On this page:
Back to:
A validation event normally takes place over a half or full day depending on the size and nature of the award(s) being validated. The agenda is normally based upon a standard structure (word document) which may be modified as appropriate for each validation event.
The Chair will normally commence the event by:
The agenda will include one or more blocks of time in which the panel may discuss the proposed course in detail with the departmental team, and in which the departmental team will have the opportunity to respond to points raised. The Chair is responsible for highlighting positive aspects of the modules and the course, and raising issues in a constructive but critical manner. The validation panel should conduct its discussions in the spirit of a ‘critical friend’.
After discussion, the departmental team depart to allow the panel to determine their recommendations. The Chair normally commences this second private meeting of the panel by summarising the issues and the departmental team’s responses and s/he will conclude the meeting by agreeing the outcome of the event with the panel before inviting the departmental team back for verbal feedback. A unanimous decision of the panel is required for the conclusion of the validation event.
The outcome of the event, including any conditions or recommendations made by the panel, is formally recorded in the validation report, which is circulated to members of the Faculty Education Committee for comment, with final approval resting with Academic Quality and Standards Committee.
The validation report summarises the panel’s conclusions and specifies any conditions or recommendations that are to be met before the course may commence. It is usual for the panel to specify the date by which the conditions and/or recommendations must be met.
There are three possible outcomes from a validation event:
In exceptional circumstances the report may recommend suspension of the
validation process whilst the departmental team undertakes a major revision to
the proposal.
Conditions are those issues that must be addressed to the satisfaction of the validation panel prior to a course’s commencement.
Recommendations are those issues on which action is to be considered, possibly after the course has commenced.
The validation panel may not set further conditions after it has reported. The Faculty Education Committee and/or Academic Quality and Standards Committee may amend the conditions set by the panel or set further conditions but this would be very unusual. In such a case, these amendments or additional conditions would over-ride the conditions set by the validation panel and the department would be obliged to adhere to them.
In the case of conditions which must be met before delivery commences, the department must make a formal response evidencing how specific conditions have been met. This response is formally reported to the Faculty Education Committee.
Information about how recommendations have been addressed should be included in the next Annual Review of Courses, unless the Faculty Executive or Deputy Dean, or Faculty Education Committee requires a response before the Board meeting.
Departments should include information about action taken in response to conditions and recommendations in the subsequent Annual Review of Courses report and where the conditions and/or recommendations require ongoing action then they should be included in the Annual Review of Courses action plan.
Not all conditions or recommendations arising from validation may be within the power of the department to action. For these University level recommendations, departments should follow the following procedure:
Resource-based issues arising as a result of validation events should be discussed by the Faculty Education Committee/Executive Dean. If a proposing department is considered to have inadequate resources, the department should bid for resources prior to the validation report going to the Faculty Education Committee and Academic Quality and Standards Committee, so that the Committee can be informed about the outcome of the bid and make a decision about whether the condition has been adequately addressed. In the event that a bid for resources is not successful the department should specify to the Committee how it intends to address the issue(s) raised by the validation condition.
Any other University level issues should be raised with the Executive Dean in advance of the Academic Quality and Standards Committee at which the validation report is being considered. The outcome of this discussion should be appended to the validation report.
The department should raise University level recommendations with the Executive Dean and include the outcome of these discussions in the next Annual Review of Courses report.
The Executive Dean will refer matters for discussion to the Faculty Steering Group and decision by USG as appropriate and inform the department, Faculty Education Manager and ASPO of the outcome.
The validation report, together with the department’s response to the report, is circulated to members of the Faculty Education Committee (electronically if needed) for the opportunity to comment, and then submitted to Academic Quality and Standards Committee for final decision as to whether the course(s) should be validated for delivery. Academic Quality and Standards Committee's decision is reported for information to Education Committee and Senate.
Page last updated: 11 September 2013