A quick guide to Quality
Approval of new degree courses
The individual procedures for quality assurance and enhancement at the University are designed to interconnect in order to create a rigorous but not overly burdensome whole. This can be demonstrated by this chart.
back to top
Approval of new degree coursesAll new degree coursesmust be approved by Senate. New courses should be submitted to the University for approval in line with the approvals process. Each department is required to produce an annual monitoring report for all of its courses. The purpose of annual monitoring is to ‘consider the effectiveness of the programme [course] in achieving its stated aims and the success of students in attaining the intended learning outcomes’ (QAA Code of Practice). The annual monitoring process draws together in one place a concise summary of all developmental activity undertaken by a department in relation to a course/group of courses. As such, the reports are intended to be a useful resource for departmental staff, Faculties, external examiners and external auditors.
In order to be effective, annual monitoring reports need to act as a focus for reflective evaluation of curriculum, delivery and the achievement of students in the previous year. An important aspect of the process is the is the production of an action plan which provides a framework for looking forward to the next delivery of the curriculum, building on the experience of the past, and enabling the active enhancement of quality and standards. Link to full details of the process. Periodic ReviewPeriodic Reviewis a quinquennial University level procedure and has two main purposes:
The periodic review provides a formal opportunity to critically reflect on the course(s), to consider elements of good practice, highlight emerging issues and identify areas for enhancement. The Periodic Review process is spilt into two parts – Stage 1 and Stage 2. Stage 1 precedes the main periodic review meeting (stage 2) and does not involve the whole periodic review panel. Stage 2 is the main periodic review meeting. The programme for each periodic review will be slightly different, in order to both meet the specific needs of the department and to address any particular issues or concerns the Panel has. The broad themes of the Stage 2 meeting correspond to those used in annual monitoring to facilitate ease of reference between the two processes. Link to full details of the procedures and the schedule of reviews. Programme SpecificationsProgramme specifications are a means of providing transparent information about programmes of study in higher education, in a consistent, accessible format, to potential and current students, their parents, University staff and employers.The programme specification is the principal document used by academic departments during the Annual Monitoringof degree courses, and by Periodic ReviewPanels at University level. It also forms the core of the new degree course proposal form. External Examiners for taught coursesHeads of Department are responsible for the nomination of external examiners for approval by the Dean on behalf of the Faculty. In the spring term, Heads of Department are asked for nominations for the appointment or re-appointment of external examiners. This information is due back to the Quality Enhancement Office before the end of the summer term. Failure to meet this deadline causes serious delay to the process of appointing external examiners; Heads of Department should therefore ensure that informal approaches to potential External Examiners are initiated as early as possible. New AppointmentsExternal Examiners are appointed for four years. Examiners may not serve for more than four consecutive years. Link for full more details about external examiner policy and practice at the University.
|
