Course Approval and Course Review & Revalidation Hayley Burns Head of Quality Unit

Purpose To provide an overview of the following processes: Course Approval: Course development approval Course Validation Course Review & Revalidation 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

Course Development Approval Process Course Development Team completes the ‘Curriculum Proposal Form’ (CPF) on ICIS CPF submitted to Head of School CPF submitted to Faculty Committee If approved submitted for University peer review Submitted to Deans and Executive for final approval to proceed to course validation

Curriculum Proposal Form Sections Course information Market Research The Course Costing Template [or Business Case] Course Delivery Course Structure Course Exit Points Subject Codes Faculty Approval

The CPF on ICIS

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*

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

Course Validation: The Validation Document SECTION 1 Executive Summary

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

Course Validation: The Validation Document (3) 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

Course Validation: The Validation Document (4) 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

Course Validation: The Validation Document (5) SECTION 5: MODULE SPECIFICATIONS Module Information Module Criteria Learning Outcomes Assessment Matrix Key Skills Concise/Indicative Reading List

Course Validation: The Validation Document (6) SECTION 6: SUPPORTING MATRICES Learning Outcomes Matrix Key Skills Matrix Assessment Schedule

Course Learning Outcomes Learning Outcomes Matrix Subject Code Module Title Course Learning Outcomes   A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 C1 C2 The following are examples only: Occurrence across the course A – KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING A1 Gain good knowledge of academic subject A2 Communication and Information gathering A3 Research to support technical activities/solve problems A4 Environmental Legislation B - INTELLECTUAL (THINKING) SKILLS B1 Interdisciplinary approach to environmental education B2 Problem Solving B3 Ability to analysis and evaluate information C - PROFESSIONAL/VOCATIONAL SKILLS C1 Ability to set project objectives and produce plans C2 Ability to work safely and appreciate Health and Safety Regulations C3 Awareness of financial, economic and environmental factors C4 Ability to manage projects

Key Skills Matrix Subject Year Code Module Title Key Skills   D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 Occurrence across the course The following must be included but others can be added at faculty discretion: D1 Managing and developing self D2 Working with and relating to others D3 Communicating D4 Managing tasks and solving problems D5 Applying numeracy D6 Applying technology D7 Applying design and creativity

Assessment Weighting % Assessment Schedule Code Module Credits Assessment Weighting %   CW1 Wordcount CW2 CT1 CT2 EX1 Length EX2 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.

Course Validation: The Validation Document (7) 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

Course Validation: The Validation Document and ICIS

Course Validation: The Process (1) Timescales 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

Course Validation: The Process (2) The Panel The event The outcomes Conditions, requirements and recommendations The report Responding to conditions

Course Validation: The Process (3) Paper-based validation No panel meeting External Advisor appointed Sign off by FQAC Chair and Faculty Quality Manager

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

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

Panel Focus Academic Standards Quality of Learning Opportunities Quality Management and Enhancement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Links to Procedures Course Approval Course Review & Revalidation Course Development Approval Course Validation Course Review & Revalidation