Course Approval and Course Review & Revalidation

© University of South Wales

Course Approval and Course Review & Revalidation

Hayley BurnsHead of Quality Unit


Purpose

To provide an overview of the following processes:

1. Course Approval:a) Course development approval

b) Course Validation

2. Course Review & Revalidation

3. To introduce ICIS and its support of these processes


Course Development Approval

Purposes•Alignment with University strategic plan•Sound business case•Identify resource implications•Potential impact on other courses•Compliance with legislative requirements•Determine appropriate course validation route

3


Process

1. Course Development Team completes the ‘Curriculum Proposal Form’ (CPF) on ICIS

2. CPF submitted to Head of School3. CPF submitted to Faculty Committee 4. If approved submitted for University peer review 5. Submitted to Deans and Executive for final approval to

proceed to course validation

4

Course Development Approval


Curriculum Proposal Form

Sections

1. Course information

2. Market Research

3. The Course Costing Template [or Business Case]

4. Course Delivery

5. Course Structure

6. Course Exit Points

7. Subject Codes

8. Faculty Approval

5


The CPF on ICIS

6

© University of South Wales7





Course Validation: Event Types

• Standalone validation event– University level– Faculty level– Paper-based level

• Re/approval of a collaborative partner• Collaborative partner event• PSRB accreditation

--

*Deadlines*11


Course Validation:Criteria

For a course to be validated the following criteria must be met:

• Curriculum• Learning, Teaching and Assessment• Admissions• Course Management• Resources• Implementation• Socially Inclusive Practice

12


Course Validation: The Validation Document

SECTION 1Executive Summary

13


Course Validation: The Validation Document (2)

SECTION 2: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE COURSE

• CPF• Rationale for the proposal• Engagement with External and Internal Reference Points• Resources• Quality Assurance• Transitional Arrangements• Ethics

14



SECTION 3: THE COURSE SPECIFICATION• Course Information• Educational Aims and Learning Outcomes• Course Structure• Teaching and Assessment• Entry and Exit Requirements• Inclusive Curriculum Statement• Addendum for Delivery at a Collaborative Partner

Organisation

15



16

SECTION 4: COURSE STRUCTURE

Per each level of study:•Module Code•Module Title•Credits•Module Status

*ensure that at each level you have the correct number of credits. See Regulations for Taught Courses


SECTION 5: MODULE SPECIFICATIONS

• Module Information• Module Criteria• Learning Outcomes• Assessment Matrix• Key Skills• Concise/Indicative Reading List

17




SECTION 6: SUPPORTING MATRICES

•Learning Outcomes Matrix•Key Skills Matrix•Assessment Schedule

18


Learning Outcomes Matrix


Key Skills Matrix

20

The following must be included but others can be added at faculty discretion:D1 Managing and developing selfD2 Working with and relating to othersD3 CommunicatingD4 Managing tasks and solving problemsD5 Applying numeracyD6 Applying technologyD7 Applying design and creativity


Assessment Schedule

Code Module Credits Assessment Weighting % CW1 Wordcoun

tCW2 Wordcoun

tCT1 CT2 EX1 Length EX

2Length

21

EX Modules that involve examinations These include modules that use closed book/open book written examinations as all or part of their assessment.

CW Modules that use 100% coursework These module use ONLY coursework such as essay, laboratory exercise, report, presentation, journal, portfolio etc.

CT Module that use Class Test These include modules that use a phased test/examination, in-class test, MCQ test, practical exam, OSCE as all or part of their assessment.



22

APPENDICES

•External Examiner/Consultants’ Report(s) and Team’s response•Letters of support from employers•Staff CVs•Ethical Approval Forms•Applications for RTS


Course Validation:Guidance Documents

• QAA UK Quality Code• QAA docs: FHEQ, subject (and other) benchmarks, course

specifications• USW Course Developer’s Guide• USW Guidelines for the Development of Foundation Degrees• USW Regulations for Taught Courses• USW Assessment Policy and Tariff• USW Learning, Teaching and Widening Access Strategy• USW CELT

23


Course Validation: The Validation Document and ICIS

24







Course Validation: The Process (1)

Timescales

30

Time +/- Event FQAC Validation Panel-8 weeks (minimum) FVP established by Faculty Quality Team - 6 weeks (minimum) Internal Faculty scrutiny process takes place- 3 weeks (minimum) Completion of validation documentation and submission to the

FQM for final checks Faculty Quality Team circulates documentation to the FVP

- 1 week (minimum) External Academic (if appropriate) provides written commentary on the proposal

0 weeks FVP to consider the documentation and determine outcomes

+ 4 weeks (maximum) Development Team response to validation conditions and completion of the revised documentation

+ 6 weeks (maximum) Meeting of conditions, documents signed off by FVP Chair, electronic submission of final documentation to the Faculty Quality Team


• The Panel• The event• The outcomes• Conditions, requirements and recommendations • The report• Responding to conditions

31




Paper-based validation

• No panel meeting• External Advisor appointed• Sign off by FQAC Chair and Faculty Quality Manager

32


Course Approval:Summary

• Course Development Approval and the CPF• Course Validation:

the criteria the Validation Document Guidance documents the process

• How ICIS supports these systems


Course Review & Revalidation:Introduction

• Assurance of maintenance of academic standards• Assurance of quality• Enhancement-focused• Opportunity for holistic and strategic thinking

– Cumulative effect of change– Changes to internal and external environments– Changes to legislation

• Single or multiple courses• Revalidation

34


Process

• Self-critical• Evidence-based• Building on strengths• Identifying and assessing risk• Highlighting areas for enhancement• Peer review: staff, students and externals• Designed to be developmental• Occurs every 6 years

35


Panel Focus

• Academic Standards• Quality of Learning Opportunities• Quality Management and Enhancement

36


Schedule

Time +/- visit Activity - 6 months Briefing meeting convened by FQM, finalisation of the review schedule

- 3 months CRR Panel set up by FQM in consultation with Review Chair, Reporting Officer, Head of School, Course Leader and formally approved by the Chair of QAC

- 9 weeks Self evaluation document and supporting documentation submitted to the Reporting Officer

- 8 weeks Reporting Officer circulates the Self evaluation document and supporting documentation to the CRR Panel

- 5 weeks Reporting Officer receives each CRR Panel member’s analysis of the Self evaluation document for their allocated section(s) and forwards this to the CRR Panel Chair

- 4 weeks Preparatory meeting convened to finalise arrangements for the review event

- 1 week Team assembles documentation to be made available during the review

0 weeks Review event + 4 weeks Draft report circulated to the CRR Panel for finalisation + 6 weeks Final draft of the report circulated to the CRR Panel and the Faculty/College to

check for factual accuracy

+ 8 weeks Final report circulated to Faculty Head of School

Next scheduled meeting after publication of the final report

Action Plan compiled to include actions to be taken at Faculty level. Report and Action Plan submitted to FQAC

Next scheduled meeting after consideration by FQAC

Report and Action Plan (to include any University actions) submitted to QAC via the Quality Unit

37


Preparation

• Admin support provided by faculty to give advice and coordinate• Briefing meeting between FQM, Head of School and Course

Leader(s) 6 months before the event:– Confirm the scope of the review– Provide an overview of the process– Identify a date and establish deadlines for submission of documentation– Guidance on developing the self-evaluation document– Discuss panel members and identify a reporting officer

38


Panel

• Chair• 2 or more external members • 2 or more internal members from a different

faculty• Faculty Quality Manager• Student Union sabbatical officer or nominee• Reporting Officer

39


Self-evaluation document:Part 1: Critical Review

• Academic Standards

• Quality of Learning Opportunities

• The maintenance of Standards and Enhancement of Quality

• Working with Others

• Appendices– Mapping from old to new courses and modules– External Examiner/Consultant’s Report and Team’s response– Recruitment and conversion table– Statistics detailing student progression, outcomes and career destinations– Reports of accreditation events and details of any changes to professional body

requirements

40


Self-evaluation document: Part 2: Revalidation Document

• SECTION 1: Planning and Development of the Course– Engagement with External and Internal Reference Points– Evidence of ethical consideration– Transitional Arrangements

• SECTION 2: Course Specification• SECTION 3: Course Structure• SECTION 4: Module Specifications• SECTION 5: Supporting Matrices• APPENDICES

41


Additional Documentation to be submitted with the SED

• List of evidence• Course Handbooks• Student Data• External Examiner reports• Course annual monitoring report• Faculty annual monitoring report

42


Additional Documentation to be available during the review

• Course and module handbooks and any other relevant course documentation

• Staff lists and a short profile• Course Board minutes• Module/course questionnaire summaries• Data, i.e. NSS satisfaction levels• Notes of course team meetings• Recent validation reports• Marketing materials

43


The preparatory meeting

• Chair, Head of School, Course Leader(s), FQM, Reporting Officer – 4 weeks before the event– Agree on key issues

– Check which claims in the SED the panel are going to verify

– Identify key members of staff who will attend meetings

– Agree on sample of students’ work to be made available

– Shape the overall agenda

– Discuss arrangements for meeting students from collaborative partners

44


The Event

•1 day long•Meetings with course and other staff, current and former students and other relevant stakeholders•Private meetings of the panel•Good practice and recommendations made•Report produced

45


Links to Procedures

• Course Approval – Course Development Approval– Course Validation

• Course Review & Revalidation

46