Content
Program Accreditation - Procedures
Parent policy: Program Accreditation and Course Approval – Governing Policy
Responsible officer: Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Approval authority: Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Approval date: 5 February 2009
Last amended:
Effective starting date: 1 March 2009
These procedures must be read in conjunction with the Program Accreditation and Course Approval – Governing Policy.
The procedures do not apply to higher degrees by research.
Contents
Part A: Timeframes for program accreditation
A1 Timelines
A1.1 Faculties plan and progress all proposed new program developments so that:
- sufficient time is allowed for informed consideration of, and decision-making based on, the merit and academic integrity of proposed new program developments and their associated resource and other implications
- the accreditation of a new University program is finalised by no later than six months prior to the teaching period in which it is to be first offered.
A1.2 Each year the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit sets timelines covering a two-year period, in consultation with relevant parties, to ensure timely progression of accreditation proposals so that programs are accredited in time to:
- meet Queensland Tertiary Admissions Centre (QTAC) publication deadlines (nine months in advance)
- meet legislative requirement set by the Commonwealth to report comprehensive program information annually to Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) in the Course of Study and Campus files
- provide accurate and timely information for the University’s annual load modelling exercises
- obtain registration of programs to be made available to international students for inclusion in the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS) and allocation of CRICOS Codes
- enter new records and update and validate program data in the Student Information System and produce accurate enrolment information for students
- develop and model University timetables for forthcoming teaching periods and resolve any issues
- provide accurate and timely information for prospective students through various marketing activities, especially in light of timing of QTAC offer rounds
- adjust plans, budgets and priorities in light of any additional resource requirements associated with new programs
- obtain or provide needed resources in sufficient time.
A2 Variation to timelines
A2.1 In exceptional circumstances, approval may be granted to expedite the accreditation processes through a minor variation of the procedures in Section B10 below, whereby the Chairperson of the Learning and Teaching Committee (LTC) or Research Degrees Committee (RDC), as appropriate, acts on behalf on the relevant Committee in considering a proposal for accreditation.
A2.2 In the event that a Faculty believes that there is compelling reason to expedite accreditation of a program, the relevant Dean makes written application to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC), through the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit, for approval to expedite.
A2.3 The written request outlines:
- the compelling reasons for requesting expedition
- the consequences if the expedited process were not followed
- the anticipated accreditation timeline.
A2.4 The DVC makes a decision on the request and provides the relevant Dean and Academic Committees and Program Support Unit with written advice of that decision.
A2.5 The Chairperson of the relevant committee reports to the ensuing meeting of the committee on the action taken on the committee’s behalf.
A2.6 The expedited process approved by the DVC relates to University level committees, faculties at their discretion and with the approval of the relevant committees can identify a similar expedited process for the faculty level committees.
Back to top
Part B: Stages and steps for accreditation
Notes:
1. There are 13 stages involved in accreditation of a new program as identified in the following procedures.
2. When a program is accredited, all new courses, majors and minors included in the accreditation documentation (other than courses documented using only the Course Synopses template) are approved for offer.
3. Any new course documented only as a Course Synopsis must:
(a) be clearly identified in any marketing or information materials as being “available subject to final approval”;
(b) if granted provisional approval by the Academic Board:
- be fully documented subsequently using the Course Outline template
- subsequently be deemed by the Learning and Teaching Committee (LTC) to be appropriate for offer, at which time the provisional approval becomes the final approval of the Academic Board; and
(c) not be offered until final approval is granted.
B1 Stage 1 - Program Bulletin
B1.1 Staff who wish to propose development of a new program submit a brief proposal to the relevant Faculty Executive (or equivalent) for consideration.
B1.2 Where cross-faculty or combined degree programs are proposed, the proposers consult with all interested parties and identify the lead faculty for development of the program and submit the brief proposal to all relevant Faculty Executives.
B1.3 If the (lead) Faculty Executive supports the proposed development, it advises the proposers to draft a Program Bulletin using the relevant template (refer to Appendix 1).
B1.4 The Program Bulletin for a new program includes the following information:
- proposed title of new program
- faculty or faculties to offer the program
- rationale for program
- paragraph stating main focus, content and duration
- proposed date of first intake
- name of contact person for further information and to whom comments or views on the proposal should be forwarded
- closing date for submission of comments and views.
B1.5 The proposers submit an e-copy of the Program Bulletin to the relevant Dean who forwards the e-copy to the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit.
B1.6 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit forwards the Program Bulletin to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC) for consideration.
B1.7 The DVC discusses any issues related to the proposed program development with the relevant Dean.
B1.8 If the DVC decides that the Program Bulletin should be released for information, the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit is advised.
B1.9 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit informs relevant University personnel by email of the release of the Program Bulletin.
B1.10 Copies of Program Bulletins released for information are made available through the Staff Portal.
B1.11 Summary of major steps related to Program Bulletin:
| Steps |
Action |
Resposibility |
| 1 |
Initial concept for new program considered by Faculty Executive |
Faculty Executive |
| 2 |
Program Bulletin drafted and submitted to Dean |
Staff proposing new program development |
| 3 |
Dean submits Program Bulletin to Deputy Vice Chancellor (DVC) through Academic Committees and Program Support Unit |
Dean |
| 4 |
DVC decides whether Program Bulletin to be released |
DVC |
| 5 |
Academic Committees and Program Support Unit advises of release of Program Bulletin |
Academic Committees and Program Support Unit |
B2 Stage 2 - Program Development
B2.1 After the closing date for submissions in response to the Program Bulletin, the program proposers advise the Faculty Executive of the substance of submissions received and, as advised by the Executive, undertake consultations concerning any issues raised.
B2.2 Subject to Faculty Executive being satisfied that there has been satisfactory resolution of any issues raised, the Faculty establishes a Program Development Team (PDT), or equivalent. In the case of proposed cross-faculty or combined degree programs the PDT comprises staff from each relevant faculty.
B2.3 The PDT develops the proposed program in line with any faculty requirements and processes, ensuring that:
(a) consultations are held with all parties:
(i) with a legitimate interest in the proposed program, including for example other faculties and service areas of the University, potential employers, professional and registration bodies, relevant Academic Advisory Committee;
(ii) for whom there may be resource, legal or administrative implications with the proposed program, including for example USC International, Information Technology Services, Information Services, Student Administration, Capital Programs and Operations, and Marketing and Communications;
(b) input is sought from other appropriate sources with expertise relevant to development of the program, for example curriculum designers and developers within or beyond the University;
(c) the program is designed and developed consistent with –
- the Australian Qualifications Framework and associated guidelines and principles
- any applicable legislation and statutory requirements (e.g. Education Services for Overseas Students [ESOS] Act and Code)
- any applicable plans, rules, policies and procedures within the University
- any applicable resolutions of the Council or Academic Board or their standing committees
- any applicable directives issued by senior staff of the University
- any standards for external recognition, registration or accreditation of the proposed program or potential graduates
- relevant guidelines and good practice in program design and development for programs of that type; and
(d) the program is designed and developed so as to meet all criteria for accreditation of a program as provided in the parent policy.
B3 Stage 3 - Initial Accreditation Documentation
B3.1 The Program Development Team (PDT) documents the proposed new program including resource needs using:
(a) the Program Proposal template;
(b) the Program Outline template; and
(c) resource impact statement pro formas developed by Facilities Management, Information Services, and Information Technology Services.
Back to top
B3.2 Program Proposal
B3.2.1 The Program Proposal is the case made for introduction of the proposed new program and it includes, but is not restricted to, the following information:
- award title and abbreviation
- field of education
- level (undergraduate, postgraduate)
- time of first intake
- duration (completion time)
- locations and modes of delivery
- availability to international students
- total unit value
- rationale and benefits, including alignment with strategic priorities, directions and market evidence
- processes for overall program development
- any phase-out and transitional arrangements where the new program is to replace a current program
- current staff who will teach in program, including summary details and areas of teaching and research
- intake and enrolment projections
- summary of issues and outcomes from consultations with key interested parties
- plans for future development of the program.
B3.3 Program Outline
B3.3.1 The Program Outline is the detailed description of the proposed new program that is used to assess the academic integrity of that program and which forms the basis for provision of information to students, intending students, the University community and the public concerning the program.
B3.3.2 The Program Outline includes, but is not restricted to, the following information:
- proposed title, duration, total unit value
- aims and intended learning of the program
- entry requirements and pathways
- program structure
- available majors and minors
- summary of teaching and assessment methods employed across the program
- program completion requirements
- professional recognition, registration and accreditation of program and graduates
- pathways to further study
- pathways to employment
- appendices documenting details of all new courses (Course Outlines or Course Synopses) and providing summaries of current approved courses (Course Abstracts) that are to be offered in the program (Using the relevant course templates).
B3.3.3 Course Details
(a) Course Outlines
All proposed new courses to be included in the program are appendices to the Program Outline and are documented using the Course Outline template, except where (b) below applies.
(b) Course Synopses
(i) In some circumstances full development and documentation of new courses to be undertaken in the second or subsequent years of offer of a proposed new program may not be possible. In these cases the PDT may temporarily substitute a Course Synopsis for the relevant Course Outline when documenting the program. Consultations should be held with any relevant external professional body to confirm the acceptability of this substitution for meeting conditions for any provisional or full accreditation of the program.
(ii) Course synopses are documented using the Course Synopses template and include the following information:
- course title (and, at later stages of documentation, the course code)
- status and level in the program structure (e.g. compulsory advanced level course, optional elective, required as part of major or minor)
- intended first year and teaching period of offer for the course, e.g. Semester 2, 2010
- prerequisite/s, co-requisites, anti-requisites
- course purpose and content summary (containing information on the rationale, intended outcomes from course, and overview of content)
- unit value
- field of education (FOE)
- fee type (for example, Commonwealth supported or fee-paying).
(iii) New courses documented only as Course Synopses are provisionally approved by Academic Board on the condition that they must be fully documented using the Course Outline template and be deemed by the Learning and Teaching Committee to be appropriate for offer, by no later than three months before they will be first offered.
(c) Course Abstracts
Currently approved courses that will be included in the program are documented in a consolidated set of course abstracts (similar to Website Handbook summaries).
B3.4 Resource Impact Statements
B3.4.1 Resource Impact Statements detail the resource needs and implications of the proposed program (or its component courses) for provision of support and services by each of Facilities Management, Information Services (especially the Library) and Information Technology Services.
B3.4.2 Each proforma is developed and made available by the relevant service organisation.
B4 Stage 4 - Consideration of Program Proposal and Program Outline by Faculty Committees
B4.1 The Program Development Team (PDT) submits the Program Proposal and Program Outline to the relevant Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee/s and relevant Faculty Academic Advisory Committee/s.
B4.2 The committees consider the documentation at their respective meetings and minutes are made of the discussion and any related recommendations.
B4.3 The committees forward the relevant minutes (or extract) including any recommendations to the PDT and the relevant Dean.
B4.4 The PDT makes any needed changes to the proposed program and related accreditation documentation and provides the Faculty Office with a copy of the current accreditation documentation, including the completed Resource Impact Statements.
B4.5 Summary of major steps related to Faculty committees’ input:
| Step |
Action |
Responsibility |
| 1 |
Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee/s and Academic Advisory Committee/s consider Program Proposal and Program Outline and provide advice and minutes to PDT and Dean |
Chairpersons/secretaries of FLTCs and FAACs
|
| 2 |
Program redesign and documentation in line with any required changes |
Program Development Team |
| 3 |
Accreditation documentation and Impact Statements submitted to Faculty Office |
Program Development Team |
Back to top
B5 Stage 5 - Program and Course Codes and Files; Referral of Impact Statements
B5.1 The Faculty Office provides Student Administration with a copy of the Program Proposal and Program Outline to date and requests Student Administration to allocate a new Program Code and Course Codes for any new courses.
B5.2 Student Administration allocates the codes and advises the Faculty Office of these.
B5.3 The Faculty Office requests Records Management Services to create a new University file for the proposed program and for each new course allocated a code.
B5.4 Records Management Services creates new files and advises the Faculty Office of the relevant file numbers.
B5.5 The PDT updates the initial accreditation documentation and Resource Impact Statements to include program and course codes and file numbers.
B5.6 The Faculty Office provides Facilities Management, Information Services and Information Technology Services with a copy of the Program Proposal and Program Outline to date and the relevant completed resource impact statement.
B5.7 Summary of major steps related to program and course codes and files, and referral of impact statements:
| Steps |
Action |
Responsibility |
| 1 |
Program and course codes allocated |
Student Administration |
| 2 |
Official University files created |
Records Management Services |
| 3 |
Program Proposal, Outline and Impact Statements updated to include codes and file numbers |
Program Development Team
|
| 4 |
Program Proposal, Outline and Impact Statements forwarded to Facilities Management, IS and ITS for input |
Faculty Office |
B6 Stage 6 - Response to Impact Statements and Development of Business Case
B6.1 Facilities Management, Information Services and Information Technology Services provide the designated contact for the program and the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit with documented input in response to the relevant Resource Impact Statement.
B6.2 The Program Development Team considers the input received in response to the Impact Statements and develops and documents a business case for introduction of the program, using the Program Business Case template.
B6.3 The Program Business Case is the case made for the financial and other resource viability of the proposed new program and it includes, but is not restricted to, the following information:
- commencing teaching period
- duration (completion time)
- location and modes of delivery
- projected program income and expenditure
- funding sources
- proposed level of fees
- projected enrolments
- proposed student types
- compulsory new courses
- staffing needs and costs
- equipment and other associated needs and costs
- summary of issues and outcomes from consultations with key interested parties and responses to completed impact statements.
B6.4 The PDT checks the updated accreditation documentation and business case for accuracy, internal and contextual consistency and completeness and then refers the complete set of documentation to the relevant Dean or, in the case of a cross-faculty or combined degree program, to each relevant Dean.
B6.5 Summary of major steps related to response to impact statements and development of business case:
| Steps |
Action |
Responsibility |
| 1 |
Documented response to Impact Statement sent to designated program contact and Academic Committees and Program Support Unit |
Facilities Management, Information Services, ITS |
| 2 |
Impact statement responses considered and Business Case developed and documented |
Program Development Team |
| 3 |
All documentation checked |
Program Development Team |
| 4 |
Complete documentation referred to Dean/s |
Program Development team |
B7 Stage 7 - Consideration by Dean and follow-up
B7.1 The relevant Deans consider the documentation in consultation with the relevant Head/s of School, taking into account the support or otherwise of the HOS, the criteria for accreditation provided in the parent policy and any others matters of relevance.
B7.2 The relevant Deans initiate actions for addressing any resource issues arising from responses to Impact Statements.
B7.3 If the relevant Deans are satisfied that resource issues have been adequately addressed and that accreditation should be sought, the Dean of the lead faculty signs the relevant section of the Program Proposal and the Program Business Case and also attests that all relevant faculty committees have considered the proposed new program.
B7.4 The lead Dean arranges for a final check and proofing of the documentation.
B7.5 The lead Dean arranges for a hard copy set of the complete accreditation documentation, together with PDF e-copies, to be submitted to the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit and for the “master” signed set of accreditation documentation to be registered and recorded in the relevant program and course files on the University’s Records Management System (RecFind).
B7.6 Summary of major steps related to Head of School and Dean input and related follow-up
| Steps |
Action |
Responsibility |
| 1 |
Dean in consultation with the relevant HOS considers Program Proposal, Program Outline and Program Business Case and initiates any action to address resource issues |
Dean |
| 2 |
Dean signifies if accreditation should be sought and that all faculty committees have considered the proposed program |
Dean |
| 3 |
Dean arranges final check of accuracy of documentation, submission of Program Proposal, Program Outline and Program Business Case to Academic Committees and Program Support Unit and capture of “master” signed documentation in RecFind |
Dean |
B8 Stage 8 – Progression of Program Business Case
B8.1 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit checks the Program Business Case for completeness and clarity, accuracy, internal consistency and coherence with information in the Program Proposal and Program Outline and liaises with relevant Faculty staff in order for appropriate actions to be taken to address any issues and for amended documentation to be submitted where needed.
B8.2 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit forwards the Program Business Case together with the associated Program Proposal and Program Outline to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC).
B8.3 The DVC considers the documentation and consults as needed during this process.
B8.4 In the case of a proposed program that requires accreditation by the Council, the DVC refers the Business Case and any other relevant documentation to the Planning and Resources Committee (PRC) for consideration, and in referring the documentation may provide the PRC with comment on the proposed program and associated Business Case.
B8.5 In the case of any other proposed program, the DVC takes such actions as seem appropriate, which may include, for example:
(a) providing advice to the relevant Dean/s concerning the Business Case;
(b) requesting or requiring the Dean to revise the Business Case;
(c) referring the Business Case to PRC for consideration and advice;
(d) directing the Dean to withdraw the proposal to accredit the program for the time being on the grounds of the current Business Case made for the program.
B8.6 Where Council is the accrediting authority for a proposed program:
(a) the relevant minute of the PRC’s consideration of the case is forwarded to Council by staff providing support services to the PRC; and
(b) Council considers the relevant minute alongside other documentation related to the proposed program.
B8.7 Where the DVC requests or requires a Dean to revise a Business Case or to withdraw a proposal for accreditation, the DVC advises the Dean of this in writing (email is sufficient) and also advises the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit of any required actions arising from a Business Case.
B8.8 The relevant Dean is responsible for advising, and liaising with, all relevant parties regarding submission of any revised or replacement Business Case or the withdrawal of an accreditation proposal.
B8.9 The DVC, in relation to the resource and viability-related criteria for accreditation as given in the parent policy, provides the Academic Board with advice and recommendations arising from consideration of the Business Case for a proposed program for which the Board is the accrediting authority.
B8.10 Summary of major steps related to progression of Business Case:
| Steps |
Action |
Responsibility |
| 1 |
Business Case, Program Outline and Program Proposal forwarded to DVC |
Academic Committees and Program Support Unit |
| 2 |
DVC considers Business Case, consults and determines initial course of action |
DVC |
| 3 |
Where the Business Case is to be considered by PRC, relevant documentation referred to PRC |
DVC
|
| 4 |
Where considered by PRC and Council is the accrediting authority, minute of PRC’s consideration forwarded to Council |
PRC and its support staff |
| 5 |
Council considers PRC advice and recommendations on Business Case where relevant |
Council |
| 6 |
If considered by PRC and Council is not the accrediting authority, minute of PRC’s consideration provided to DVC |
PRC and its support staff |
| 7 |
DVC determines course of action based on any advice from PRC and advises Dean and Academic Committees and Program Support Unit |
DVC |
| 8 |
Dean advises and liaises with all relevant parties in any resubmission of Business Case or related actions |
Dean |
| 9 |
Academic Board advised of advice and recommendations related to resource and viability criteria relevant to accreditation of proposed program |
DVC |
Back to top
B9 Stage 9 - Progression of Program Proposal and Program Outline to Deans Group
B9.1 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit checks the accreditation documentation for completeness and clarity, accuracy, internal consistency, compliance and consistency with relevant University and external reference points, and liaises with relevant Faculty staff in order for appropriate actions to be taken to address any issues and for amended documentation to be submitted where needed.
B9.2 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit includes information on the proposed program in a summary sheet of program and course developments that are to be progressed in the current round through key collegial and decision-making bodies.
B9.3 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit forwards the Program Proposal and Program Outline and summary sheet to the Deans Group.
B9.4 Deans Group considers the Program Proposal and Program Outline, paying particular attention to the potential impact on other programs and the extent to which the program might replicate or overlap with any current University offerings.
B9.5 Deans Group advises the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit of any comments and recommendations it may have on the proposed program.
B10 Stage 10 - Progression of the Program Proposal and Program Outline to Learning and Teaching Committee or Research Degrees Committee
B10.1 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit forwards the accreditation documentation and summary sheet including comments and recommendations from Deans Group to the Learning and Teaching Committee (LTC) or Research Degrees Committee (RDC) as appropriate.
B10.2 The Chairperson, LTC or RDC can determine that the accreditation documentation is incomplete or under-developed and delay the consideration of the proposal by LTC or RDC until such time as the faculty has responded to the Chairperson’s concerns regarding the quality of the accreditation documentation.
B10.3 LTC or RDC considers the academic merit of the program on the basis of the accreditation and related documentation and:
(a) resolves to recommend that the proposed new program as currently documented be accredited; or
(b) resolves to recommend that the proposed new program as currently documented be accredited subject to identified amendments being made to the proposed new program and associated documentation; or
(c) resolves that the proposed new program and associated documentation should be revised by the relevant faculty/faculties in light of matters identified by the Committee and subsequently be submitted to the Committee for further consideration; or
(d) makes such other resolutions as may be appropriate.
B10.4 If unqualified accreditation is recommended, the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit refers the accreditation documentation and relevant extract from the Committee’s minutes to the Academic Board for consideration.
B10.5 If accreditation is recommended subject to amendments being made [under item B10.3 (b)]:
(a) the relevant Faculty is advised to make the amendments and submit to the Chairperson of the Committee, through the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit, the amended documentation together with a written response to the matters identified, including a statement detailing the changes made to the documentation (with page references); and
(b) the Chairperson of the Committee reviews the amended documentation then forwards it to the Academic Board through the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit. (The Chairperson may raise with the Academic Board any matters related to the amended documentation.)
B10.6 Where revision is recommended [under item B10.3 (c)]:
(a) the relevant Faculty is advised to revise the proposed program and associated documentation and submit new documentation to the Committee together with a written response to the matters identified including an outline of changes made;
(b) the Committee reviews the revised documentation and makes an appropriate resolution; and
(c) the Committee refers the accreditation documentation and relevant extract from the Committee’s minutes to the Academic Board through the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit for consideration.
B11 Stage 11 - Progression of Program Proposal and Program Outline to Academic Board
B11.1 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit forwards the latest version of the Program Proposal and Program Outline and associated extracts from minutes of the LTC/RDC to the Academic Board.
B11.2 Academic Board considers the Program Proposal and Program Outline , related documentation and advice from the Deputy Vice-Chancellor concerning program resources and viability in light of the criteria for accreditation of programs, and:
(a) resolves to accredit the program subject to the standard conditions of accreditation as specified in the parent policy and any other conditions that the Academic Board may impose, identifying when the program will be offered for the first time; or
(b) resolves to recommend to Council that it accredit the program as currently documented subject to standard conditions of accreditation as specified in the parent policy; or
(c) resolves to accredit the program, or recommend to Council that it accredit the program, subject to:
(i) specific amendments being made to the proposed new program and associated documentation to the satisfaction of the Chairperson Academic Board; and
(ii) the standard conditions of accreditation as specified in the parent policy; or
(d) resolves not to accredit or not to recommend accreditation of the program in the form in which it is currently documented; or
(e) makes such other resolutions as may be appropriate.
B11.3 Where accreditation is recommended to Council, the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit refers the accreditation documentation and relevant extract from the Academic Board’s minutes to the Council for consideration.
B11.4 Where accreditation is subject to any required amendments being made [under item B11.2(c)]:
(a) the relevant Faculty is advised to make the amendment and submit to the Chairperson Academic Board, through the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit, the amended documentation together with a covering statement detailing the changes made to the documentation (with page references);
(b) the Chairperson, Academic Board reviews the amended documentation and if satisfied that the required amendments have been made attests to this in writing and forwards the attestation to the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit; and
(c) if the Academic Board is the accrediting authority, the program:
(i) is accredited (with the standard conditions of accreditation) from the date of the Chairperson’s attestation; and
(ii) may be offered from the time specified in the amended documentation; or
(d) if Council is the accrediting authority, the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit forwards the amended documentation and attestation to the Council for consideration.
B12 Stage 12 - Progression of the Program Proposal and Program Outline to Council
B12.1 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit forwards to Council the latest version of the accreditation documentation, associated extracts from minutes of the Academic Board and any attestation from the Chairperson of the Academic Board.
B12.2 Council considers the accreditation and related documentation, including relevant extracts from Planning and Resources Committee minutes, in light of the criteria for accreditation of programs, and:
(a) resolves to accredit the program subject to the standard conditions of accreditation as specified in the parent policy and any other conditions that the Council may impose, identifying when the program will be offered for the first time; or
(b) resolves not to accredit the program in the form in which it is currently documented; or
(c) makes such other resolutions as may be appropriate.
B13 Stage 13 - Post-accreditation matters
B13.1 The staff delivering secretariat services to Council or the Academic Board provide written advice to all relevant parties of the outcome of final considerations concerning proposals for accreditation.
B13.2 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit provides written advice to relevant parties concerning important matters that must be attended to post-accreditation, including:
(a) Course Synopses to be replaced by fully documented Course Outlines that require final approval prior to offer, the indicative dates for progression of the Outlines for consideration by the Learning and Teaching Committee, and the need to annotate information on the relevant courses on the University’s Website and in other marketing or promotional material with “Course is subject to final approval”;
(b) where the program is to be made available to on-shore international students, the need to make application for registration of the program for inclusion in the Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS) and allocation of a CRICOS Code for the program;
(c) the need to include or update information on the program on the University’s Website, including information related to the program’s availability to international students depending on CRICOS registration; and
(d) the need to make the Program Outline (excluding the appendices) available to students and staff through a central faculty location on the Staff and Student Portals.
Back to top
Part C: Records management
C1 The Faculty proposing accreditation of a new program is responsible for initiating action with Records Management Services to create new files for the proposed program and all associated new courses.
C2 The Faculty is responsible for ensuring that:
(a) all versions of the accreditation, associated new course documentation, impact statements and business case, up to and including the versions forwarded to the Academic Committees and Program Support Unit for submission to Deans Group, are recorded in the relevant files and registered in RecFind; and
(b) the final versions of the program as accredited and of each new course approved as part of the accreditation, including any amendments required to be made as part of the accreditation, are recorded in the relevant files and registered in RecFind; and
(c) a copy of the accredited version of the Program Outline is made available to staff and students through the Portal.
C3 Staff providing secretariat services to the Learning and Teaching Committee or Research Degrees Committee (as appropriate), Academic Board and Council are responsible for ensuring that the versions of the accreditation and associated new course documentation considered by the relevant body together with related documentation including extracts from minutes are recorded in the relevant files and registered in RecFind.
C4 Staff providing secretariat services to the Planning and Resources Committee are responsible for ensuring that all documentation considered by the Committee in relation to the Business Case for a proposed program together with related documentation, including extracts from minutes, are recorded in the relevant program file and registered in RecFind.
C5 The Academic Committees and Program Support Unit is responsible for ensuring that records of Program Bulletins, Summary Sheets presented to Deans Group and related post-accreditation matters are recorded in the relevant program files and registered in RecFind.
Appendix follows
Appendix 1: List of templates
Program related
Program Bulletin – New Program*
Program Proposal*
Program Business Case*
Program Outline*
Program Bulletin – Substantial Change
Proposal to Make a Substantial Change to a Program
Proposal to Make a Limited Change to a Program
Program Bulletin – Discontinuation
Proposal to Discontinue a Program
Program Bulletin – Suspend an Intake
Proposal to Suspend an Intake
Course related
New Course Proposal
Course Outline**
Course Synopses#
Request for Final Approval of a Course(s)##
Proposal to Make a Substantial Change to a Course
Proposal to Discontinue a Course
* Use these templates when proposing a new program
** Use this template for new courses to be introduced as part of the new program
# Use this template for new courses that have not yet been fully developed and that will be offered in years later than the first year of offer
## Use this template and the Course Outline when seeking final approval for courses initially documented as Course Synopses
Location of templates
The Program templates are available on the Staff Portal at:
Community>Academic Committees and Program Support Unit>Curriculum Accreditation and Approval>Programs>Templates
The Course templates are available on the Staff Portal at:
Community>Academic Committees and Program Support Unit>Curriculum Accreditation and Approval>Courses>Templates
END
Back to top