for all students, they could be included in optional modules for those students who wish to choose them. 

Ensure that there is progression in the development of knowledge and skills throughout the Course, that there is course coherence and that the curriculum as a whole stretches students academically, particularly in the final year of undergraduate study and at postgraduate levels. This should be evidenced in the content of the module, the level of the learning outcomes and in the demands of the indicative assessments.

When writing module learning outcomes, the use of frameworks such as Bloom’s taxonomy can be very useful here. Avoid words like know; become acquainted with; understand; appreciate; have a grasp of; be familiar with. Make use instead of verbs and phrases which are more objective, such as: state; explain; identify; outline; describe; list; compare; suggest reasons why; apply; analyse; distinguish between; summarise; evaluate; assess (Further guidance on learning outcomes is available via the AQA intranet site: https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/process/quality/Pages/cdg.aspx .)See Appendix 4b of this guide, for guidance on Module Level Descriptors (which have been aligned with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications). The number of learning outcomes specified for a 20 credit module is normally limited to a maximum of 5. Focus learning outcomes on learning processes rather than content. This gives course teams some flexibility to update content and make enhancements arising from the course team’s reflections and reviews and feedback from stakeholders including students, professional bodies and employers, written in such a way that they do not change with content fluctuations. Consideration should be given to the equivalence of workload across modules (see guidance in appendix 21).

Devise the module assessment task(s). If you have written precise learning outcomes this should be easy because the assessment should allow you to judge whether or not the outcomes have been achieved. There is scope for a more diverse range of assessment tools than most staff currently use. Learning and assessment should be integrated and fully aligned as an integral part of the learning process. There should be a focus on the development and achievement of intended programme outcomes rather than on marks and grades, ie assessment for learning rather than simply assessment of learning. Consider therefore how the assessment task can develop abilities and skills, and how feedback might be given through the course of the assessment as well as at the end. The maximum number of summative assessment elements in each 20 credit module should not normally be more than two. All modules should also include formative assessment tasks that enable the provision of timely, actionable feedback for improvement. In preparing assessments, course developers should be mindful of the need for consistency in assessment workload across modules. (see appendix 21).

Give consideration to the assessment strategy across all modules to anticipate where adjustments may be necessary for students recruited with a disability or learning difficulty. Reflect upon whether a particular form of assessment or a particular learning outcome is actually essential for all students recruited to the course.

For additional information on assessment, including assessment principles and guidance on marking criteria, see the Assessment Handbook. This is a companion document to the Academic Regulations and contains policies and procedures that underpin and carry the same authority as the Academic Regulations. Both documents can be found at:http://www.uclan.ac.uk/aqasu/academic_regulations.php

Review all the modules which will contribute to the Course to identify whether the teaching, learning and assessment strategies will meet the diverse needs of the students to be recruited. Also identify those modules which are to be compulsory modules ensuring that the essential learning outcomes from the course are included in those modules or sufficiently in the combination of options available so that all students will be assessed in the overall learning outcomes for the course. (See curriculum skills map within the Programme Specification – Appendix 6). Modules will normally only be designated as ‘Core’ where there is a professional/statutory body requirement which does not permit compensation. (Modules

6

designated as ‘Compulsory’, (but not ‘Core’) must be attempted but may be compensated. Modules designated as ‘core’ may not be compensated.)

In the module descriptors, present the learning, teaching and assessment strategy in terms of student activity and learning, and not simply as ‘what is done to students’. Indicate how the different elements from this section of the guide are incorporated within the learning experience.

Plan in a process of course evaluation and review which involves staff and students, and is on-going throughout the year.

4. ACADEMIC REGULATIONS

The Academic Regulations provide the framework for course design and specify the minimum credit requirements for awards. In the case of certain awards, such as Undergraduate Degrees, Foundation Degrees, and Undergraduate Masters, the minimum module requirement is also the maximum requirement. However, for other awards there is the flexibility to specify more than the minimum, if this can be justified.

The Academic Regulations take account of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ). It is important that course developers always work with the current set of Academic Regulations (available on AQA website.)

Particularly useful sections for Course Developers and Course Approval Panels are indicated below

Section B3 Awards of the University incorporating: Table B3.11 Classifications available. General minimum entry requirements; Standard course duration; Highest level of study; The place of the course within the FHEQ.

Section C Modular Framework incorporating: Standard Module Minima required for Awards; Information on Higher Education levels and pre-degree levels operated in the

University. These descriptors will be kept under review; Module sizes expressed in terms of credit value; Mode and duration of study

Section D Course Approval and Periodic Course Review incorporating: Collaborative arrangements; Memorandum of co-operation;

Section E4 Admission with Credit, including the Accreditation of Prior Learning and Credit Transfer Where an element of learning is a general requirement for admission to a course,

it may not be used simultaneously to claim admission with credit. Undergraduate study may not be accredited towards postgraduate awards With

the exception noted below, the maximum credit for prior learning towards both undergraduate and postgraduate awards is two thirds of the total credit requirement for the award. In the case of a 480 credit undergraduate award the maximum credit for prior learning is 360 credits.

Applicants wishing to use a previously awarded higher level or equivalent level qualification towards either undergraduate or postgraduate awards may not be credited with more than one third of the total module requirement for that award. This regulation applies equally to UCLan transfer credit and to credit accumulated outside the University.

Credit for prior learning is not available in relation to entry to the final year of Honours degrees, including Top-up degrees. Exceptions up to a maximum of 20 credits will only be considered in the case of recognised awards within a national/regional framework, for example meeting requirements set by the

7

Nursing and Midwifery Council, and may not apply to the dissertation/honours project module.

Further information/guidance on the above process may be obtained from the APL Co-ordinator.

Section G Assessment A supplementary Assessment Handbook is available with the Academic Regulations at http://www.uclan.ac.uk/aqasu/academic_regulations.php

Requirements of Pearson Education Ltd (formerly BTEC/Edexcel)The University approves HNC/D awards under a licence agreement with Pearson Education Ltd. Current guidelines are available from Heads of School and also from the Academic Quality and Awards, which is responsible for liaison centrally with the Higher Education Business Unit at Pearsons. Proposals involving overseas collaborative partners need to be notified to Pearsons three months in advance of the Course Approval event. Proposals for new course titles and collaboration with new partners also require to be notified to Pearsons.

A Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRBs)The relationship with each professional/statutory body or regulatory bodies is the responsibility of a designated manager, normally a Head of School. A register of contacts with PSRBs is available from Academic Quality and Awards.

Where appropriate, Course Approval events may be conducted conjointly with professional/statutory bodies. All University taught courses must comply with the University’s Academic Regulations for taught provision as well as taking account of the specific requirements of any PSRB. Where possible, the course team should ensure that any differences between the requirements of the PSRB and the University are accommodated appropriately within the design of the Course.

However, there may be instances where the course team is unable to accommodate specific differences within the Course, particularly where the requirements of the PSRB are more stringent than those of the University. In such cases, the requirements of the PSRB will take precedence over those of the University, subject to formal approval by the University’s course approval and review processes. (See Academic Regulation A3.2)

In proposing exemptions to the University’s Regulations in response to the requirements of a PSRB, the Course Team is required to provide a clear rationale for consideration and approval by the Course Approval/Review Panel. The documentation required for the Course Approval event should include evidence of the specific PSRB guidance or regulation that requires the University’s own regulations to be varied, supported by evidence of liaison with the PSRB in an attempt to achieve a harmonisation between the two sets of regulations. The documentation should clearly articulate the relationship between the PSRB regulations and those of the University, making explicit exactly which University Regulations require exemption. The Student Handbook should clearly state where PSRB regulations have taken precedence and what those regulations are.

Course Teams and the Course Approval/Review Panel may seek further advice on proposed exemption from the University regulations from Academic Quality and Awards.

External AwardsThe approval to offer external awards (ie awards other than those in the University’s name) is undertaken by a paper-based approvals system. The approval procedure applies to all new and/or significantly revised courses leading to external awards and will cover all courses delivered by the University but leading to an award from another body (eg professional bodies such as the Chartered Institute of Marketing). For further guidance and proposal form, please see Appendix 17.

5. COURSE APPROVAL

8

5.1 Purpose

The purpose of the Course Approval process is to ensure the School has proposed a coherent course structure which is appropriate to the name of the award, the level of the award and the subject to be approved, that the requirements for students to achieve the learning outcomes are clear and that the assessment is designed to rigorously test the learning outcomes. The Course Approval Panel must be assured that the Course can be delivered within the current resource base of the School/Partner Institution. The Panel must assure itself that the Course is able to operate at or above a threshold quality standard in comparison to other awards in the University and at national and international level. By implication this assurance must be extended to all of the University’s stakeholders including potential and current students, parents, employers and society at large.

In the case of postgraduate qualifications and final year honours work, the Course Approval Panel will also want to assure itself that the necessary research activity exists to appropriately underpin the higher level work and that there is sufficient intellectual challenge.

Franchise Course Approval is where a complete course or module(s) designed and approved by the University is subsequently approved for operation by a partner institution.

5.2 Criteria

Course Approval events need to be focused and to examine the provision on the basis of explicit criteria as set out in the University’s Threshold Criteria for Course Approval (Appendix 9).

The information available for Course Approval should provide sufficient evidence, via documentation and discussion, from which the Course Approval Panel can make an informed decision on the outcome of the process. A summary of the process may be found at Appendix 8.

5.3 Developmental and Initial Evaluation

The University expects that course teams will use the pre-approval stage to debate their proposal, finalise documentation and prepare for the course approval event. All course approval documentation is required to be signed off by the School Quality Lead prior to submission to AQA for circulation to a course approval panel.

For collaborative proposals with partner institutions, due regard needs to be taken of potential student progression to the University and the standards required by the relevant University School in overseeing the Quality Assurance aspects of the Course.

5.4 Documentation for Course Approval

The documentation required for Course Approval purposes comprises information on which the Panel may make judgements against the Threshold Criteria for Course Approval (Appendix 9). One copy of the course documentation should be submitted to Academic Quality and Awards (AQA) at least six weeks prior to the event for checking, before the final version is made available to AQA, signed off by the School Quality Lead, at least three, and no later than two, weeks prior to the Course Approval event. Non-compliance with this timescale is likely to lead to a postponement of the Course Approval event in the current academic year and consequently is likely to affect recruitment timescales A copy of the relevant QAA Subject Benchmark Statements should also be provided to the Panel. These Statements are designed to make explicit the general academic characteristics and standards of honours degrees offered within the UK.

The documentation required comprises:

1. *Programme Specification(s) (including entry requirements) (template at Appendix 6)

9

2. *Module Descriptor(s) using the University’s current template (Appendix 4) and clearly indicating for approval any new modules and changes proposed to existing modules.

3. Planning Consent Form (on-campus provision) or Course Resource Audit Form (collaborative provision) (see Appendix 2)

4. Staff CVs (see Appendix 7)5. *Student Handbook (in line with the template available at Appendix 13) 6. Subject Benchmark Statement(s) and Qualification Characteristics (where applicable)

(* These are definitive documents and formal approval is required before they are amended).

For collaborative provision, there are additional documentation requirements as follows:

7. Institutional Document8. Teaching schemes for modules being franchised for the first time by the Partner

institution9. Resource Proforma completed by UCLan Head of School for Course Approval events

not held at the Partner Institution.10. Additional evidence required to support the delivery of level 7 – see “Collaborative

Provision” - Appendix 11 of the AQA Manual 11. The Institutional Approval visit report (if applicable) and Academic Case for new

partner proposals (UK and overseas) – see Collaborative Provision - Policy and Procedures available on the AQA website.

12 Memorandum of Co-operation and, where applicable, the Institutional Agreement (draft or finalised version where completed).

NB For distance and open learning delivery the Panel will wish to see examples of the material which will be supplied to students. Further information on requirements for this type of delivery mechanism is given in Appendix 10.

For Foundation degrees and Top-ups, there is an additional requirement as follows:

13 For new Foundation Degrees, a mapping exercise should be undertaken to show how students will progress from the Foundation Degree to the named top-up route. For the approval of top-up degrees, a mapping exercise should show how the student will progress from the Foundation Degree to the top-up. Evidence that the External Examiner has been consulted, and given their support, should also be included.

5.4.1 Programme Specification

The Programme Specification is the key document in the approval of new programmes and the on-going development of existing programmes. Each named award or a close suite of cognate awards should have a completed Programme Specification. The Programme Specification for each named award should also reflect delivery at all UCLan campuses, off-site delivery by UCLan staff and the institutions to which the award has already been franchised. The University uses a standard Programme Specification template which is available from the AQA intranet site, together with guidance notes for completion of it (see Appendix 6 of this Guide).

The development of a Programme Specification should engage the Course Development Committee in a thinking process, with the aim being to clearly articulate what the programme is seeking to achieve and how that achievement is supported and assessed. (See appendix 6.)

5.4.2 Module Descriptors

A module is defined as a self-contained block of learning with its own learning outcomes that describe the appropriate level of intellectual standard required for successful completion of it. A standard module equates to the learning activity expected from one sixth of a full-time undergraduate year (2 semesters). Modules are now described in terms of their credit rating, with a standard module being worth

10

20 credits (which equals 200 notional learning hours). Credit points for other module sizes are allocated pro-rata.

A standard module is worth 20 credits. Modules are normally developed as 10, 20, or 40 credits. Modules may be developed up to a maximum of 120 credits for full-time study.

All Module Descriptors follow a standard format to present the information required and must be contained within the standard template – see Appendix 4 .

5.4.3 Planning Consent Form/Course Resource Audit Forms

A Planning Consent Form (see Appendix 2A ) must be completed and signed for all new courses to be delivered “on campus” in order to receive initial consent to proceed to initial course development, as part of the course planning process. During the compilation of the documentation for the Course Approval event, Section B of the form should be updated to reflect any developments since initial planning consent was given and further liaison about the course development should take place with the appropriate University services.

For collaborative provision, a Course Resource Audit Form (CRAF1) (see Appendix 2B) should be completed, whether it is a new course development or existing provision to be franchised to a partner institution.

The Planning Consent Form and the CRAF1 are designed to identify specific resource requirements and must be signed by the Course Leader, Head of School and Head/Principal of Partner Organisation, as appropriate.

A Business Plan should be prepared for submission with the Planning Consent form. Please contact your Financial Services Business Partner who will assist with completing this.

CRAF 2 must be completed for courses which are to be delivered by UCLan staff at an off-site location or for a course to be delivered at an additional UCLan campus to the one at which it was originally approved for delivery (see Appendix 2C). The completed and signed CRAF2 should be forwarded to AQA so that it may be noted by the University’s Collaborative Sub-Committee. Please note that a formal agreement will be needed if the arrangement involves the use of resources, support or assistance from a third party.

CRAF 3 must be completed for the Periodic Course Review or re-approval of existing courses (see Appendix 2D of this Guide.

As part of the resource identification, the Planning Consent Form should be sent to LIS, Facilities Management and the Equality & Diversity Officer prior to the Course Approval event. For collaborative provision, the Course Resource Audit Form requires a copy of the completed LIS form to be submitted to the relevant learning resources centre/section within the partner organisation. Please check with LIS whether there are licensing restrictions which may affect the access of students and teaching staff at partner institutions to UCLan’s online resources. Heads of School (or their nominee(s)) are required to complete a separate resource proforma for the Course Approval event where the same is not held at a partner institution for a course to be franchised to a partner or across a network of partners –see Appendix 3 of this Guide. The purpose of this Proforma is to act as a substitute for the Panel’s tour of resources.

5.4.4 Student Handbook

11

The Student Handbook provides evidence for the Panel of the support available to students and of the intended course structure/delivery and will be provided to applicants as part of the terms and conditions of an offer of a place. The University standard template for Student Handbooks and guidance on the minimum content requirements are available in Appendix 13 of this Guide.

Where information in the Handbook contravenes the Academic Regulations a condition may be imposed on Course Approval. The Course Team should also ensure that the Aims and Intended Learning Outcomes of the Course if stated in the Student Handbook must be identical to the Aims and Intended Learning Outcomes set out in the Programme Specification.

5.4.5 Teaching Schemes

The additional requirement for teaching schemes is only necessary where a partner institution is franchising a module from a University School. Schools are responsible for checking that the teaching scheme presented for each module is appropriate, and comparable to delivery of that module on-campus. The Teaching Scheme should include the following information:

the University module code and title; list each week of delivery with a brief description of the topics to be covered and

the name or initials of the staff involved; provide a general indication of the teaching approach, eg lecture, seminar,

presentation, laboratory exercise etc; date of assessment handout and deadline for date of submission.

A standard template for Teaching Schemes has been designed to provide guidance to partner institutions, which is available on the AQA website (see appendix 5).

5.4.6 Institutional Document

Partner organisations should provide an institutional document that contains useful information to the Course Approval/Review Panel, which briefly describes the institution’s aims, objectives and structure, its policy and procedure for peer observation of teaching; arrangements for the administration of Module Evaluation (including consideration of the outcome and feedback to students on action taken); and the arrangements for the management of assessment and moderation processes.

5.5 Course Approval - Final Evaluation

The Course Approval process requires scrutiny of the proposal by a Course Approval Panel that comprises staff drawn from the URP membership (see 5.5.1 below) and External Subject Advisers who are requested to provide written comments on the proposal by completing a standard proforma in advance of the Course Approval event. This information is provided to the Course Approval Panel and the School and is used to inform the agenda and maximise input from External Advisers. Information on documentation requirements is provided under Section 5.4 above. The chart in Appendix 19 indicates responsibilities and timescales.

This stage is designed to judge the proposal against the Threshold Criteria for Course Approval – see Appendix 9. Within this context, opportunities exist to improve further aspects of the proposal in the form of conditions or recommendations attached to the approval.

5.5.1 Course Approval Panel

12

The Course Approval Panel normally comprises five or six members, namely a Chair and two internal members (taken from the University Review Panel (URP), two external advisers and possibly a student representative, together with a Reporting Officer. Panels will comprise as a minimum: a Chair, one internal member, one External Advisor, together with a Reporting Officer, with a risk based approach being taken and the size of the Panel for an individual event being determined by the Chair and AQA representative.

The Chair for a Course Approval Panel is drawn from designated Chairs of the URP. They have extensive experience of Course Approval and quality issues. URP Chairs are appointed annually by ASQAC from the membership of the URP.

The internal membership of a Course Approval Panel is drawn from the standing University Review Panel and will not be connected with the School bringing forward the course proposal for approval. The membership of the URP is notified annually to the Chair of ASQAC and appears on the AQA intranet site. It is expected that URP members will serve for a number of years thereby developing experience of the course approval and review processes. All Course Approval Panel members have equal status.

There is a normal requirement for a minimum of one, and normally two External Advisers to join a Course Approval Panel with at least one from an academic institution and, where appropriate, a second adviser either from industry or from higher education. The number of External Advisers is agreed with and the URP Chair with advice from the Reporting Officer within AQA. External Advisers are appointed from nominations signed by the Head of School using a standard proforma (see Appendix 12 to this guide). Input from External Advisers may be by correspondence in certain circumstances (such as Chair's Action events). A Course Approval Panel may contain members of professional/statutory bodies where a conjoint Course Approval is being conducted. External Advisers are requested to provide written comments to the Reporting Officer one week before the Course Approval event. These comments will be distributed to the Panel members and the Head of School.

For collaborative events, a representative from the relevant School will be required to act as an internal adviser to the Course Approval Panel. Internal Advisers provide information from the perspective of the School and are considered equal members of the Course Approval Panel.

In addition, an independent student representative is invited to join the Course Approval Panel.

Course Approval Panels are supported by a Reporting Officer, normally from AQA, who is responsible for making all the arrangements for the event, providing advice on protocol, producing the report and processing responses to conditions, (where appropriate), to bring the approval process to completion.

5.5.2 Authority of the Course Approval Panel

The Course Approval Panel acts on behalf of Academic Board and reports to ASQAC which is a sub-Committee of Academic Board.

At Course Approval events, the Course Approval Panel may recommend approval with or without conditions and/or recommendations or recommend non-approval of a Course to start (or continue). It is mandatory that all conditions must be met satisfactorily, prior to a course commencing operation. A Course Approval Panel is not authorised to approve a Course which is outside the Academic Regulations of the University. Please see Section 6.1 which provides further information on conditions set at Course Approval events and Appendix 14 of this Guide for the Fulfilment of Conditions template.

13

5.5.3 Course Approval Process

The process will consist of a meeting with the Course Team to discuss the proposal which will be based upon an agenda of issues drawn up by the Course Approval Panel at the start of the meeting and which takes account of the written comments submitted by the External Advisers prior to the event. During the meeting, the Course Approval Panel will emphasise/explore issues relating to academic standards with the Course Team – see Threshold Criteria for Course Approval – Appendix 9. The following questions are indicative of the issues to be pursued during the meeting:

How do the intended learning outcomes for the course relate to external reference points including relevant subject benchmark statements, Qualification Characteristics, the FHEQ and any professional body requirements (ie are they appropriate for the course and its level)?

Are the learning outcomes appropriate to the aims?

Are there the appropriate number of learning outcomes?

Has the course team engaged with academic standards issues (eg through involvement with Higher Education Academy Subject Centres)?

Does the assessment process enable learners to demonstrate achievement of the intended outcomes?

Are there criteria which enable examiners to distinguish between different categories of achievement?

Are the assessment methods chosen appropriate and effective?

Does the curriculum, as designed, enable students to achieve the intended learning outcomes?

Are there the appropriate number of summative assessments?

Is there evidence of progression in skills development and knowledge acquisition?

Do staff draw upon their research, scholarship or professional activity to inform the course?

Are the learning and teaching activities appropriate in terms of the intended learning outcomes?

Are the learning and teaching activities appropriate in terms of the development of skills?

Is the documentation clear as to how students will progress through the course?

Is there evidence that the Course Team will be supportive of the needs of students with differing needs and that there are suitable mechanisms to counsel and advise students, eg for induction, progression, placements, periods abroad, disability and/or learning difficulties, academic difficulties and personal problems?

Is there evidence that students are supported in their Personal Development Planning?

Is there a sufficient number of appropriately qualified staff to support the expected number of students to be recruited?

14

Are there adequate learning resources and access to those resources to meet the needs of the anticipated number of students to be recruited?

For collaborative provision, is there evidence that the partner’s staff development policy addresses the specific needs of staff teaching on HE programmes?

For collaborative provision, is there evidence of the adequacy of arrangements to ensure that there is an appropriate level of liaison prior to the start of the programme and subsequently?

Both external and internal Course Approval Panel members will be in a position to subject the rationale and strategies that underpin the proposal to rigorous scrutiny before making a final decision on the proposal. There are no private meetings of the Course Approval Panel and Head of School and Course Leader are permitted to observe at agenda setting and when the Course Approval Panel reports its conclusions.

Following the Course Approval meeting, the Reporting Officer produces a report summarising the outcomes which is agreed by the Chair of the Course Approval Panel and then circulated to all Course Approval Panel members, the Head of School and Course Leader for comment.

5.5.4 Approval of new named Certificates/Advanced Certificates

The approval of a new named Certificate/Advanced Certificate may be undertaken by Chair’s Action, via an appropriate URP Chair, either by correspondence or by a short meeting held with the Course Team (in the event of a short meeting the URP Chair will normally be accompanied by one other internal URP Panel member). The most appropriate approval method would be agreed via AQA in consultation with the URP Chair and Head of School.

The approval process would involve written supporting comments from one or two External Advisers for the approval of a new named award but without the attendance requirement of the External. The documentation requirements for approving a new Certificate/Advanced Certificate by correspondence or short meeting are the same as for a standard Course Approval event.

Background information on rationale for the proposal, potential market, and where a change to an existing course is proposed, the nature of that change;

Comments from External Adviser/Examiner and response from Course Team on action taken as a result;

Programme Specification(s) Module Descriptors Signed Planning Consent Form/Course Resource Audit Form(s) CVs of the Course Team Student Handbook(s)

The approval of a new Certificate to be delivered by distance learning would normally be undertaken through a Course Approval event – please contact AQA for further advice.

6. ACTION FOLLOWING SUCCESSFUL COURSE APPROVAL

15

It is the Head of School’s responsibility to ensure that the follow-up action is taken following successful Course Approval:

6.1 Response to conditions and recommendations

A response to conditions should be submitted to the Reporting Officer in electronic format using the template provided at Appendix 14 by the agreed deadline, as indicated in the Course Approval report. It is mandatory that all conditions must be met satisfactorily before the next admissions cycle. . It should be noted that the identification of conditions should not be regarded as punitive, but as a quality assurance mechanism upon which the University can rely to ensure that actions are taken to enhance provision and implement best practice.

Conditions must be signed-off by the end of July preceding the next admissions cycle.

In the case of course revalidation or changes to existing modules, amendment will normally only be approved for the next entering cohort (and not mid-admissions cycle). If it is agreed that changes may be made which will affect existing students or current applicants, an addendum clearly describing the changes should be included for insertion within the appropriate Student Handbook Please refer to the Course/Module Amendment Process for guidance on consultation with students (CDG appendix 15).

Recommendations relate to advice which the Course Team may consider for the future development of the course and should be responded to as part of Annual Monitoring.

The requisite number of copies of the response to conditions should be forwarded to the Reporting Officer for the Course Approval accompanied by the standard template to indicate where changes have been made in the documentation. It will not be possible to process the response to conditions if it is not accompanied by information on where changes have been made and it will be returned to the School or Partner for this information to be supplied/inserted (as appropriate).

6.2 External Examiner Appointments

Consideration should be given to the appointment of a suitable External Examiner at an early stage. A nomination form for the appointment of an External Examiner should be submitted to AQA as soon possible after completion of the course approval event. A letter of appointment will be sent to the nominee only following confirmation of Course Approval. Guidance on the appointment of External Examiners is available to staff on the AQA intranet site. There is also information available for newly appointed External Examiners to support them in fulfilling their role, including details on the Scheme of Fees for External Examining. Briefing events for newly appointed External Examiners are held bi-annually.See https://intranet.uclan.ac.uk/ou/sass/Pages/External-Examiners.aspx

6.3 Course Advertising Information

Information on your new programme should be submitted to Marketing in order that web-based guidance and advice can be provided to prospective students.

6.4 Course Documentation and Computer Records

If conditions had been set at the Course Approval event which required changes to the Programme Specification, Module Descriptors or Student Handbook, revised document(s) in electronic format need to be lodged with AQA as the definitive versions. The requisite course information will be entered onto the University’s Banner Student Record System by the Student Data Management Team/CAS staff, as appropriate, to enable students to be enrolled.

7. FEEDBACK ON THE COURSE APPROVAL PROCESS

16

Feedback is sought from External Advisers, Heads of School, Partner Institutions and URP Chairs as part of a process to ensure that the integrity and rigour of the Course Approval process is maintained. The outcome from Course Approval events, including feedback from participants, is reviewed annually by AQA to identify whether the process is operating effectively and to identify any trends and issues which need to be brought to the attention of ASQAC. Their reports are considered collectively by the URP Chairs, who will identify any major issues/good practice and make recommendations for any changes to the processes to ASQAC. Where concerns have been raised by Schools/Colleges or Panel Chairs about the operation of the process, action will be identified and agreed with the Head of AQA to resolve the issue.

8. PROCESS OF CREDIT RECOGNITION OF IN-HOUSE COMPANY COURSES

There is a separate process of Credit Recognition for in-house company learning and training. This process is not dissimilar to the course approval and review processes, and has been developed to provide an employer friendly and academically robust model for the recognition of HE credit of in-company training and development activities. It aims to support and enhance an organisation’s staff development activities and to improve business performance. Once approved, the work-based training or learning provided for staff will qualify for a certificate of credit or credit equivalence and may count towards an appropriate University qualification. For further details, see the document “Collaborative Provision – Policy and Procedures” (Appendix 11 of the Academic Quality Assurance Manual).

9. COURSE/MODULE AMENDMENT PROCESS

It is expected that over time, Course Teams will need to make amendments to courses and modules, for example to respond to feedback from students and external examiners, to reflect changes in the external environment, developments in the subject area and incorporate changes required by accrediting bodies.

Where changes are proposed to courses/modules which are franchised to partners, Schools should ensure that these discussed with partners ensuring that any resources/staffing implications are addressed and, when approved, are rolled out to partners within an appropriate timeframe,

As a general principle, amendments should be approved for the next entering cohort and preferably in advance of the next admissions cycle, and not for current students, except where the proposed amendments will deliver a better quality of education experience to students enrolled on the course and the changes are clearly beneficial to the students. Changes which affect key material information provided to applicants will normally only be approved for the next admissions cycle.

The matrix at Appendix 15 of this Guide provides guidance on the changes which can be made under the Process and the appropriate approval mechanisms.

AQA is required to maintain a log of changes approved to each award bearing course and will request that a School takes appropriate action on any large, incremental changes proposed to one course (which may result in full revalidation of the course). If there is any doubt or confusion about whether and/or how a change may be processed, advice should be sought from AQA staff.

10. MAJOR CHANGES TO EXISTING COURSES

The University recognises that it will be necessary to make major changes to an existing course, for example a change to an approved course title*, a change of mode (eg from full-time to part-time or vice versa, or to approve a full-time version of a sandwich course). In such cases, the URP Chair may agree to consider the proposal by correspondence or by holding a short meeting with Head of School (or nominee), Course Leader and other members of the Course Team as appropriate. If a short meeting is held, the Chair would normally be supported by at least one other internal member of the URP. The most

17

appropriate approval method will be agreed via AQA in consultation with the URP Chair and Head of School and will depend on the scale and nature of the proposed changes. Depending on the scale of change, full revalidation may be required. All proposals for major changes to existing courses must be accompanied by written comments from the External Examiner (External Examiners will not be required to attend).

The following are considered to be major changes. Please contact AQA staff for advice:

Course titleCourse aims and learning outcomesCourse mode eg part-time to full-time, Sandwich to full-timeIntroduction of named routesLarge incremental changes to course content which over 2-3 years would significantly alter the course

The definition of a large incremental change requiring formal course re-approval is:

Cumulative changes* to one third or more of the award bearing course over a period of 2-2.5 years.

(* in this context, “changes” are those listed as nos. 9-13 on the revised matrix).

By way of example, a large incremental change to a three year degree course would normally be changes requiring formal approval to 120 credits of an 360 credit course over a period of 2-2.5 years.

Agreement will be sought with the URP Chair as to the most efficient and effective method for the change to be processed, which may be through Chair’s action (see the Section 9 below).

If there is any doubt or confusion about whether and/or how a change may be processed, advice should be sought from AQA staff.

Proposals for major changes to existing courses (with the exception of a change to course title) do not require consideration by the Course Planning Committee, but must have the agreement of the host University School and should be channelled through AQA who will provide guidance on the documentation requirements based upon the nature of the changes proposed, and are likely to include:

Background information on rationale for the proposed changes and the nature of the changes

Statement on any resource implications and how these are being addressed Comments from External Examiner and response from Course Team on action taken as a

result Updated Programme Specification Module Descriptors for any new or revised modules CVs of the teaching staff Student Handbook Addendum to the Student Handbook, if the proposed change might affect current

students/applicants mid admissions cycle (refer to appendix 15 for further guidance on material changes)

Changes to course titles may vary in significance. A rationale for a change to course title (together with market intelligence supporting the rationale, where appropriate) should first be signed off by the Head of School and submitted to AQA to progress initial consideration by Course Planning Committee (CPC) to secure approval to proceed with the change. (See Appendix 15 for details of the approval process and deadlines). Where significant changes to the title and focus of a course are proposed, AQA may advise that the proposal be considered as a new course and progressed through Course Planning Committee. For approval deadlines, see appendix 15.

18

Where changes are proposed to courses which are franchised to partners, Schools should ensure that these discussed with partners ensuring that any resources/staffing implications are addressed and, when approved, are rolled out to partners within an appropriate timeframe.

11. ON-GOING QUALITY ASSURANCE

The following section briefly describes the quality assurance systems used by the University through which the operation of courses is continually reviewed and action taken to maintain and improve the quality of provision.

11.1 Annual Monitoring

The University is responsible both for the standards of its awards and for the quality of its students' learning experience. Annual monitoring is the process by which the University regularly, and reasonably frequently, reviews the status and operation of its courses. The University requires staff responsible for each course, or cluster of cognate courses, to undertake a review annually and to report the outcomes of this review, using a standard format. The annual monitoring reports compiled over a five-year period are at the core of the Periodic Course Review (see section 10.4 below).

Further guidance on the Annual Monitoring Process and the report templates for Course/Subject Leaders and Heads of School are available from the AQA intranet site (See AQA Manual Appendix 6).

11.2 Interim Review

This process provides an opportunity for the course team to undertake a critical appraisal of a new course/subject after the first year of operation and should follow the guidance provided in Threshold Criteria for Course Approval, concentrating on standards using feedback from the student experience. An Interim Review of an existing course may also take place at any time if the Head of School or University Review Panel Chair agrees that it may be beneficial.

Guidance on this process is contained in a separate document within the AQA Manual (Appendix 9) and is available from the AQA intranet site.

11.3 Periodic Course Review (On-campus Provision)

The purpose of Periodic Course Review (PCR) is to confirm the good standing of a School’s courses and is conducted by the URP supported by AQA. The focus of the event will be upon the review and re-approval of existing courses.

Changes to courses approved at PCR, will normally be brought in for the next admissions cycle and will apply from that cohort only. In certain circumstances, it may be possible to roll out change earlier (see appendix 15 for further guidance). Where changes are proposed to courses/modules which are franchised to partners, Schools should ensure that these discussed with partners ensuring that any resources/staffing implications are addressed and, when approved, are rolled out to partners within an appropriate timeframe,

PCR is carried out for each academic School in accordance with a published cycle agreed by ASQAC. Provision is reviewed and re-approved on a cycle of normally between five or six years. Guidance on this process is contained in a separate document within the AQA Manual (Appendix 7) and is available from the AQA intranet site.

11.4 Periodic Course Review (Partnership)

19

This is a process similar to Periodic Course Review for on-campus academic Schools. It is conducted to review and re-approve University provision which operates at UK and Overseas partner institutions on a cycle of normally between 5 to 6 years. Guidance on this process is contained in a separate document within the AQA Manual (Appendix 8) and is available from the AQA intranet site.

20