New Program Creation & Approval Practices. PCCAT conference 2015 Joanne Duklas (primary Investigator) Duklas Cornerstone Consulting

Transcription

1 New Program Creation & Approval Practices PCCAT conference 2015 Joanne Duklas (primary Investigator) Duklas Cornerstone Consulting

2 The Project Seeking to understand typical typologies, timelines, and approval frameworks for new program creation, approval, implementation, and launch Examining the full spectrum across credentials, institutions, allied organizations, quality assurance bodies, and government What s involved? How long does it take?

3 Project Scope Focus: current practices Goal: demystify the process and identify the expert guides What it is not: not seeking to identify improvements or best practices Target Audience: Members of ONCAT (not private colleges or graduate) Relevance to pathway development: joint program development - creating efficiencies by enhancing knowledge of current practices

4 Research Approach Interviews Foundational document reviews Assessment and validation

5 Primary focus of interviews Colleges Universities Quality Assurance Bodies Government Allied organizations that support new program launch (e.g., OUAC, OCAS)

6 Ontario Qualifications Framework Certificates 1 & 2 Certificate of Apprenticeship & Certificate of Qualification Certificate III Diploma 1 Not included: Private College Diploma 2 Advanced Diploma Post-Diploma Certificate Baccalaureate/Bachelor s Degree Baccalaureate/Bachelor s Degree Honours Master s Degree Doctoral Degree CODA Funded Programs Ontario College Certificate Ontario College Diploma Ontario College Advanced Diploma Ontario College Graduate Certificate - University College and University

7 High Level Overview From Start to Finish

8 Potential Stakeholders Involved in New Program Creation, Approval, and Launch Institution: Faculty, Staff, Students Industry Quality Assurance Bodies OCQAS, PEQAB, Quality Council College of Trades / Accrediting Bodies MTCU External Allied Organizations

9 Strategic Institutional Considerations Curriculum, Teaching, Research and Related Resource Needs Marketing/ Recruitment Registrarial/ Academic Support Student Retention/ Student Success Facilities, Staffing, etc.

10 Program Creation Discipline focus: core principle college and university Industry engagement colleges Environmental scans Decanal support

11 Additional Considerations - Launch

12 June, July, August Featuring new programs in marke6ng materials used for fall recruitment season Star6ng in November Students apply for next September entry Ins6tu6ons begin making offers Early spring/summer (varies by sector, target audience, and school) Students confirm offers for September entry By mid- August Marke6ng materials to key influencers By end of October Programs set up at applica6on centres Managing process; data Typical Program Launch Timeline By end of September/ October Student recruitment fair presence Fall Marke6ng to high school guidance counsellors, adult learning centres, etc.

13 Typical Typologies Apprenticeship Programs Local College Certificates Ontario College Credentials College / university Degrees Rapid Launch Rapid Launch Launch:1 to 1.5 years Launch: 2.5 to 3 years CODA funded Institutional approvals only OCC, OCD, OCAD, OCGD Baccalaureate Possible OCQAS review No OCQAS Review OCQAS; MTCU Consent: all college & some university degrees Approval: university degrees PEQAB; MTCU Quality Council; MTCU

14 Government Legislation, Regulations & Binding Policy Directives The Context

15 MTCU Oversight for programs requesting funding approval and OSAP eligibility and for those programs requiring consent Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities Act Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, 2000 (PSECE Act) Governs degree granting/right to operate as a university; PEQAB s mandate; right of colleges to offer degrees; PEQAB s role related to quality assurance for these credentials Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology Act, 2002 (OCAATA) Ministerial mandate and reach over colleges Ontario Colleges of Trades and Apprenticeship Act, 2009 Individual university statutes and Royal Charter (right to grant degrees, diplomas, certificates)

16 Regulations 279/02 tied to the PSECE Act; speaks to consent 391/11 as above (2011); addresses referral to quality assurance bodies, types of consent decisions, appeal process, etc. elaws_src_regs_r11391_e.htm

17 MTCU CAAT Extranet Site For legislation, regulations, Minister s Binding Policy Directives, Operating Procedures): User name: caatsite Password: 900Mowat (case sensitive) College Diploma and Certificate Program Standards Degree Authority in Ontario - degreeauthority/ Minister s Binding Policy Directive (MBPD) Framework for Programs of Instruction PolicyFramework_PostSec.pdf Minister s Binding Policy Directive (MBPD) Funding Approval of Programs of Instruction, Minister s Operating Procedure Funding Approval of Programs of Instruction Procedures

18 Additional Considerations Ontario s Differentiation Policy Framework for Postsecondary Education Signed Strategic Mandate Agreements (SMAs) Universities - Colleges -

19 Credential Frameworks Quality Assurance

20 Overarching National Credentials Framework Canadian Degree Qualifications Framework (pg. 2) Statement-2007.en.pdf

21 Ontario Qualifications Framework Underpins all credentials

22 Ontario Qualifications Framework Certificates 1 & 2 Certificate of Apprenticeship & Certificate of Qualification Certificate III Diploma 1 Not included: Private College Diploma 2 Advanced Diploma Post-Diploma Certificate Baccalaureate/Bachelor s Degree Baccalaureate/Bachelor s Degree Honours Master s Degree Doctoral Degree CODA Funded Programs Ontario College Certificate Ontario College Diploma Ontario College Advanced Diploma Ontario College Graduate Certificate - University College and University

23 Core frameworks For PEQAB the Ontario Qualifications Framework PEQAB.CA For universities - Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Framework OUCQA.CA For college certificates and diplomas - Minister s Binding Policy Directive (MBPD) Framework for Programs of Instruction Credentials Framework (pg. 8) OCQAS.ORG

24 College Certificates & Diplomas OCQAS

25 Certificate and Diploma Process College: creates new program proposal Seeking funding and OSAP eligibility to Ministry Ministry approves or denies funding/ OSAP OCQAS: assesses and validates proposal (2 weeks) OCQAS: decision to College and Ministry College: decision to proceed

26 Ontario College Quality Assurance Service (OCQAS) [E]stablished to provide efficient tools that ensure specific quality and consistency standards are met by the Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology. (OCQAS. 2015) Achieves this through two primary services: the Credential Validation Service (CVS) which focuses on program level quality assurance and the (Program Quality Assurance Process Audit) PQAPA which focuses on institutional-level quality assurance (K. Belfer, OCQAS, 2014)

27 Credential Validation Service (CVS) Responsible for reviewing new and existing programs that result in one of the following credentials: Ontario College Certificate, Ontario College Diploma, Ontario College Advanced Diploma, and the Ontario College Graduate Certificate. OCQAS (through the CVS) is to provide reasonable assurance that all postsecondary programs of instruction.regardless of funding source, conform to the Credentials Framework and are consistent with accepted college system nomenclature/program titling principles (MTCU, April 2005, pp. 3-4).

28 MTCU Expectations - Colleges Minister s Binding Policy Directive (MBPD) Framework for Programs of Instruction and the embedded Ontario Credentials Framework MTCU: requires adherence to specific program standards (where applicable) when developing new program proposals, when delivering new programs, and when executing the program review process (MTCU, 2015b). [P]rogram standards apply to all similar programs of instruction offered by colleges across the province and established programs; at this time, these include the following elements: vocationally specific learning outcomes...essential employability skills learning outcomes [and a] general education requirement (2015b).

29 MTCU Colleges Unit, Postsecondary Accountabilities Branch Consider: alignment with the SMAs, responsiveness to labour market demands, status of regulatory or accreditation approval Conduct: policy review, confirm adherence and alignment to Binding Policy Directives, and consider other government policy components. Funding review: examines total number of hours included in the program, what constitutes those hours, and how these map back to existing programs. Timeframe: depends very much on the completeness of the college proposal, the response time of the college to any question that may arise (technical or otherwise), and the submission and review of any additional requested information.

30 Conestoga Example College Approvals "Request for Approval to Proceed" document submission Program Advisory Committee Endorsement "Request for Approval to Proceed" document submission Program Proposal Package ("Data Pack ) & PAC Endorsement ACASA Summary; Proposal Approved ACASA Summary Reviewed; Proposal Approved Program Planning and Review Committee Program Advisory Committee (PAC) or Program Development Advisory Committee (PDAC) Academic Forum Academic Coordinating Committee Advisory Committee on Academic and Student Affairs (ACASA) Board of Governors

31 Expanded Role Emerging for OCQAS Becoming a formal accreditation body Focus: moving to an institutional-level accreditation process, which will replace the PQAPA quality assurance audit (OCQAS, 2015d). OCQAS management board: approved Accreditation Standards many of which touch on program approval practices, demonstration of achieving expected learning outcomes, academic quality, student learning, and more (will fall under the College Quality Assurance Audit Process - CQAAP). ( ocqas.org/?page_id=9272) Revised-January pdf

32 College Degrees PEQAB

33 Institution receives approvals and submits application to MTCU Postsecondary Accountability Branch, Universities Unit MTCU Universities Unit reviews PEQAB recommendation & conducts policy review MTCU Universities Unit provides recommendation to Minister MTCU Universities Unit makes recommendation regarding PEQAB review PEQAB provides recommendation to MTCU If approved, Minister makes time limited decision (typically 5-7 years); notifies institution Minister may refer proposal to PEQAB PEQAB process unfolds MTCU Consent Process

34 Proposal to MTCU for new degree PEQAB and Secretariat Quality Assessment Panel PEQAB Minister

35 Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board (PEQAB) Arms-length, advisory agency for MTCU Makes recommendations to the Minister regarding applications for ministerial consent and other related matters in accordance with the Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, 2000 (PSECE Act) (PEQAB, 2009). Scope of authority includes reviewing for quality assurance any type of undergraduate or graduate postsecondary program (public or private) offered by those colleges, universities, and other institutions not otherwise empowered by an act of the provincial legislature to offer a particular degree program in Ontario (J. Brown, personal communications, March 2015).

36 PEQAB Private institutions: two reviews organizational and program 2000:- Minister authorized publicly funded Ontario colleges to offer applied bachelor s degrees (MTCU, 2000) program review for new degree programs and those existing degree programs subject to renewal Organizational review: focused on ascertaining an organization s resource and policy framework, financial robustness, and academic capacity, and its attention to the overall care of students Minister: may send college proposals for PEQAB review prior to consideration of consent

37 PEQAB Handbook for Ontario Colleges (New Programs) Review and assessment: program structure; degree level; admission, promotion, and graduation; program content; program delivery; capacity to deliver; credential recognition; regulation and accreditation; nomenclature; program evaluation; academic freedom and integrity; student protection; economic need; non-duplication of programs; adherence to the government s Ontario Qualifications Framework for Honours Bachelor Degrees College has 90 days to respond; recommendation to MTCU from PEQAB

38 Conestoga Creating a New Degree Develop New Degree Program Concept Inform Academic Administration Designate a Degree Program Developer Research: industry, government, other existing PACs, students To ensure approval in principle Potential program coordinator; possibly a PhD Create Environmental Scan Complete Degree Approval Package Part 1 and Space Requirements Form Seek Approval to Proceed Academic and labour markets Consultation and initial program development Program Planning and Review Committee (PPRC); Academic Forum (AF)

39 Conestoga Creating a New Degree Seek Preapproval to Proceed Create Program Development Advisory Committee (PDAC) Complete Degree Approval Package - Part II Send ACASA Summary and Seek Final Approval MTCU Develop program themes, design, learning outcomes; provide support Finalize program design, seek PDAC recommendation and additional approvals (as necessary); support signatures attached Academic Coordinating Committee (ACC), Advisory Committee on Academic and Student Affairs (ACASA) Seek Final Approval Board (send ACASA Summary with proposal) Develop PEQAB Submission; External PEQAB, MTCU Process Unfolds Full degree approval package, environmental scan, PEQAB standards

40 University Degrees Quality Council and MTCU

41 University notifies MTCU of internal and Quality Council approvals through application process MTCU staff provide recommendation to Minister Minister makes decision on application MTCU Universities Unit receives application & conducts initial review Within 30 days, institution notified regarding review process Expedited or Secondary Review MTCU conducts policy, tuition, & funding review (to assign a funding weight) MTCU's new criteria applied when assessing application Minister notifies university; distributes a "Sector Memo" to notify PSE university community MTCU Program Approval

42 Quality Council [O]versees quality assurance processes for all levels of programs in Ontario s publicly assisted universities, and helps institutions to improve and enhance their programs (2015b). In particular, the Quality Council ensures the following: the continuing achievement of a defined level of quality in the design and delivery of an institution s programs, with particular emphasis on the desired learning outcomes and Ontario s degree level expectations, as well as on the monitoring of an institution s compliance with its Institutional Quality Assurance Process (IQAP) in its cyclical program reviews (2015b).

43 Quality Council: 45 days if proposal complete and no additional information required

44 MTCU University Program Approval Submission Guidelines (page 2) Strategic Mandate Agreement alignment; Proposed tuition fee (including institutional and sector comparators), funding weight, and FORPOS code; Costs (including program financing considerations and capital cost implications); Justifiable duplication; Societal need and labour market demand; Student demand; Enrolment planning and graduate allocations; Experiential learning; and Program prioritization/program transformation initiatives.

45 Mar-Apr Approval in principle Apr New Program Notice of Intent to QA Office University of Windsor Example Apr-Oct Internal Approvals Nov-Dec Quality Council MTCU Jun Provostial approval; consultation plan Sep New Program Proposal Brief / MTCU Approval Form Oct-Apr External Review + Report + Refinements

46 Other Jurisdictional Examples

47 Different Examples Program approval and review protocols and policies Qualification frameworks Characteristics Types

48 College Baccalaureate Degree Approval Processes (Skolnik, 2013) Jurisdiction Program Duration Approval Approval Model Stages Austria 3 years NA Program assessment British Columbia 4 years 2 Program assessment Denmark 3-4, varies by program NA Program assessment Finland 3.5-4, varies by program 2 Process audit Florida 2 years (after two-year associate 2 Institutional degree) accreditation Germany 3-4 years, varies by program 1 Choice of program assessment or institutional accreditation Ireland 3-4 year degrees NA Program assessment New Zealand 3-4 year degrees 1 Program assessment Netherlands 4 years 2 Mixed

49 Credential Level Expectations Breadth and depth of knowledge Knowledge of methodologies Knowledge of methodologies and research Research and scholarship Level of analytical skill Level of application of knowledge Awareness of limits of knowledge Professional capacity / autonomy Level of communication skills Canada Degree Qualifications Framework[1] X X Maritime Degree Level Qualifications Framework (undergraduate) [2] X (in the field) X (outside the field) X (Conceptual and methodological awareness) X Maritime Degree Level Qualifications Framework (graduate) [2] X (in the field) X (outside the field) X (Conceptual and methodological awareness) X Ontario Qualifications Framework (certificate through graduate); Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board Quality Assurance Framework (baccalaureate)[3] Quality Assurance Framework (graduate) [4] X X X X (Conceptual and methodological awareness) X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

50 Additional Differences Approach to consultation The approval processes Whether or not programs are funded Apprenticeship programs Nature of joint program

51 BC Degree Quality Assessment Board (DQAB) DQAB s external quality assurance process for new degree program proposals is available online. The Minister, in November 2006, updated the Exempt Status Criteria and Guidelines which provide an expedited review for institutions with long standing capacity and rigorous quality assessment processes for successfully granting degrees (Ministry of Advanced Education [AVED], November 2006). Any BC institution can apply for exempt status; if this is approved by the DQAB, the quality assessment process would be expedited up to the degree level specified and the programs would be forwarded to the Ministry for review and consent / approval after the requisite 30-day public advertisement on the Ministry s degree quality assessment site (p. 1). It is still within the Minister s discretion to request a DQAB review or recommendation if the circumstances warrant. See the following site for an overview of the process for non-exempt institutions: See the following site for an overview of the process for exempt institutions:

52 Versus Ontario The BC new degree program approval process is different and yet similar in some ways to the process in Ontario. DQAB plays a more comprehensive, overarching role across all sectors which is supported by legislation, a scope of authority very different than the quality assurance bodies in Ontario. However, DQAB has also implemented an expedited process for approvals to support the sector for those institutions with a robust history with granting degrees. This is a strategy that is similar to other quality assurance bodies in the country. The internal institutional processes are similar to those in Ontario in that there are numerous opportunities for internal and external consultation and active engagement of governing bodies. Collaboration with other institutions in the case of inter-institutional program initiatives is the expected norm. The timelines allow for thoughtful proposal development, community engagement, and public launch.

53 Reasonably Similar Timelines The legislative framework, mandate, and scope of authority of quality assurance bodies, and approval processes vary depending on jurisdiction and institution. The provinces examined carefully embed quality assurance protocols to ensure program learning outcomes are met for each of certificates, diplomas, and degrees. BC s DQAB recommends institutions submit proposals 12 to 18 months prior to a planned launch to ensure timely consideration.

54 Example of a Multi partner Degree

55 Example of a Credentialing approach

56 Additional questions? Joanne Duklas, ONCAT.ca (Report will be published in the research section)

57 Appendices

58 Ins6tu6onal academic leadership / governance bodies Administra6ve supports Program proponents; quality assurance departments Academic resources Student support areas Program Creation