Quality Assurance Handbook

Transcription

1 Quality Assurance Handbook Published by the Quality and Academic Support Office Students and Education Support Directorate Academic session 2013/14

2

3 Contents Contents Section A Introduction 1. Scope of the procedures 1 2. List of abbreviations 1 3. Quality assurance, regulatory and credit frameworks national 1 and College Section B Procedures for programme and module approval and modification 1. Programme and module design 5 2. Business plan and marketing 7 3. Distance learning and e-learning programmes 8 4. Collaborative activity, placement learning and joint awards 8 5. Professional, statutory and regulatory bodies (PSRBs) 8 6. Documentation for approval and modification 9 7. The approval process Timescale for approval Setting up modules on SITS Publication of programme specifications Diagram of the approval process 14 Section C Procedures for the approval and monitoring of collaborative provision 1. Partnerships policy Strategic considerations Scope Principles Definitions Governance Management Diagram of the approval process Initial agreement to explore partnership Approval of provision Management Further information 22 Section D Procedures for programme and module monitoring and review 1. Introduction to monitoring and review Aims, objectives and process for annual monitoring Aims and objectives of review The review process Collaborative activity and placement learning Combined review and validation/accreditation by professional, 26 statutory or regulatory bodies (PSRBs) i

4 Contents 7. Documentation for review Report of the review Monitoring of recommendations arising from programme review Diagram of the review process 31 Section E Procedures for postgraduate research degrees approval and monitoring 1. New research degree programmes The approval process following consideration by Programme 33 Development and Approval Committee 3. PhD by blended learning Monitoring of postgraduate research degrees 35 Section F Core code of practice for postgraduate research degrees 1. Introduction Purpose of the Core Code Admission to a postgraduate research programme of study Supervision Research environment Enrolment, registration and attendance Induction, training and development Working during a research degree Monitoring and assessment of students progress Submission of thesis Changes to registration interruptions, extensions and transfers Sick leave arrangements for students on fully funded studentships Arrangements for extensions to submission deadlines for Research 53 Council funded students 14. Feedback Complaints and appeals Suspension of regulations for research degree students 56 Appendix 1 Roles and responsibilities 58 Section G Assessment and External Examiners 1. Introduction to assessment Setting of assessment Marking. Plagiarism and feedback External Examiners Diagram of the procedure for the consideration of External 74 Examiners reports Section H Notes of guidance Guidance on risk and ethics assessment in the design of modules 75 Guidance on global connectedness 81 Guidance for taught postgraduate dissertations 85 Guidance on the production of programme specifications and the 89 completion of programme and module approval and modification forms ii

5 Contents Guidance on clinical medicine, dentistry and cost centres 101 and Guidance for Schools on the use of external specialists and external peers 113 for programme approval and review Guidance on flexible and distributed learning 117 Guidance on the operation of collaborative teaching activity 119 Guidance on student placements 121 Definitions of collaborative activity 125 Guidance on joint awards 127 Guidance on the design of taught interdisciplinary, joint honours and 131 major/minor combination programmes Guidance on off-campus study in research degrees 133 Guidance on key principles relating to the management, monitoring and 135 assessment of joint PhD programmes Core terms of reference for a Joint Academic Committee for joint PhD 137 programmes Guidance on equality of opportunity and access in programme and 139 module review Guidance on professional, statutory and regulatory body reporting 153 Marking framework 155 Generic marking criteria: undergraduate 159 Generic marking criteria: taught postgraduate 163 Translation of credits/marks attained through study away from the College 165 Academic honesty and integrity 167 Guidelines for Examiners: plagiarism and related forms of cheating 171 Feedback guidelines for students 181 Key principles to effective assessment feedback for staff 183 Section I Templates and forms iii

6 iv Contents

7 Section A Introduction

8

9 1. Scope of the procedures Introduction 1.1 The procedures in this Handbook cover the approval, modification, monitoring and review of all undergraduate and taught postgraduate programmes and modules, including collaborative provision, specialist doctorates and short credit bearing courses; the approval and monitoring of new research degree programmes; the Core code of practice for postgraduate research degrees; and assessment policies and processes. There is a separate set of procedures covering the processes for the College s validation and accreditation of programmes offered by other institutions, which can be obtained from the Policy Zone at Proposals for non-credit bearing short courses should follow the approval procedures as laid down by the Head of School, and be submitted via the online Short Course application form (SCAF) which can be found at: For more guidance on what is classified as a short course please see the Short course code of practice. 2. List of abbreviations 2.1 The following definitions of terms are used throughout the Handbook: Module Programme CAB CEC QAA PSRB SDAS QAS PDAC PRSS SEC SITS an individual element of a programme of study which is taught and examined under the approved regulations for that programme comprises the approved curriculum followed by a student for a specified award upon which the student is registered College Assessment Board College Education Committee Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Professional, statutory or regulatory body Student Data and Analytical Services team Quality and Academic Support section of the Students and Education Support Directorate 1 Programme Development and Approval Committee Postgraduate Research Student s Sub-committee School Education Committee or equivalent body acronym for the student record system 3. Quality assurance, regulatory and credit frameworks national and College 3.1 College procedures are required to take account of the various components of the QAA s UK Quality Code for Higher Education; (see The Quality Code supersedes the various components that previously made up the academic infrastructure. The Code has three sections: Part A: Setting and maintaining threshold academic standards Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality Part C: Information about higher education provision Part A has six chapters and those with particular reference to procedures in this Handbook are: 1 See for contact details. 1

10 A3: The programme level A4: Approval and review A5: Externality A6: Assessment of achievement of learning outcomes Introduction Part B has 11 chapters and those with particular reference to procedures in this Handbook are: B1: Programme design and approval B3: Learning and teaching B4: Enabling student development and achievement B6: Assessment of students and accreditation of prior learning B7: External Examining B8: Programme monitoring and review B10: Managing higher education provision with others B11: Research degrees 3.2 A key component of the College s quality assurance framework is the way in which programmes and modules are designed, approved, modified, monitored and reviewed. This process ensures that the College s programmes meet the academic standards set by the College and the external environment, which includes the QAA and the various PSRBs. These standards are then maintained and monitored via the processes of delivery, assessment and review. 3.3 The College s structure and operation is characterised by the devolution to Schools of a wide range of responsibilities within a defined framework. 2 The Academic Board, as the principal corporate body with responsibility for assuring quality in the academic work of the College, sets the framework and defines the standards and rules to which Schools must work. It is aided in this task by a sub-structure of committees which develop, agree and monitor the majority of the policies and procedures governing the operation of the framework. The relevant part of the Academic Board s sub-structure concerned with programme and module approval and modification is the Programme Development and Approval Committee (PDAC); while the sub-committee concerned with the monitoring and review of programmes and modules is the College Education Committee (CEC) which oversees these procedures and their implementation by Schools; the relevant sub-committee concerned with assessment is the College Assessment Board (CAB). For terms of reference of Academic Board and its substructure see Academic governance and management regulations, section C In line with the principles of devolution School Education Committees (SECs), or equivalent bodies, as specified in the School core governance functions are therefore responsible for approving and modifying programmes and modules in accordance with the procedures set out in this Handbook. School core governance functions are available at SECs are also responsible for collecting annual monitoring reports from programmes/departments within their School and for reporting on these as advised by CEC. SECs are also responsible for ensuring that reviews of all programmes within the School are undertaken and for reporting such reviews to the CEC. The CEC, via its Scrutiny Panel, considers all review reports and gives final approval to the review which includes the re-approval of the programmes. For further information on academic governance see 2 Throughout this document the term School also includes the grouping of free-standing global institutes and the English Language Centre which operate as a virtual School for the purposes of academic governance and quality assurance. 2

11 Introduction 3.5 With the introduction of the credit framework for all new enrolments from the beginning of the 2007/08 academic year, there is one set of generic regulations that apply for all undergraduate and taught postgraduate programmes. 3 Programme specific regulatory information is contained within programme specifications which therefore have regulatory status; the information required for regulatory purposes is highlighted in the programme specification template by a double box. Programme specifications are published only once a year, prior to the start of each session and cannot be amended during a session. Requests for the suspension of regulatory information in a programme specification should follow the same procedure as requests for suspension of the Academic regulations. Further information on the credit framework, associated regulations and level descriptors can be found on the programmes of study web pages at There may, however, be instances, for example with some professional programmes, where programme specific regulations may be required. In such instances advice on the necessity for and the production of such regulations should be sought from QAS. These regulations and any subsequent major amendments will require the approval of the Academic Board before the start of the session in which the programme is due to commence, and should be appended to, and form part of, the programme specification. 3 A small number of programmes are not in the credit framework. The full list of exempt programmes can be found in the Academic Regulations, A3 Regulations for taught programmes. 3

12 4 Introduction

13 Section B Procedures for programme and module approval and modification

14

15 1. Programme and module design Procedures for programme and module approval and modification 1.1 In designing a new programme of study, account needs to be taken of a number of external reference points. All programmes have to be set at one of the levels within the Framework for higher education qualifications (FHEQ) published by the QAA ( px) and demonstrate that they fit the qualification descriptors for each level. The levels and the main qualifications at each level are: Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 8 Undergraduate Certificates of Higher Education Undergraduate Diplomas of Higher Education, Foundation degrees Bachelors degrees with Honours, Graduate Certificates and Graduate Diplomas MB BS, BDS, Integrated Masters degrees, Postgraduate Certificates, Postgraduate Diplomas and Masters degrees Doctorates 1.2 The QAA, in conjunction with the sector, has developed subject benchmark statements based around broad subject groupings which are designed to represent the conceptual framework of a discipline and to provide information about the understanding and skills acquired through the study of that discipline. Subject benchmark statements need to be considered in the design of a new programme, although it should be noted that for some programmes more than one benchmark statement may be relevant and for others there may not be any statements of direct relevance. There are 56 benchmark statements for honours degree programmes plus 13 benchmark statements for masters degrees and 18 Department of Health/NHS benchmark statements for DoH funded provision. There is a qualification benchmark for Foundation Degrees, which is not specific to any particular discipline but which sets out a generic framework for Foundation Degrees that serves as a reference point for use in programme design, delivery and review. There are some subject benchmark statements for M level degrees such as Business and Management, Dentistry, Medicine and the MPharm: the Engineering, Computing, Physics and Chemistry benchmark statements include references to integrated masters degrees, and for the Mathematics statement this is covered in an annex. The QAA has also produced a guidance note on Master s degree characteristics. Further information and the benchmark statements themselves can be found on the QAA web site at In addition to the external framework within which programmes have to be constructed, the following internal requirements should also be taken into account as part of the process: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) the College s Strategic Plan plus the 2011 strategic review update the College Learning Teaching and Assessment Strategy; the College s equality and diversity policies available at the College s Academic Regulations including College criteria for degrees available at the underpinning of joint honours programmes by a clear intellectual rationale, either educational or academic defined in the following terms: an educational rationale applies to instances whereby the components of a joint honours degree, without necessarily overlapping at subject level, nonetheless provide the student with a greater breadth of complementary learning outcomes and thereby a more rounded education than afforded by a single honours degree; 5

16 (f) Procedures for programme and module approval and modification an academic rationale applies to combinations where there is a significant overlap between the two subject areas in terms of knowledge and expertise and where studies in one component thereby shed light on studies in the other to enhance the student s understanding of both; it is also good practice to seek the views of students about the design and development of new programmes, although it is recognised that this is not always feasible. 1.4 During 2007/08 the Quality Assurance Review Group reviewed the College s quality assurance processes and concluded that the programme and module approval process was working well but made the point that completion of the paperwork should be the culmination of the academic process in devising a new programme or module, not the starting point. The recommendation was that a good practice to adopt in programme/module approval is to view the programme/module and its delivery from the perspective of the student and the way in which information is imparted to students, which includes for example, consideration of seminar topics and bibliographies. 1.5 Taking all of the above into account therefore it is necessary for the design of a new programme to identify the following: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) level of the programme within the Framework for higher education qualifications; overall credit value; aims and objectives; content, structure, distinctive features and learning outcomes with reference to any relevant subject benchmark statements; opportunities to embed research skills into the curriculum; opportunities to embed a global dimension into the curriculum; associated modules and whether or not any are introductory, compulsory, core, optional, professional practice, prerequisites, co-requisites or excluded combinations and the combination of levels of credit allowed within the overall credit for the programme; teaching pattern and modes of delivery to include the embedding of technology enhanced learning; opportunities for interdisciplinary learning; assessment methods. Cognisance should be taken of the expectations and associated indicators in the chapter of the QAA Quality Code on assessment of students. Further information on assessment is provided in the assessment policies and practices web pages at ; identification of nested awards (ie a lower level and/or volume award which students may register for) and identification of exit awards (e.g. an award available to a candidate unable to meet the credit volume and/or credit level requirements for the award on which they are registered. In 2013/14 exit awards became default. For a programme who does not wish to offer an exit award prior permission from CAB must be sought first); consideration of how the teaching pattern, content, mode of delivery and assessment methods allow for equality of opportunity for academic achievement (see Guidance for the production of programme specifications on page 83). 1.6 All but (a), (g) and (k) above are also necessary in the design of new modules. In addition the following need to be taken account of in respect of modules: (a) alignment of learning outcomes with agreed level descriptors ( s%202010_0.pdf ); 6

17 (b) (c) (d) Procedures for programme and module approval and modification whether the module is also available as an option for Study Abroad students or whether it is available for such students in a modified form; whether a module contains some kind of physical procedure or administration of questionnaires, conducting interviews or making video or audio recordings. All such activity which involves human participants or raises other ethical issues with potential social or environmental implications must be submitted for ethical review (see Guidance on risk and ethics assessment in the design of modules on page 69) and the research ethics web pages ; for Masters programmes, alignment of the dissertation/research project element with College guidelines (see Guidance for taught postgraduate dissertations on page 79). 1.7 This process culminates in the production of a programme specification. The QAA states that a programme specification is a concise description of the intended learning outcomes of an HE programme, and the means by which the outcomes are achieved and demonstrated. These intended learning outcomes relate directly to the curriculum, study and assessment methods and criteria used to assess performance. 1 It is expected that programme specifications are produced for all programmes and they constitute a prominent feature of the architecture of the QAA s method for quality assurance; therefore programme specifications form the basis of programme approval documentation (see section 6 below). Guidance on the production of programme specifications and the completion of programme and module approval and modification forms can be found on page 83 and the QAA Guidelines can be found at It is necessary for proposals for new programmes to undergo some form of specialist external input/review; this must be evidenced in the programme approval documentation (see section 6 below). It is possible to use current External Examiners for this purpose, however, it is not appropriate for the same External Examiner to then be engaged in the capacity of External Examiner for the new programme until a period of three academic years has elapsed. It might also be appropriate for some disciplines to make use of professional experts or employers for this purpose. For further information on the use of external specialists see Guidance for Schools on the use of external specialists and external peers for programme approval and review on page Business plan and marketing 2.1 Whilst the academic rationale and quality of a programme should remain the most important factors in the consideration of a new programme, Schools strategic and operational planning will be greatly assisted by a business plan and marketing plan accompanying all new programme proposals. The business plan will indicate how the resources to support the programme will be provided and the marketing plan will outline how sufficient numbers of high quality candidates can be attracted to the programme and at what cost. 2.2 The Marketing Department is responsible for presenting and advising on marketing strategies for each School so it is important that new programmes are incorporated into the School s overall marketing strategy. Guidance should be sought from School marketing officers when proposing a programme to ensure appropriate information is provided to PDAC to enable the Committee to make a full decision. The template form for PDAC can be found at: 1 QAA, Guidelines for preparing programme specifications, 2006, page 2. 7

18 Procedures for programme and module approval and modification 2.3 The template for the business plan can be found at: Programme proposers are expected to send both forms to the Head of School and Director of Marketing so that marketing support can be agreed with the Head of School. 2.4 Consideration should also be given to the planning and marketing of modules for the Study Abroad market. Further advice should be sought from the Marketing Department. 3. Distance learning and e-learning programmes 3.1 Designers of distance learning programmes should consult the QAA Quality Code, chapters B3: Learning and teaching and B10: Managing higher education provision with others, Guidance on the production of programme specifications and the completion of programme and module approval and modification forms on page 83 and Guidance on flexible and distributed learning on page Distance learning programmes may also be delivered via e-learning, although the two are not necessarily synonymous. Such provision is often referred to under the heading flexible and distributed learning which can be defined as educational provision delivered and/or supported and/or assessed through means which generally do not require the student to attend particular classes or events at particular times or in particular locations. Additional quality assurance checks are required for the approval of programmes of these types. Consideration should be given to the educational and pedagogical rationale for the introduction of programmes of this nature. For programmes delivered via electronic technologies, a series of pilots should be undertaken prior to approval of the programme to ensure that technical (both hardware and software) and pedagogical processes have been tested and proved satisfactory. Contingency plans should be drawn up in the event of the failure of the designed modes of delivery. Additional external specialist advice on the pedagogical aspects of the delivery of flexible and distributed learning programmes should be sought if this cannot also be provided by the subject external specialist. HEFCE have produced useful guidance on intellectual property rights in e-learning programmes (HEFCE July 2006/20, 4. Collaborative activity, placement learning and joint awards 4.1 There are separate procedures that govern the College s validation and accreditation of programmes offered by other institutions (see ). However there are instances when elements of College programmes are delivered away from the main College campuses by bodies external to the College and instances when students undertake activity outside the College for defined periods of time. In these circumstances the process of programme design should give due consideration to the quality assurance aspects of such arrangements to ensure that the academic standards of the programmes are maintained and that the student experience is not compromised. Reference should be made to Guidance on the operation of collaborative teaching activity on page 113, Guidance on student placements on page 115 and Definitions of collaborative activity on page Approval from the PDAC is required before a programme that involves the award of a joint degree can be approved by the School. As the first stage in the process, completion of the Collaborative Proposal Programme Form must be submitted to the PDAC for approval (see Section C Procedures for the approval and monitoring of collaborative provision for further detail). There are also certain legal and financial matters concerning the status of the proposed partner that need to be clarified before 8

19 Procedures for programme and module approval and modification outline approval can be given for joint degrees (see Guidance on joint awards on page 121). 5. Professional, statutory and regulatory bodies (PSRBs) 5.1 A wide range of programmes delivered by the College either require, or choose to seek, validation or accreditation from relevant PSRBs and the requirements of such bodies will be particularly influential in the design of the curriculum of such programmes. Depending on the requirements of the body in question, there may be some sharing of documentation and process between the School s approval of a new programme and a validation or accreditation event by the PSRB. 2 Notwithstanding the College s devolved procedures, some bodies also require the presence of relevant College staff at a validation or accreditation event. 6. Documentation for approval and modification 6.1 The documentation listed below is the minimum that the College expects to be provided for the approval and modification of programmes and modules. Schools are free to request additional information to meet their own particular needs. 6.2 Documentation for new programme proposals should consist of the following: (a) a Programme Proposal form (available at (b) a programme specification and related programme approval form (see Guidance on the production of programme specifications and the completion of programme and module approval and modification forms on page 83); (c) evidence of external input into the design of the programme. This should take the form of a brief report from a subject specialist expert, external to the College. The report form template is included in the programme approval forms; (d a business plan (see (e) module approval forms for new modules. Where existing modules are used in a new programme, the learning outcomes of those modules must be made available with the programme documentation. Where a programme makes use of optional modules from outside the department eg language modules, then those specific learning outcomes do not need to be made available at approval but the learning outcomes of the programme must include some generic provision for such modules. For joint awards and partnership programmes where elements of the programme are delivered away from the main College campuses by bodies external to the College the following is required: (f) (g) (h) a Collaborative Provision Proposal form (available at: a report of the learning resources available off-site together with mechanisms for the ongoing monitoring of such resources; a draft memorandum of agreement between the College and the external body. The draft memorandum of agreement should be submitted to QAS for checking before the programme is approved. Subsequent to the approval the signed memorandum should be submitted, with the associated programme approval information to QAS. Web links for templates for Memoranda of Agreement can be found in Section I. 2 The General Council of the Bar and the Law Society have a specific requirement for a representative of the professional bodies to attend the programme approval event for qualifying law degrees. 9

20 Procedures for programme and module approval and modification 6.3 Documentation for new module proposals should consist of the following: (a) an online module approval form 3, (see Guidance on the production of programme specifications and the completion of programme and module approval and modification forms on page 83). 6.4 Documentation for modified programmes and modules should consist of the following: (a) (b) (c) a modification form, (see Guidance on the production of programme specifications and the completion of programme and module approval and modification forms on page 83). This form should also be used for the deletion of programmes and modules 4 no longer being offered; a revised programme specification, if the nature of the modification entails changes to the specification; if the proposed changes are of a major nature such as a major re-focusing of the curriculum content; a major structural change to a programme; a change in the delivery to flexible and distributed modes of learning; a change of learning outcomes; a change to assessment patterns, then a new programme or module 5 approval form should be completed for approval by the School Education Committee, or equivalent. For those proposed changes that are a major re-focusing of the curriculum content then final approval must also be sought from PDAC. 6.5 Modifications to programmes and modules cannot be implemented in the same academic year in which they are approved. 7. The approval process 7.1 A summary of the approval process in diagrammatic form is given on page The College s annual planning process should identify any new programmes that a School may wish to introduce, and notification of such intended programme approval activity should be submitted by Schools through the annual reporting mechanism. Notifying the CEC and PDAC of intended programme approval in this way should ensure that any potential areas for cross-school collaboration are identified at an early stage. If during a session a School wishes to approve a programme of study that has not formed part of this notification, then a case for the introduction of such a programme will need to be made to the PDAC. 7.3 Proposals for new programmes must be submitted for approval to PDAC via the Programme Proposal Form that is available at: Once approval from PDAC has been granted then the following steps can be taken. 7.4 Proposals for new programmes and modules and for modifications must be submitted for approval to the appropriate SEC, to include the information specified in section 6 above. SECs are free to request any information additional to this to fit their own particular requirements. In the case of joint degrees within the College or where the teaching of a programme or module is undertaken by more than one School, it is necessary for the proposal to be approved by the SEC of both/all Schools (please also refer to the Guidance on the design of interdisciplinary, joint honours and major/minor programmes on page 125). Proposals for modifications to 3 The School of Arts and Humanities will continue to use the paper-based form until Spring For modules Schools should use the online system 5 For modules Schools should use the online system 10

21 Procedures for programme and module approval and modification programmes and modules need to identify clearly the modification required, whether it is a major or minor modification and the rationale for the change. If a programme is being discontinued, measures need to be taken to notify and protect the interests of students registered for, or accepted for admission to, the programme. 7.5 It is the responsibility of the SEC to ensure that the following have been taken into account before a programme or module is approved: (a) all resource implications; (b) the marketing implications in the case of programmes (see paragraph 2.1 above); (c) that programme and module designers have liaised appropriately with Library Services and other relevant academic support services; (d) confirmation, if relevant, that the appropriate ethical approval has been sought and granted for modules (see Guidance on risk and ethics assessment in the design of modules on page 69 for further guidance); (e) that equality of access and opportunity have been fully considered in the design of the programme or module. The advice of the Head of School should be sought in cases where SECs are not satisfied that the issues above have been addressed. 7.6 In accordance with the requirements of the chapter of the QAA Quality Code on programme design and approval, the body that approves a programme should be independent of the unit that will offer the programme. It is recommended therefore that SECs should establish programme approval panels which should include as a minimum: (a) a Chair, normally the chair of the SEC. In single department Schools and in cases where the programme being approved is from the same department as the Chair, the Chair of the panel should be from another School; (b) a representative from another School (the Chair or a member of the SEC); 6 (c) the external peer(s) (see Guidance for Schools on the use of external specialists and external peers for programme approval and review on page 107 for further guidance); (d) a student representative. Normally this will be the student representative on the SEC but where their attendance is not possible at a specific event then a representative from KCLSU should be present; (e) the School Director of Administration or nominee. Representatives from the department/area proposing the new programme should be invited to the meeting to discuss the proposal. 7.7 The use of CEC/SEC representatives in this way aids the monitoring of the comparability of standards of programmes of study across the College and assists in the process of quality enhancement through the dissemination of good practice. The external peers should be different from those who provided input to the design of the programme and will be excluded from subsequently acting as External Examiner for the programme until a period of three academic years has elapsed. The external peer will not necessarily be an expert in the field but will have a broad understanding of the discipline. Their main function is to provide an external viewpoint on the approval process; the specific specialist advice having been provided earlier at the design stage of the process. External peers are appointed by the College for a period of two years in the first instance with the possibility of renewal for a further two years (the process being comparable in many ways to the appointment of External Examiners), each School requires one or two externals to act in this capacity. The 6 A list of CEC members is available from the QAS section. 11

22 Procedures for programme and module approval and modification external peer will be expected to attend all programme approval panels; in exceptional circumstances where this is not possible they should provide a written report for the panel. They should also attend at least half of the SEC meetings each year. 7.8 In approving programmes and modules Schools should ensure that their procedures give due consideration to the academic standards of awards and the quality of the learning opportunities available and, where external bodies are involved in the delivery of the teaching, that there are appropriate mechanisms in place to guarantee such standards and quality. SECs should ensure that where programmes and modules are approved but with conditions attached, that the fulfilment of those conditions is signed off on the programme approval documentation, reported back to the SEC and documented in SEC minutes. Programmes of study are normally approved for a period of six years unless specified otherwise by the SEC. Reapproval is gained through the process of review which is detailed in Section D of this Handbook. 7.9 Following approval by the SEC, the programme and module documentation (see paragraphs above) should be forwarded to QAS; an electronic version of the programme specification is also required. Unless the documentation is submitted in full the programme will not be regarded by the College as being approved. If separate programme regulations 7 are required, these are subject to further approval by the Academic Board and until this has occurred students may not be registered on the programme The QAS section forwards, electronically, submitted programme documentation to PDAC members for final approval. Programme details are added to SITS only after such information has been approved by PDAC. A summary of all approvals is then submitted to each meeting of the PDAC, as well as to Academic Board Minutes of all meetings of SECs should be sent to the QAS office. 8. Timescale for approval 8.1 The recommended timescale for approval of new and modified programmes and modules is as follows, these refer to when the PDAC should have given approval: New postgraduate programme 22 months prior to commencement (for the printed prospectus) 18 months prior to commencement (for the online prospectus) New undergraduate programme 29 months prior to commencement (for the printed prospectus) 25 months prior to commencement (for the online prospectus) New module 9 months prior to commencement Major modification to a programme same timescale as for new programme Minor modification to a programme prior to registration of students Major modification to a module prior to registration of students Minor modification to a module prior to registration of students 8.2 These are recommended timescales to allow for the inclusion of information for UCAS and the College s prospectuses and to ensure that there is sufficient time to set up new programmes and modules on SITS. Schools can introduce a new programme or module with a shorter lead-time to take account, for example, of the 7 Normally these would be integrated into the programme specification please consult QAS where there is a potential case for separate regulations. 12

23 Procedures for programme and module approval and modification appointment of a new member of staff; however, in such cases, the School should recognise that additional steps may need to be taken to market the programme and that adequate sized teaching rooms cannot be guaranteed as approval of the new module has fallen outside of normal timetabling procedures. It is essential that students are aware of any modifications to their chosen programme. Modifications need to have been approved in time to allow them to be reflected in the documentation given to students at the beginning of each year. 8.3 Programmes cannot be advertised as being available in UCAS and College documents or on-line until they have been approved, however because of the long lead-in times for the publication of this information, programmes can be advertised as being available subject to formal approval. 9. Setting up modules on SITS 9.1 During 2012/13 it was agreed that from 2013/14 module approvals will be via an online system (OPAMA). 9.2 Once the School has put the details of the new module or modification onto OPAMA, SITS will be automatically updated with the relevant information. QAS will be informed of the online information and will make a final check on the information recorded. 10. Publication of programme specifications 10.1 As discussed in paragraph 3.5 of Section A Introduction, the regulatory status of programme specifications and therefore their importance as providers of accurate information to staff and students requires their publication on only one occasion a year and via one central source; QAS is authorised by the Academic Board as this central source. Before publication each year Schools will be required to confirm the accuracy of their programme specifications for the following year. 13

24 11. Diagram of the approval process Procedures for programme and module approval and modification Seek Initial approval from Head of School Advance notice of new programme approvals submitted to CEC and PDAC through annual reporting Submit Programme Proposal form to PDAC for approval; Programmes can be advertised as subject to approval once initial approval given PDAC approve joint awards with another institution (where required) Design programme with reference to: QAA Framework for higher education qualifications QAA subject benchmark (if applicable) College requirements/policies A3 Regulations for taught programmes Requirements of professional, statutory or regulatory bodies (if applicable) Specialist external input Legal and good practice requirements of equality and diversity Identify for programmes and modules Level in the credit framework Aims and objectives Content, structure, learning outcomes Associated modules and status thereof (programmes only) Teaching patterns and modes of delivery Assessment methods Consult Marketing Department for advice on producing a marketing plan to inform the business plan QAS for advice on a Memorandum of Agreement with external bodies (if applicable) QAS if separate programme regulations are required Admissions Office for advice on entry profile Test Technological and pedagogical aspects of distance/e-learning programmes Complete as appropriate: Programme specification and associated programme approval forms, business plan Memorandum of Agreement (if applicable) Module approval form Modification form and new or amended programme specification and regulations if applicable Seek Ethical approval if needed for modules Submit all paperwork to SEC Programme Approval Panel for approval: well in advance for new programmes/modules/major modifications in good time for minor modifications Following approval by SEC and signing of approval forms, send papers, to include Memorandum of Agreement (if applicable), to QAS If appropriate, submit programme regulations to QAS for approval by the Academic Board QAS check paperwork, forward to PDAC for final approval; summary reports are submitted to Academic Board Details of new and modified programmes and modules added to SITS by SDA allowing applications and registration of students 14

25 Section C Procedures for the approval and monitoring of collaborative provision

26

27 1. Partnership policy Procedures for the approval and monitoring of collaborative provision 1.1 The purpose of the Partnerships policy detailed in paragraphs 1.1 to 7.1 below is to support the development and management of partnerships in a manner that advances the College s academic reputation and manages quality assurance, financial and other risks. 2. Strategic considerations 2.1 The College s Strategic Plan commits King s to enhance its global position and standing. As part of this aim, different types of partnership with other HEIs and other institutions can serve the College in a variety of ways. Many partnerships that are appropriate at a departmental or divisional level are not best suited to other departments or divisions but these relationships should not be discouraged if they enhance research, knowledge transfer, learning and student experience capacities. 2.2 Whether at College, School, Department or Division level, all partnerships should be evaluated using the same quality criteria, as well as following the same quality assurance processes. The College s Partnerships policy distinguishes between partnerships not in terms of expectations about the merits or assurance conditions for a successful linkage, but where the primary distinction is drawn is over the breadth of the partnership arrangement and the expected source for funding partnership activities. What distinguishes the small number of partnerships that are recognised as College-wide, is the multi-school breadth of the College s linkages with such institutions, with College-level partnerships also signifying the College s close association with universities of comparable international standing in research and teaching (see This policy draws on and is consistent with the QAA Quality Code, chapters B3: Learning and teaching and B10: Managing higher education provision with others available at 3. Scope 3.1 This policy covers all partnerships that lead to an award of the College, or an award made jointly with another institution, or to the award of credit, or involve the exchange of staff or students (however see 3.2 below in respect of the latter). The policy also covers partnerships that lead to admission to one of the College s programmes, whether or not this is with advanced standing. The term programme/programme of study is taken to apply equally to undergraduate, taught postgraduate and research postgraduate degrees. 3.2 The policy does not cover: (a) (b) (c) stand alone research collaborations which should be arranged in collaboration with the Directorate of Research Management; clinical and other professional placements that are a requirement of a professional, statutory or regulatory body; exchanges arranged under the Erasmus scheme. 15

28 4. Principles Procedures for the approval and monitoring of collaborative provision 4.1 The following key principles will underpin all partnership activity. 4.2 Academic reputation. All partnerships entered into by the College will enhance the reputation of the College as well as the School or Schools sponsoring the partnership. Where there is a conflict between a School and the College in terms of the perceived reputational advantage of a prospective partnership, the College s interests will take precedence. 4.3 Academic standards and awards. The academic standards of awards developed and delivered through partnership arrangements, as well as students educational experiences, will be equivalent to those delivered solely by the College and will also be compatible with any relevant UK benchmarking information. 4.4 Assessment of risk. All partnership arrangements will undergo an assessment of risk prior to commencement, with a formal statement of the risk signed-off by the appropriate level of authority. Risk is categorised as high, medium or low in respect of both the partner and the type of collaborative activity. Risks to consider include: dissipation of the College s mission; dilution of the academic standards of awards and the quality of the student experience; adverse publicity and damage to reputation; financial risk; wasted effort and overstretching of School/department efforts; diversion of staff time away from core activities; preliminary travel and other costs which cannot be recouped immediately. 4.5 Consistency with strategy. All partnerships must complement the College s Strategic Plan and International Strategy. 4.6 Financial sustainability. All partnership activity entered into by the College will be financially sustainable, having been fully costed in accordance with the relevant procedures to give an indication of the direct/indirect costs to the School and department. 4.7 Legal framework. All partnerships will be regulated by College approved legally binding agreements setting out the responsibilities and obligations of the College and the partner organisation(s). 4.8 Programme management. For a partnership leading to an award or the award of credit, the College s management of the programme or module shall operate in the same way as internal provision with formal approval and review through the College s programme and module approval and review processes (see Sections B, D, E and F). Where the activity leads to an award of the College this will be supplemented by central support for the agreement of a partner, the approval of the academic provision and management of records including the register of collaborative provision. Management arrangements will be specified in the Memorandum of Agreement. Admissions: admissions processes will take account of both partners criteria, regulations and policy requirements. 16