Academic Standards and Quality

[New course home page]

Categories of new courses and respective approval processes

Courses are grouped into three categories, largely determined by the level of new provision, which indicate the approval route required.  Depending on the approval route, courses may be considered by the Faculty Executive Dean, Faculty Education Committee, or a Validation Panel.  Recommendations are made to Academic Quality and Standards Committee for final approval, unless the authority has been delegated either to the Executive Dean.

If you are unclear which approval category your proposal falls into please contact the Academic Standards and Partnerships Office or speak to your Faculty Education Manager.

Categories

• Category 1:  Either wholly constructed from existing modules or including a maximum of two new modules, up to a maximum of 60 credits, that contribute to degree classification (UG), or no more than two new core modules, up to a maximum of 40 credits (PGT).
• Category 2:  Courses which include more than two new modules, or more than 60 credits, that contribute to degree classification (UG) or more than two new core modules, or more than 40 credits (PGT).
• Category 3:  Courses which meet the following criteria:
  • are in new curriculum areas (as defined by QAA Subject Benchmarks)
  • involve external collaboration (other than work-based or placement learning)
  • require internal validation in order to meet external requirements
  • where internal validation is requested by the Executive Dean

Category 1:  Approval by the Executive Dean

• Either wholly constructed from existing modules or including a maximum of two new modules, up to a maximum of 60 credits, that contribute to degree classification (UG), or no more than two new core modules, up to a maximum of 40 credits (PGT).

Final approval route (Part 2)

• Paperwork submitted to the Faculty Education Manager.  Final approval is confirmed by the Faculty Executive Dean.
• The Dean's decision is reported for information to the Faculty Education Committee, Academic Quality and Standards Committee, Education Committee and Senate.

Documents Required

• Part 1 form (word doc.), including Market Research Report if requested
• External comment from an existing or recent external examiner
• Part 2 form (word doc.) and accompanying documents

Category 2:  Approval by Academic Quality and Standards Committee, via the Faculty Education Committee

• Courses which include more than two new modules, or more than 60 credits, that contribute to degree classification (UG) or more than two new core modules, or more than 40 credits (PGT).

Final approval route (Part 2)

• Paperwork submitted for initial consideration by the relevant Faculty Education Committee.  Paperwork to be sent to the Faculty Education Manager by the deadline for submission of Faculty Education Committee papers (at least two weeks before the meeting).
• The Faculty Education Committee will make a recommendation, including setting out any conditions or recommendations attached to approval, to the Academic Quality and Standards Committee.  Academic Quality and Standards Committee will make the final decision on whether to approve the course.
• The Academic Quality and Standards Committee's decision is reported for information to Education Committee and Senate.

Documents Required

• Part 1 form, including Market Research Report if requested
• External comment, not from an existing or recent external examiner (i.e. less than three years since their appointment ended)
• Part 2 form and accompanying documents

Category 3:  Approval via Validation Panel

Courses which meet the following criteria:

• are in new curriculum areas (as defined by QAA Subject Benchmarks)
• involve external collaboration (other than work-based or placement learning)
• require internal validation in order to meet external requirements
• where internal validation is requested by the Executive Dean

If it is anticipated that a validation event may be needed because a proposal falls into approval category 3, departments should discuss this possibility with the Academic Standards and Partnerships Office (ASPO).  If a validation event is needed then ASPO, in consultation with the Executive or Deputy Dean, will appoint a Validation Panel.

Approval route

• Paperwork submitted to ASPO for consideration by a Validation Panel
• The Validation Panel will make a recommendation on whether the course should be approved, and will set out any conditions or recommendations attached to approval.  Members of Faculty Education Committee will receive a copy of the Panel's report for information (electronically if needed) and will be given the opportunity to comment on the recommendation.  Final approval rests with the Academic Quality and Standards Committee.
• The Academic Quality and Standards Committee's decision is reported for information to Education Committee and Senate.

Documents Required

• A Market Research Report requested from CER is encouraged
• Part 1 form (word doc.)
• Validation documentation

Page last updated: 01 October 2013