HCT ACADEMIC QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL

Transcription

1 HCT ACADEMIC QUALITY ASSURANCE MANUAL

2 Contents Chapter 1: Higher Colleges of Technology: Overview 1.1 Chapter 2: Quality Assurance Framework 2.1 Quality Assurance Framework 2.1 Evaluation of the Quality Assurance Framework 2.1 Chapter 3: Key Structures for Quality Assurance 3.1 Governance 3.1 Organizational Effectiveness (OE) Department 3.4 Academic Affairs Division 3.4 Campus Operations Division 3.8 Education Technologies Division 3.9 Central Communications Unit 3.10 Policy and Procedures 3.10 Chapter 4: Design, Approval and Modification of Programs 4.1 Structures & Responsibilities 4.1 National Qualifications Framework 4.2 Program Design 4.5 Program and Curricula Change 4.10 Accreditation 4.15 Policy and Procedures 4.15 Chapter 5: Academic Program Quality Review 5.1 Structures & Responsibilities 5.1 Programme Quality Review Framework 5.2 Programme Learning Outcome Assessment 5.5 Annual Academic Programme Audit 5.13 Cyclical Programme Review 5.17 Policy and Procedures 5.21 Chapter 6: Course Quality Review 6.1 Structures & Responsibilities 6.1 Processes 6.3 Chapter 7: Assessment and Grading 7.1 Structures & Responsibilities 7.1 Assessment Processes 7.3 Grading Processes 7.6 Policy and Procedures 7.9

3 Chapter 8: Faculty 8.1 Structures and Responsibilities 8.1 Processes 8.2 Professional development 8.5 Research 8.6 Policy and Procedures 8.7 Chapter 9: Students 9.1 Structures and Responsibilities 9.1 Processes 9.2 Policy and Procedures 9.5 Chapter 10: Teaching and Learning Resources 10.1 Structures & Responsibilities 10.1 Processes 10.2 Policy and Procedures 10.4 Chapter 11: Public Information - Academic Programs 11.1 Structures and Responsibilities 11.1 Processes 11.1 Publications 11.2 Chapter 12: Academic Information Management 12.1 Structures and Responsibilities 12.1 Information Sources 12.1 Chapter 13: Cyclical External Quality Assurance 13.1 Structures and Responsibilities 13.1 Processes 13.2 Policy and Procedure 13.2

4 Chapter 1: Higher Colleges of Technology Vision, Mission and Strategic Plan Contents Background 1.1 HCT HCT Vision 1.2 HCT Mission 1.2 Strategic Plan 1.2 Background In 1985, H.E. Sheikh Nahayan Mabarak Al Nahayan, Chancellor of the United Arab Emirates University, made a commitment to establish a new system of post-secondary education for UAE Nationals that would stress the ideals of productivity, self-determination and excellence. His Excellency envisioned a system of the highest quality that would be used to educate Nationals for the professional and technical careers necessary in a rapidly developing society. In fulfillment of that vision, the Higher Colleges of Technology (HCT) was established in 1988 by Federal Law No 2 issued by the Late Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, may his soul rest in peace. Four colleges commenced that year. Since then, thirteen additional colleges and the Center of Excellence for Applied Research and Training (CERT) have opened throughout the Emirates to form the system of the Higher Colleges of Technology. The system of the Higher Colleges of Technology (HCT) is a community of more than 23,000 students and 2,000 staff based on 16 modern, technology-enhanced campuses in Abu Dhabi, Al Ain, Dubai, Fujairah, Madinat Zayed, Ras Al Khaimah, Ruwais and Sharjah, making it the largest higher education institution in the UAE. HCT 2.0 HCT 2.0 is the process designed to drive the transformation of the institution over the next 5 years in order to ensure its continuing success. Some of the justifications for this transformation include the following. Meeting Key Internal Challenges: Students Academics Partnerships Enablers Preparing for the Future: 21st century skills gap 1.1

5 Job market is evolving significantly Technology megatrends underway Moving towards performance based funding Meeting National Aspirations: Alignment with UAE National Agenda Vision 2021 Excellence in service offering Embedding a culture of innovation Best value for money HCT Vision The Higher Colleges of Technology is the leading applied higher education institution in empowering generations to contribute to the shaping of the future of the UAE. HCT Mission Provide applied higher education to equip generations with knowledge, skills and competencies that meet international standards and the future needs of the UAE industry and society. HCT Strategic Plan The HCT has developed the following five key, strategic goals which reflect HCT s strategic directions and aspirations. These goals are each linked to 15 specific outcomes, which in turn relate to 25 specific initiatives which HCT will undertake over the five-year HCT 2.0 plan. Goal 1 Empowering students with 21st century skills in a vibrant campus environment engaged with their local communities Strategic Outcomes Students who are well informed about programs and career choices HCT community are involved in global interactions and have a strong positive impact on local community Students strongly affiliated to HCT and actively engaged in a vibrant student community and campus environment Strategic Initiatives G1-I1. Overhaul of academic advising program. G1- I2. Launch of new campaign to drive vibrancy of student life. G1-I3. Enhancement of student services app. for automation and community engagement. G1-I4. Enhancement of career services to have a more integral role in student career development. G1-I5. Enhancement of student community service programs for community outreach. 1.2

6 Goal 2 Continuous improvement of academic programs, faculty and scholarship activities to meet high quality standards and industry requirements Strategic Outcomes Highly qualified, pedagogically and technologically skilled and engaged faculty Industry-relevant curriculum, with greater flexibility for student choice Culture of scholarship institutionalized across the organization Equivalency of learning experience across campuses Strategic Initiatives G2-I1. Institutionalization of program excellence and quality assurance. G2-I2. Restructuring of program offerings in alignment with NQF and industry. G2-I3. Full adoption of Smart Learning. G2-I4. National and international accreditation. G2-I5. Enhancement and extension of faculty professional development program. G2-I6. Institutionalization of applied research Goal 3 Engagement of strategic partnerships to foster strong connections with industry, higher education institutions, alumni and high schools Strategic Outcomes Systematic and focused engagement of industry in sponsorship, curricula setting and work placement Systematic and focused engagement of HCT alumni as advocates Attraction of academically-ready high school graduates to HCT Strategic Initiatives G3-I1. Creation of targeted approach to actively engage partners from strategic sectors. G3-I2. Creation of active alumni community program G3-I3. Establishment of connection program between HCT and high schools G3-I4. Establishment of customer service call center and help desks 1.3

7 Goal 4 Provision of quality and efficient administrative services with effective governance Strategic Outcomes Effective, efficient and standardized multi-campus operations Efficient and effective utilization of financial resources Highly skilled, engaged & motivated staff Use of technologies aligned with UAE smart government initiative Strategic Initiatives G4-I1. Establishment of strategic recruitment process for employees. G4-I2. Establishment of engagement scheme throughout employee career. G4-I3. Institutionalization of structured career progression system for all employees. G4-I4. Creation and communication of organization-wide policies and guidelines. G4-I5. Optimisation of financial planning. G4-I6. Review of organization structure and governance model. Goal 5 Embedding of innovation culture in the institutional environment Strategic Outcomes Culture of innovation institutionalized with support structures in place across the organization Strategic Initiatives G5-I1. Creation and setup of innovation and learning spaces. G5-I2. Building of innovation capabilities for employees. 1.4

8 Chapter 2: Academic Quality Assurance Framework Contents Academic Quality Assurance Framework 2.1 Institutional Quality Assurance Framework 2.1 Evaluation of the Academic Quality Assurance Framework 2.1 Academic Quality Assurance Framework The Academic Quality Assurance Framework has been adapted from the Standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area, May The Framework sets out the structures, responsibilities, processes and timelines for ensuring that academic programs are fit-for-purpose, viable, and meet national and international standards, and that students have a comparable educational experience regardless of where they study. The HCT Framework consists of the components listed below each of which is described in following Chapters. 3. Key Structures for Quality Assurance 4. Design, Approval and Modification of Programs 5. Academic Program Quality Review 6. Course Quality Review 7. Assessment and Grading 8. Faculty 9. Students 10. Teaching and Learning Resources 11. Public Information - Academic Programs 12. Academic Information Management 13. Cyclical External Quality Assurance Institutional Quality Assurance Framework The Institutional QA Framework includes all administrative departments, units, services and processes. The Framework is being developed as part of the ISO Integrated Management System (IMS) project which is being overseen by the HCT s Strategy and Future Division. The project is expected to be completed by the end of Evaluation of the QA Framework Internal Review The Academic Quality Assurance framework is reviewed by the Academic Council (refer Chapter 3) on a regular basis to ensure that the Framework is meeting expectations and being implemented effectively. External Review To ensure that it is fit-for-purpose, the quality assurance framework for academic programs will undergo periodic evaluation by external experts. 2.1

9 Commission for Academic Accreditation The Ministry of Education of the United Arab Emirates requires that each program of one academic year or longer leading to the award of an academic degree, certificate, or diploma is accredited by the Commission for Academic Accreditation. Accreditation for new programs lasts up to two years after the first cohort of students graduate from the program. Renewal of accreditation is required every five years. Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) The HCT is required to obtain a No Objection letter from ADEC before applying to the CAA for approval to offer a new Bachelor s or Master s program in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. The ADEC criteria look at the quality of educational provisions, access to higher education, alignment with the national development plans as well as an aspiration to establish a knowledge- based society through evaluating the impact and the value added that the new programs bring to the HE system and the Emirate of Abu Dhabi society at large. International & Professional Accrediting and Licensing Agencies In order to ensure that programs meet accepted international or professional standards, each academic program is expected to seek and obtain international or professional accreditation / licensure from an appropriate agency. Furthermore, Academic Faculties are expected to align programs with professional certifications wherever possible to ensure currency with developments and standards within the field. 2.2

10 Chapter 3: Key Structures for Academic Quality Assurance Contents Governance 3.1 Organizational Effectiveness (OE) Department 3.5 Academic Affairs Division 3.6 Campus Operations Division 3.9 Education Technologies Division 3.10 Central Communications Unit 3.11 Policy and Procedures 3.11 Governance Board of Trustees (BoT) The Board of Trustees is the highest governance body of the HCT. The Board has final approval for a number of major changes such as the establishment of new programs, length of the program, and modifications to admission requirement. Membership Membership consists of the Chancellor of the HCT (Chair), the Vice Chancellor (Secretary of the Council) and a minimum of seven members from relevant sectors of the UAE appointed by the Cabinet of the UAE. Executive Committee The Executive Committee is the senior internal HCT decision making body and also recommends policies and procedures, and major changes to the Board of Trustees. Membership The Committee is chaired by the Vice Chancellor and includes: Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Deputy Vice Chancellor Administration Deputy Vice Chancellor Campus Operations Deputy Vice Chancellor Strategic Planning & Communication Chief Financial Officer Chief Human Resources Officer Executive Director Organizational Effectiveness Department Director, Strategic Planning Academic Council (AC) The Academic Council is the highest academic committee. The AC that receives and evaluates recommendations from the Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee (see below) and endorses them for approval by the Executive Committee or Board of Trustees. 3.1

11 Membership Members are appointed by the Chancellor. The Council is chaired by the Vice Chancellor and includes: Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Deputy Vice Chancellor Administration Deputy Vice Chancellor Campus Operations Deputy Vice Chancellor Strategic Planning & Communication Executive Director Organizational Effectiveness Department Executive Deans System Registrar (ex-officio) A faculty member (ex-officio) College Director who is hosting the meeting Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee Responsibilities This Academic Management Standing Committee oversees and supports the implementation of the program quality review provision, and reports annually to Academic Council on the effectiveness of program quality review processes and activities. Terms of Reference 1. Annually review the HCT policy and procedures related to academic program quality review recommending changes, if necessary, to the Academic Council 2. Annually report to Academic Council on the effectiveness of the annual and cyclical program review processes and mechanisms recommending improvements if necessary. 3. Review and monitor processes for the assessment of programme learning outcomes, annual programme audits, and cyclical program reviews identifying issues and recommending improvements to the Executive Dean Programmes & Curricula. 4. Receive and action feedback and recommendations from Academic Faculties and other stakeholders for improvement of the program review process and mechanisms. 5. Monitor annual program audit reports and refer matters of concern including recommendations for a programme to undergo immediate cyclical program review to the Academic Council. 6. Receive and review cyclical program review reports and make recommendations for programme continuance to Academic Council. 7. Approve the timetable for the cyclical review of all academic programmes. 8. Give technical support to the Executive Dean Programmes & Curricula in the implementation of the learning outcome and program review provision across the HCT. 9. Work in a consultative capacity. 10. Any other assignments as directed by Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs. Membership Chair: Dean of Institutional and Academic Accreditation Members: six members appointed by the Academic Council 3.2

12 System-wide Curriculum Committee Responsibilities This Academic Management Standing Committee reviews proposals for new and major modifications to programs and courses to assure that programs are aligned with the HCT Mission and national standards, have appropriate academic rigor, and are adequately resourced in terms of faculty and teaching and learning resources. Terms of Reference The Curriculum Committee: 1. Reviews proposals for new and major modifications to programs and courses in terms of: 1.1. Rationale for the proposal including alignment with the HCT Mission, impact on other HCT programs, and need and demand from industry stakeholders, society, and students 1.2. Academic Rigor of the new or modified program or course including alignment with national and international standards, program structure and credit hours, learning outcomes, mode of instruction (elearning/blended, Intensive) 1.3. Resource requirements including faculty, teaching & learning resources, specialist equipment, facilities, and budget 2. Provides Academic Council with an evaluative report and recommendation for each proposal 3. Reviews HCT related policy and procedures recommending changes, if necessary, to the Academic Council 4. Reports annually to Academic Council on the effectiveness of the program development and improvement processes and mechanisms recommending improvements as necessary 5. Receives feedback and recommendations from Academic Faculties and other stakeholders for the improvement of processes and mechanisms 6. Provides assistance and advice to the Executive Dean Programme & Curriculum as required including the appointment of external reviewers for new programs and majors 7. Supports and advises Academic Faculties in matters relating to program development and improvement Membership Chair: Executive Dean Program and Curricula Members: six members appointed by the Academic Council Applied Research Council The Applied Research Council (ARC) is an Academic Governance Standing Council. The ARC is responsible for regulating and overseeing internal and external sponsored applied research projects undertaken by Academic Faculties or faculty members. Terms of Reference A) Develop and oversee the following applied research strategic priorities: Direct research funds and develop strategic alliances to enhance applied research productivity and output in areas of National focus. Oversee the development of HCT research strategic priorities in alignment with HCT 3.3

13 Strategic Plan. Support building an applied research infrastructure including the development and maintenance of a research database, facilities, equipment, materials and services. Develop research leadership through targeted recruitment, creation of research career pathways and retention with focus on early and mid-career researchers. Collaborate with other institutions to strengthen research connections, joint ventures and resource sharing where appropriate. Support current initiatives to promote applied research through student projects, joint research projects, innovation projects and co-location of staff across research aligned areas. B) Govern rules and regulations: Define the applied research themes and topics that are aligned with the national Agenda and HCT Research priorities. Award and monitor the management of research funds. Indirect cost recovery rate (HCT overhead) Appointment and compensation of research assistants. Intellectual property. Research confidentiality. Publish research results. Approve requests to use HCT faculty, staff or students as research subjects. Transform innovative ideas into successful start-ups and commercialize HCT intellectual property. Manage the review and selection processes for all proposals. Approve release time for faculty, if and when required. Oversee responsible conduct in all research projects that involve the use of human, animal, or hazardous materials. Develop processes and templates for managing research budgeted items and expenses. Consider how best to further HCT research outreach to the external community. Consider ways to enhance the academic impact of research. Seek external reviewers for research proposals. Membership Vice-Chancellor (Chair) Chief Innovation Officer (Vice-Chair) Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic Affairs Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Education Technologies Executive Dean Engineering Director Partnerships Chief Executive Officer of CERT Dean of Faculty Affairs and Applied Research. Student Council Each campus has a Student Council elected by the student body to ensure student representation in campus management and governance. Representatives from each of the campus Councils elect a system-wide HCT Student Council which: 3.4

14 represents the wider HCT student body nationally and internationally at educational institutions, conferences and student forums; advocates students interests; participates in discussions of national and international issues related to students; promotes communication between students and management. Organizational Effectiveness (OE) Department, Strategy and Future Division OE monitors, audits and reports on assessment practices and grades across Academic Faculties, programs, courses, and campuses identifying issues to the Vice Chancellor. The Department is headed by the Director Organizational Effectiveness and contains specialist Units for Institutional Research and for Assessment (IR). IR provides input in terms of institutional research data and analysis, and monitors the effectiveness of the academic program quality review provision. IR also publishes an annual Institutional Effectiveness (IE) Report which contains Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Academic Faculties and campuses. The Report provides trend analysis of institutional effectiveness indicators over the last three years, responses from Academic Faculties and campuses on the past trends, targets and action plans for improvement. The IR Unit is also responsible for the annual HCT Fact Book. 3.5

15 Academic Affairs Division Organization Structure Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Academic Faculties Accreditation Program & Curriculum Faculty Affairs & Research Applied Media; Business; CIS; Education; Engineering & Science; Health Sciences ; Military & Security; General Academic Requirements Institutional and Program National and International Accreditation Curriculum Development; Program Review & Improvement Applied Research Faculty Workload & Credentials Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Program and Curricula Department (PCD) Responsibility The Department is responsible for monitoring and supporting Academic Faculties in the continuous quality improvement of the HCT s educational provision, the development of the academic quality program review provision, and the assurance of its implementation. PCD maintains the Academic Quality Assurance Manual ensuring that it is regularly updated and accessible to stakeholders and also manages the institutional curriculum management system. The Department is headed by the Assistant Deputy Vice-Chancellor Program and Curricula and contains the following sections each headed by a Manager: Curriculum Development (CD) Section The section is responsible for supporting Academic Faculties in the design, development, change and resourcing of academic courses. The section also manages the curriculum management system used for academic programs and courses. Program Review and Improvement (PRI) Section The section is responsible for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the course review and continuous quality improvement processes. 3.6

16 Faculty Affairs and Applied Research Department (FAAR) FAAR assures that policy and procedures related to faculty are followed and that the institution s strategy for applied research and scholarly activities is implemented. The Department also reviews applications from faculty members for funding for applied research activities. FAAR is headed by a Dean who is supported by a Manager for Faculty Affairs. Accreditation Department Responsibilities The Department leads and guides all stakeholders in the processes related to institutional and program accreditation. The Dean of Accreditation collaborates with HCT stakeholders, and liaises with accreditors, as well as agencies involved in institutional and programmatic accreditation. The Department ensures timely completion of self-study reports, on-site reviews, follow-up reports up to final award of accreditation. Staffing The Department is headed by a Dean who is supported by three Senior Specialists in Academic Accreditation, Institutional Accreditation, and Assessment. Academic Faculties Responsibilities Each Academic Faculty is responsible for developing, implementing, and improving programs and courses ensuring that the educational provision aligns with the HCT s mission, industry and national needs, government and accreditation requirements, and the Qualifications Framework for the Emirates. Staffing An Executive Dean is the head of each Academic Faculty offering programs leading to a degree. Staff complements depend on the size of the Faculty and the nature of the discipline but include Program Chairs and faculty (i.e. instructors) members. The degree-awarding Academic Faculties are: Applied Communication Business Computer Information Science Education Engineering & Science Health Sciences Military and Security The General Academic Requirements Division is headed by a Director and is responsible for the following programs: Academic Success Arabic and Emirati Studies Foundations General Studies Executive Deans Each Academic Faculty is led by an Executive Dean who is responsible for the oversight of program curriculum, delivery, quality assurance and Improvement, finance, human resources activities. The 3.7

17 Executive Dean ensures that programs are internationally current and also responsive to the needs of the UAE community. Faculty Academic Committee (FAC) Responsibilities Each Academic Faculty has a Faculty Academic Committee responsible to the Executive Dean for ensuring that HCT s curriculum development and review are consistent with approved processes and undertaken in full compliance with educational policies. The Committee develops and recommends curricular changes or additions to existing programs, new programs or elimination of existing programs. Membership The Executive Dean typically chairs the committee which includes: Faculty members with expertise in the subject matter from each campus where program(s) are offered Representative number of Program Chairs and Senior Managers Curriculum Leader The Curriculum Leader (CL) provides academic leadership and oversight for one or more courses within their area of expertise. As courses may be offered by a number of programs, the CL ensures that the courses offered are current with developments in the discipline and workplace. Course Team The course team is responsible for course delivery and evaluation. The Team contributes to the planning and on-going monitoring of the course highlighting any issues to the Course Team Leader (see below). After instruction is complete, the Team critically evaluates the delivery of the course in the course file and by completing the Faculty Course Evaluation Survey. Membership The course team consists of the instructors delivering the course across the campuses Course Team Leader (CTL) The CTL provides academic leadership to the instructors delivering the course (the course team). CTLs are appointed based on experience and credentials in the field of study. Programme Chair (PC) The PC supervises instructors to ensure that the syllabus, assessment, and classroom teaching methodology complies with the approved course outline, and reviews course grades. The PC liaises with College Dean of Academic Operations to ensure that the course is adequately resourced. The Executive Dean appoints at least one PC at each campus delivering Faculty programs. Appointments are based on experience and credentials. Industry Advisory Committee (IAC) Each Academic Faculty has one or more Industry Advisory Committees (IAC's) or equivalent industry advisory boards depending on the range and diversity of its programs/majors. IACs meet a minimum of two times per year. The purpose of the IAC is to provide regular input from local industry professionals and other external stakeholder into the programme and its courses from the perspective of industry professionals and external community stakeholders. IACs are expected to take an active role in the development of new and existing programs and curricula to ensure their alignment with industry needs. 3.8

18 Membership Each IAC consists of external community stakeholders, industry professionals and representatives from the Academic Faculty including the Executive Dean. Campus Operations Division Dean of Academic Operations (DAO) The DAO liaises with Program Chairs and the College Director to ensure the effective delivery of the course through the optimal utilization of the campus teaching and learning, human, and physical (e.g. labs and workshops) resources. The DAO also ensures campus support for the administration of course examinations. DAOs are appointed at each campus by the Vice Chancellor and report directly to the College Director. Head Campus Operations (HCO) The Head oversees academic services and advising at the campus and supervises the campus Academic and Student Services Department. Health and Safety Committees System Health and Safety Committee The System Committee has consultative, executive, and audit functions to support campuses in ensuring that relevant policy and procedures are implemented across the system, and reviewed and updated as required. The System Committee meets once per semester. Membership Executive Dean of either the Faculty Engineering Technology and Science, or the Faculty of Health Sciences (Chair) College Director Chief Human Resources Officer Head of Facilities Head of Planning and Development System Coordinator of Health and Safety Minimum 2 x College Health and Safety Committee Chairs Campus Health and Safety Committee Each campus has its own Health, Safety and Environment Committee that is responsible for facilitating compliance with policy and procedures and providing appropriate information and training to students, staff, and other stakeholders. The Campus Committee meets at least twice per semester Membership College Director (Chair) Human Resources Coordinator Facilities Coordinator Program Chair Faculty Technician 3.9

19 Student Services, Campus Operations Department System Registrar s Office, Student Services Department The System Registrar is responsible for: ensuring the integrity and accuracy of the academic records of current and former students; student registration; the processes for transfer credits, graduation and certification. The System Registrar s Office also works closely with the Academic Services departments at campuses to ensure the provision of clear and accurate information to HCT students about academic and student policies, and regulations. Academic Advisors Academic Advisors have a duty of care to provide academic advice and support to students with the purpose of improving retention, progression and performance. Wherever possible a faculty member who teaches the student is assigned as the student s Academic Advisor. If this is not possible a suitably qualified academic or non-academic staff will be assigned. Education Technologies Division The Educational Technology Division at HCT s Central Services is responsible for the sustainable provision of core IT infrastructure, application services, and knowledge management systems across all HCT campuses to support academic research, teaching and learning and administrative services. Information Technology Steering Committee The Committee advises the Executive Committee and other standing committees of the HCT on all issues related to technology development and implementation and to help ensure business alignment, effective strategic IT planning and oversight of IT performance. Membership Membership is by appointment of the Vice Chancellor and includes but is not confined to: Chief Technology Officer College Management overseeing IT at the colleges Educational Technology Advisory Committee The Committee reviews and recommends to the IT Steering Committee on Ed. Tech. strategic planning, major Ed. Tech. projects, Ed. Tech policies, Ed. Tech. performance, and priorities between Central Services Ed. Tech unit and the campuses and assists to ensure business alignment, effective strategic Ed. Tech. planning and oversight of Ed. Tech. Performance. Educational Technology Unit The Unit develops and delivers technical services to enhance and support teaching and learning across the institution including Blackboard Learn (Learning Management System), supporting technologies (such as Creative Eye), content authoring tools. The Unit also provides support to campus Independent Learning Centres. The Unit collaborates with Academic Faculties in the co-creation of educational resources and provides a range of training and professional development opportunities to train faculty in the effective use of a wide range of educational technologies. Teaching & Learning Responsibilities The Teaching and Learning Department provide support in the following areas: Providing a comprehensive range of professional development opportunities and guides that focus on improving the student learning experience; 3.10

20 Co-creation of educational resources and the training of faculty in the effective use of a wide range of educational technologies; and Managing and maintaining all Library systems to ensure that students and faculty have access to resources and training they need to support learning and teaching. Extensive professional development for new Emirati faculty, including guiding and supporting the HCT 170@17 Mentoring programme. Staffing The Unit is headed by a Director and consists of three teams: Professional development & Practice Educational Technology Library Technical Services Central Communications Unit, Office of the Vice Chancellor. The Unit manages the HCT s Internet site and prepares publications for release. The Unit also monitors campus publications consulting with key stakeholders (e.g. Executive Deans) to ensure accuracy and currency. Policy and Procedures HCT s Academic Policies are published on-line in its Policy and Procedures Manual. The Manual also contains policy and procedures relating to Administration, Organizational Excellence and Human Resources. For further detail refer to HCT Policy and Procedures Manual 3.11

21 Chapter 4: Design, Approval and Modification of Programs Contents Structures & Responsibilities 4.1 National Qualifications Framework 4.2 Program Design 4.5 Program and Curricula Change 4.10 Accreditation 4.15 Policy and Procedures 4.15 Structures & Responsibilities Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Program and Curricula Department, Academic Affairs The Unit is responsible for supporting Academic Faculties in the expansion of the HCT s educational provision through the development of new programs and courses and in the improvement of the quality of the current provision through the modification of existing programs and courses. The Department has a central role in overseeing program design and modification by ensuring that proposals follow proper processes and approvals in compliance with HCT Policy, Procedures, and Guidelines. Academic Faculty The Academic Faculty is responsible for establishing a clear approval path involving internal curriculum and content experts (e.g. Curriculum Leaders, Programme Chairs etc.) and committees to ensure that proposal has been thoroughly reviewed within the Academic Faculty before being submitted to the Executive Dean for approval or endorsement. Faculty Academic Committee (FAC) The Committee develops and recommends curricular changes or additions to existing programs, new programs or elimination of existing programs offered. System-wide Curriculum Committee The Committee evaluates and reports on the appropriateness of a proposed programme/course or major modifications to a programme in order to assure alignment with the HCT Mission, academic rigor and viability. Academic Council The Academic Council receives and evaluates recommendations from the System-wide Curriculum Committee and endorses them for approval by the Board of Trustees. Board of Trustees The Board has final approval for a number of major changes such as the establishment of new programs, length of the program, and modifications to admission requirement. Industry Advisory Committee (IAC) IACs, or industry advisory boards, are expected to take an active role in the development of new and existing programs and curricula to ensure their alignment with industry needs. 4.1

22 Commission for Academic Accreditation (CAA), Ministry of Education All academic programs of one academic year or longer beyond the UAE Secondary School Certification (or the equivalent) leading to the award of an academic degree, certificate, or diploma, must be accredited by the CAA. Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) New programs at Baccalaureate level or above that are to be offered in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi require a No Objection Certificate from the Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) prior to submission to CAA for accreditation. National Qualifications Framework The HCT offers programs at five levels aligned to the National Qualifications Framework (QFE) of the UAE. The QFE uses a ten point scale to differentiate between the level of qualifications and their associated titles. The table below shows the ten levels and their associated qualification titles for Vocational, Higher and General education. Qualification Titles (Qualifications Framework for the Emirates Handbook p40) Credit Hour Requirement The following Table shows the minimum credits required at each QFE Level. 4.2

23 (Qualifications Framework for the Emirates Handbook p123) Level Descriptors The QFE Level Descriptors consist of the 10 Levels described above and the expected learning outcomes for each level described in five strands: Knowledge, Skills and three Competencies (Autonomy and responsibility, Role in context and Self-development). The ten levels and the five strands of learning outcome statements define the Level Descriptors (see Attachments 2 and 3), indicating the complexity of learning for each level, the expected level of achievement for each level and how each level relates to occupations in the world of work. 4.3

24 Summary of QF Emirates Level Descriptors 4.4

25 Alignment of HCT programs with QFE Levels The alignment of HCT programs with QFE Levels is shown in the table below. HCT Program Example of HCT Program Title QFE Level Required Credit Hours Master Master of Business Administration 9 30 Bachelor Bachelor of Education Higher Diploma Higher Diploma in Health Information Coding 6 90 Diploma Diploma in Electrical Engineering Technology 5 60 Certificate Technical Studies Program 4 60* * UK National Council for Further Education (NCFE) credits: NCFE is the awarding body The process for aligning HCT academic programs to the QFE is as follows: Academic Faculty ensures that programs address the Knowledge, Skills, and Competencies appropriate to the level of the qualification. External Experts review the alignment System-wide Curriculum Committee verifies the alignment Commission for Academic Accreditation validates that a program is aligned to the appropriate level through the initial program accreditation process. Note for the Technical Studies Program, the National Qualifications Authority validates the alignment. Program Design Mission of the HCT Each program is built upon a Mission Statement aligned to the Mission Statement of the HCT which is to: Provide applied higher education to equip generations with knowledge, skills and competencies that meet international standards and the future needs of the UAE industry and society HCT Learning Model The Learning Model provides a framework within which HCT students receive their education. The model is consistent with the HCT mission and offers a means by which the HCT mission is attained. The HCT Learning Model is based on the following professional values: Innovative practice Continuous improvement Professional integrity Efficiency and effectiveness Responsiveness to the needs of stakeholders. 4.5

26 It sets standards for the design of curricula, gives principles which should be followed in learning and teaching, and guidelines for assessment within the HCT. The learning model defines the HCT s educational philosophy and identifies eight graduate outcomes: Graduate Outcome One: Communication and Information Literacy According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in: Communicating information, opinions, concepts and ideas effectively in English through the spoken and written mediums to a variety of audiences; Selecting, understanding, evaluating and making effective use of information from a variety of sources presented in both spoken and written form in English; and Acting ethically in the use and presentation of information from a variety of sources. Graduate Outcome Two: Critical and Creative Thinking According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in: Evaluating and analyzing knowledge and information; Identifying and understanding problems; and Demonstrating creativity and innovation in problem-solving. Graduate Outcome Three: Global Awareness and Citizenship According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in recognizing and analyzing: Ethical dilemmas, and practicing ethical decision-making; The issues affecting the local, regional and global environment; The interrelations between local, regional and global contexts and cultures; and Recognising the role of the leaders of the UAE in developing the social, cultural, economic and political aspects of the nation. Graduate Outcome Four: Technological Literacy According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in: Recognizing the influence of technology upon individuals and society; Using technology to perform effectively in their personal and professional lives and acting ethically when using technology. Graduate Outcome Five: Self-Management and Independent Learning According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in: Reflecting on and evaluating their own learning; Working independently; and Demonstrating a positive work attitude and effective work habits. 4.6

27 Graduate Outcome Six: Teamwork and Leadership According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in: Understanding the functions and dynamics of groups; Contributing effectively to teamwork; Acting effectively in a leadership role; and Demonstrating confidence and social maturity in interpersonal relationships. Graduate Outcome Seven: Vocational Competencies According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in: Applying profession-specific knowledge required for successful employment in their chosen field; Applying profession-specific skills required for successful employment in their chosen field; and Demonstrating the specific attributes required for successful employment in their chosen field. Graduate Outcome Eight: Mathematical Literacy According to their credential, HCT graduates demonstrate an appropriate level of competence in: Applying relevant numerical analytical tools to solve problems in authentic contexts; and Analyzing and communicating mathematical concepts with confidence in authentic contexts. (Refer: LP100 HCT Learning Model) Industry Alignment One of the strategic goals of the HCT is to align academic programs with present and future industry needs. To this end, industry advisory boards are involved in the development of programs and curricula to ensure that graduates possess the knowledge, skills and competencies wanted in the workplace. In addition, Academic Faculties are encouraged to embed professional certification within their programs wherever feasible with the purpose of either graduating students with certification or with exemptions from appropriate certification requirements. Programme Learning Outcomes Programme learning outcomes (PLOs) are derived from the Program Mission and designed to support student achievement of the HCT Graduate Outcomes. Additionally, the PLOs are aligned with levels of the QFE so for example the PLOs for a Bachelor program align to the QFE level descriptors for Level 7, and PLOs for Diploma programs align to QFE Level 5. Curriculum Mapping To facilitate effective curriculum design and to provide evidence for internal and external reviewers that the curriculum is aligned to each programme learning outcome and that there is a clear development of knowledge, skills and competencies, Academic Faculties are required to provide a number of curriculum maps showing the alignment of: 4.7

28 Programme Learning Outcome to Graduate Outcomes Program Learning Outcomes Mapping to the QFEmirates Level Descriptors Courses to Programme Learning Outcomes: to clarify the sequencing of learning, the map uses the IRMA system (see below) to identify the level to which the PLOs are being addressed through the courses. IRMA System I - Introductory Level: Indicates that the Program Learning Outcome (PLO) is achieved through the specified course at the introductory level, assuming limited or no prior knowledge R - Reinforced : Indicates that the Program Learning Outcome (PLO) is reinforced, assuming introduction in a previous course M - Mastered : Indicates if the Program Learning Outcome (PLO) is mastered or not, usualy assuming introduction/reinforcement in previous courses A - Assessed : Indicates where, within the program, the PLOs are assessed Teaching and Learning Approach As an institution of applied education, the HCT promotes a student-centred approach in its programs to actively engage students in their own learning through activities such as group work, problem solving and real world experiences. This general approach is realized through the teaching and learning strategies specified for each course in the approved course outline (see below). Student Progression For each program, a study plan guide is provided that details student progression route through the program specifying the courses and credits that should be taken in each semester to ensure that students graduate on-time. To support this Academic Faculties identify Prerequisite courses, courses that must be taken before another course, to ensure that students have the necessary prior knowledge, skills and competencies required for success in the new course. Program Structure Programs consist of three components: General Studies Courses; Core Courses; Elective Courses. General Studies Students are required to take a minimum of 33 credit units of General Studies in BAS programmes, 30 credits in Higher Diploma programmes, and 18 credits in Diploma programmes. Students must complete one or more courses in each of the following areas: English, Arabic or Other Languages Humanities or Art Information Technology or Mathematics Natural Sciences Social or Behavioural Sciences 4.8

29 Core Courses Students are required to complete each core course before they can graduate from a program. The number of core courses varies depending on the discipline and level of award with required credits for BAS programs ranging from 39 to 75 credit hours. Work Experience The HCT requires that each of its programs include required credits from courses based in the workplace. As an institute of applied education, work experience prepares students for active roles in the workplace by providing them with the opportunity to consolidate and nurture skills learned in the programme. Work experience courses facilitate a transition from college to work and provide feedback into the curriculum. Work experience courses have defined purposes, learning outcomes and credits. Work placement is scheduled depending on the nature and length of the program. Electives Each program contains elective courses to provide students with a range of options from which they select the courses they wish to study. The number of Elective Courses available to students depends on the discipline and level of award of the program. Majors, Minors, Concentrations A Bachelor s student must complete at least one major in their program; concentrations and minors are optional. The table below shows the minimum credits required by the Commission for Academic Accreditation. Major 30 Concentration 15 Minor 12 Required Credits (Minimum) Course Design Courses are designed by Academic Faculties to support student progression towards the achievement of program learning outcomes. Each course is aligned with one or more PLOs and is mapped against the appropriate QFE Level. Course Learning Outcomes Course learning outcomes (CLOs) are designed to support student success in achieving PLOs by the phased development of required knowledge, skills and competencies over the length of the program. As with PLOs, the CLOs are aligned to the level of the QFE appropriate to that of the course. For example in a typical four year 120 credit Bachelor program, the expected alignment would be: 4.9

30 CLOs QFE Level Number of Credits Years 1 & Year Year Total credits 120 Course Outline For each course, there is a Course Outline approved by the Executive Dean which provides key information to instructors and students including the following: Course Credits and Required Contact Hours Pre-requisite and Co-requisite courses Course learning outcomes Delivery Framework a week by week schedule of teaching, learning and assessment activities Teaching and Learning Strategies the methodological approach adopted for the course Assessment Strategies details of assessment tasks and their alignment to the course learning outcomes Educational Resources required Students are provided with the course outline as part of the course syllabus distributed by the instructor at the start of each course. Program and Curricula Change Categories and Approvals The Categories below are guidelines only and the Programme & Curriculum Department may review any proposal regardless of its Category on account of the nature or impact of the proposal and may submit to the System-wide Curriculum Committee for further review. Minor Changes (Approved by Executive Dean) Course assessment strategy Course contact hours Course delivery framework (Weekly schedule) Course description Course equivalencies addition or removal Course grading method Course learning outcomes Course learning resources Course teaching and learning strategies including Mode of instruction (e.g. blended/elearning) Discontinuing/Teaching out a course 4.10

31 Elective course - addition or removal of one elective Pre-Requisites / Co-requisites addition or removal Recommended Sequence of Study (Ideal Semester) Title of course / course code (Note: where a program offered by another Academic Faculty is affected, the change may be referred to the System-wide Curriculum Committee.) Major Changes (System Approval Required) Curricula Changes Changes to courses aligned to professional certification Course credit value Course level e.g. changing a 2000-level course to a 4000-level course Language of instruction Offering a course in intensive mode e.g. offering a regular 15 week course in 6 weeks Replacing a course within a CAA accredited program Programme Changes Adding or deleting two or more electives Campuses offering a programme - add or discontinue Concentrations - add or discontinue Course - addition to or removal from a programme: core courses and General Studies courses Concentrations, minors, track, etc. - add or discontinue Programme completion requirements Programme description Programme learning outcomes Programme Mission Discontinuing/Teaching out a programme Suspending a programme temporarily Length of the programme New programmes Programme admission criteria Programme financial structure (e.g. sponsored, cost recovery, government financed) Title of credential 4.11

32 Course, Curriculum & Programme Change System Minor Changes Within Academic Faculty s Power 1. Course assessment strategy 2. Course contact hours 3. Course delivery framework (Weekly schedule) 4. Course description 5. Course equivalencies addition or removal 6. Course grading method 7. Course learning outcomes 8. Course learning resources 9. Course teaching and learning strategies including Mode of instruction (e.g. blended/elearning) 10. Discontinuing/Teaching out a course 11. Elective course - addition or removal of one elective 12. Pre-Requisites / Co-requisites addition or removal 13. Recommended Sequence of Study (Ideal Semester) 14. Title of course / course code Major Changes Within DVCAA/Academic Council s Power 15. Changes to courses aligned to professional certification 16. Course credit value 17. Course level e.g. changing a 2000-level course to a 4000-level course 18. Language of instruction 19. Offering a course in intensive mode 20. Offering a new course for the first time 21. Adding or deleting two or more elective courses 22. Campuses offering a programme - add or discontinue 23. Concentrations - add or discontinue 24. Course - addition to or removal from a programme: core courses and General Studies courses 25. Minors - add or discontinue 26. Programme completion requirements 27. Programme description 28. Programme learning outcomes 29. Programme Mission Major Changes Within Board of Trustees Power 30. Discontinuing/Teaching out a programme 31. Length of the programme 32. New programmes 33. Programme admission criteria 34. Programme financial structure (e.g. sponsored, cost recovery, government financed) 35. Suspending a programme temporarily 36. Title of credential Proposal Development Coordinate with Concerned Programmes Facilitate/Implement Changes to: - Curriculum Management System - Banner - Catalogue Academic Faculty Review Approval of Executive Dean Programme & Curriculum Department Changes Note: Changes 1-20 are Course/Curriculum related Changes are Programme related System-wide Curriculum Committee Academic Council Changes Board of Trustees 4.12

33 New Programs Proposals for a new academic program must provide convincing evidence of the need for, quality of the curriculum and sustainability of the program including: Alignment with the Mission of the HCT Organizational structure to coordinate across delivery sites to ensure comparable student achievement and educational experience Need for the proposed new program from the labour market Potential demand from students Programme learning outcomes appropriate to the discipline and qualification Academic rigour appropriate to the level of the qualification and the QFE Coherent curriculum aligned to the programme learning outcomes Work placement provision appropriate to the nature of the program Graduation requirements appropriate to the level of qualification and the program major and any concentrations (e.g. required credits for General Studies, Core Courses, Electives) Teaching faculty with appropriate qualifications and experience to deliver the program across delivery sites Teaching & learning resources to deliver the program across delivery sites Technological infrastructure to deliver the program across delivery sites Physical facilities including laboratories to meet expected student numbers and requirement of the program across delivery sites Financial viability to sustain the program over time Process for new program proposal: Academic Faculty submits an application for initial program accreditation from CAA to the Programme and Curricula Department following the Commission for Academic Accreditation s Standards for Licensure and Accreditation (2011), and Procedural Guidelines for Initial Accreditation (2011) Programme and Curricula Department reviews the proposal and submits to the System-wide Curriculum Committee System-wide Curriculum Committee reviews the proposal and recommends to the Academic Council Academic Council endorses the proposal to the Board of Trustees Board of Trustees approves the offering of the new program New Courses A new course can only be developed for inclusion within an approved program. The proposal for a new course must provide: Rationale for the new course Draft course outline using the approved HCT template Curriculum Mapping showing the alignment of course learning outcomes to programme learning outcomes and the appropriate QFE Level Impact analysis on program curriculum including prerequisites. Process for new courses Each Academic Faculty establishes a clear approval path involving internal curriculum and content experts (e.g. Curriculum Leaders, Programme Chairs etc.) and committees to ensure that proposal 4.13

34 has been thoroughly reviewed within the Academic Faculty before submission to the Programme & Curricula Department. After the Executive Dean approves the proposal, it is submitted to the Programme & Curricula Department. Programme & Curricula Department reviews the proposal and guided by the category of the change described above does one of the following: facilitates/processes the change submits to the System-wide Curriculum Committee for review Modifications to Programs & Courses Any proposed modifications to programs & courses must provide a rationale for change and impact analyses on current students and on other programs and courses. Modifications should be: Consistent with the HCT s mission and strategic directions of the Higher Colleges of Technology Aligned to Program Mission and Learning Outcomes Appropriate in academic rigour Cost-effective Compatible with stakeholder requirements Approved, where appropriate, by the Commission for Academic Accreditation in compliance with CAA Stipulation2 Substantive Change, 2011 Standards for Licensure and Accreditation. Process Each Academic Faculty establishes a clear approval path involving internal curriculum and content experts (e.g. Curriculum Leaders, Programme Chairs etc.) and committees to ensure that proposal has been thoroughly reviewed within the Academic Faculty before the workflow is sent to the Programme & Curricula Department. After the Executive Dean approves the proposal, it is submitted to the Programme & Curricula Department. Programme & Curricula Department reviews the proposal and guided by the category of the change described above does one of the following: facilitates/processes the change submits to the System-wide Curriculum Committee for review System-wide Curriculum Committee reviews and makes a recommendation on approval to the Academic Council Academic Council, depending on the category of change, either: Approves the change Endorses the change to the Board of Trustees Timeline Changes made during an academic year are implemented the following academic year unless the Academic Faculty has requested and received approval from DVCAA for an earlier implementation date. 4.14

35 Changes that affect the following year s HCT Catalogue must be formally approved by the end of the Fall semester of the current academic year. Curriculum Management System The curriculum management system (CMS) is an on-line facility which provides for: Curriculum editing & approval processes System-wide access to curriculum information such as program mission, matrix and ideal semester, learning outcomes, delivery framework, assessment strategy, teaching and learning strategy, educational resources, co/pre-requisites. Publication of course catalogues, course outlines, and curriculum maps The CMS is managed by the Program and Curricula Department, Academic Affairs. Before new or modifications to programs and courses are implemented, the new information must be entered into the CMS. The following are involved in the CMS process: Resources Reviewer: reviews required resources for introducing or changing programs or courses System Editor: ensures the curriculum management system is properly updated System Registrar: enters new information for student registration, progression, and graduation into HCT systems. Accreditation National HCT programs are required to be accredited by the UAE s national accreditation body, the Commission for Academic Accreditation, Ministry of Education. Programs below Diploma level require accreditation from the National Qualifications Authority. As part of the accreditation process, the CAA requires programs and courses to be vetted by an External Review Team containing experts in the field to ensure that the program and its constituent courses are fit-for-purpose and meet the requirement of the Qualifications Framework Emirates (QFE) for the level of award in terms of the Knowledge, Skills, and Competencies expected of students. Additionally, for proposed new programs at Baccalaureate level or above that are to be offered in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi a No Objection Certificate from the Abu Dhabi Education Council (ADEC) is required prior to submission to CAA. International The HCT requires that all academic programs leading to the award of a credential seek accreditation from a recognised overseas accreditation body to verify that they meet international standards. Details of the international accreditation status of HCT programs is publicly available on the Accreditation page of the HCT website. Policy and Procedures LP100 HCT Learning Model LP223 New Programs and Courses 4.15

36 LP226 Program Modification LP232 Work Experience 4.16

37 Chapter 5: Academic Program Quality Review HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Contents Structures & Responsibilities 5.1 Programme Quality Review Framework 5.2 Programme Learning Outcome Assessment 5.5 Annual Academic Programme Audit 5.13 Cyclical Programme Review 5.17 Policy and Procedures 5.21 Structures & Responsibilities Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Program and Curricula Department, Academic Affairs The Department is responsible for supporting Academic Faculties in the continuous quality improvement of the HCT s educational provision, the development of the academic quality program review provision, and the assurance of its implementation. The Department is headed by the Assistant Deputy Vice-Chancellor Program and Curricula and contains a specialist section for Program Review and Improvement. Academic Faculties Faculty Academic Committees (FAC) The FAC is responsible for implementing the policy and procedure related to program review. Industry Advisory Committee (IAC) Industry Advisory Committees (IAC's) provide input from local industry professionals and other external stakeholder into the programme and its courses from the perspective of industry professionals and external community stakeholders. Academic Council The Academic Council receives and evaluates recommendations from the Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee and endorses them for approval by the Executive Committee or Board of Trustees. System-wide Curriculum Quality Assurance (CQA) Committee The Committee oversees and supports the implementation of the program quality review provision, and reports annually to Academic Council on the effectiveness of program quality review processes and activities. The Committee approves the Cyclical Program Review calendar. Board of Trustees The Board approves the teaching-out of an academic program across the HCT. Institutional Research Unit, Organizational Excellence Department (IR) IR provides input in terms of institutional research data and analysis, and monitors the effectiveness of the academic program quality review provision. IR also publishes an annual Institutional Effectiveness (IE) Report which contains Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for Academic Faculties and campuses. The Report provides trend analysis of institutional effectiveness indicators over the last three years, responses from Academic Faculties and campuses on the past trends, targets and action plans for improvement. 5.1

38 Programme Quality Review Framework HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Purpose The HCT s academic Programme Review Policy is designed to ensure that programmes are: Aligned to the Mission of the HCT Regularly enhanced to meet the changing needs of the nation and its economy Continuously improved for effective learning Upgraded to align with new and emerging technologies Effectively resourced in terms of instructors, teaching and learning resources, computer and information technology, physical facilities, and budgeting Requirement Academic Programs Process Frequency Focus Timeline HCT 2.0 Bachelor s, Higher Diploma, Diploma Program Learning Outcome Assessment Each PLO at least once every 3 years Minimum 30% of PLOs per year Teaching & Learning August HCT 2.0 Bachelor s, Higher Diploma, Diploma Annual Program Audit Yearly review of key indicators Program Health Check October Bachelor: every 5 years HCT 2.0 Bachelor s, Higher Diploma, Diploma Cyclical Program Review Higher Diploma: every 4 years Program Continuance December Diploma: every 3 years HCT 2.0 Bachelor s, Higher Diploma, Diploma External Accreditation of Academic Programs Periodically (depending on external accreditation schedule) International Standards - 5.2

39 Overview of the HCT Programme Review Process HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Year 1 =>30% PLOs Assessed Annual Programme Audit Report Year 2 =>60% PLOs Assessed Annual Programme Audit Report Year 3 100% PLOs Assessed Annual Programme Audit Report Year 4 =>30% PLOs Assessed Annual Programme Report Year 5 =>60% PLOs Assessed Annual Programme Report Cyclical Review Focus Student Learning Programme Modification Programme Continuance Responsibilities: Programme Quality Review Framework Program Review Component Program and Curricula Department Academic Faculty Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee Academic Council Program Quality Review Framework Implements the framework Reports on the implementation of the Programme Quality Review Framework to the CQA Committee Recommends measures for improvement of the Programme Quality Reports on the effectiveness of the Programme Quality Review Framework including Program Learning Outcome Assessment, Annual Program Audits, and Cyclical Program Review Recommends measures for improvement of the Reviews and monitors the effectiveness of Programme Quality Review Framework Receives feedback from Academic Faculties regarding the effectiveness of the Programme Quality Review Framework Receives reports on the implementation and effectiveness of the Programme Quality Review Framework from CQA Committee Approves measures for improvement of the Programme Quality Review Framework 5.3

40 Program Review Component Program and Curricula Department HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Curriculum Quality Academic Faculty Assurance Academic Council Committee Review Framework to the CQA Committee. Programme Quality Review Framework to the CQA Committee. Recommends measures for improvement of the Programme Quality Review Framework to the Academic Council Timeline What When Purpose Programme Learning Outcome Assessment At least once every 3 years Continuous quality improvement Program Audit Report Annually Continuous quality improvement - evaluate program s effectiveness in meeting its mission, and the needs of students and society Cyclical Program Review Every 5 years Continuance at the HCT or at a particular campus External Review of Academic Programs Periodically (depending on external accreditation schedule) National and international accreditation Program Review Site Resources and Reports related to program learning outcome assessment, annual program audit and cyclical program review are published on-line. For further details visit the: Program Review Site 5.4

41 Programme Learning Outcome Assessment HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Purpose The purpose of PLO Assessment is to monitor the effectiveness of the curriculum and to guide quality improvements to programs. There are two types of PLO assessment: Summative PLO Assessment The main purpose of institutional PLO Assessment is to gather evidence of the cumulative effect of the program curriculum on student learning. Assessments selected from courses close to graduation Courses identified in the Curriculum Map as where students would be able to demonstrate their mastery of the target PLO. Formative PLO Assessment The focus is to provide faculty and students with valuable feedback on progress towards achieving PLOs. The Academic Faculty administers throughout the program length employing course assessments aligned to the specific PLO. PLO Cycle Evidence of Student Achievement There are two types of evidence collected: Direct evidence of student achievement of programme learning outcome using embedded course assessments. Academic Faculties may also employ alternatives to embedded assessment such as specially designed assessment tasks, external examinations etc. Indirect evidence of student achievement of programme learning outcomes is collected by means of surveys. The survey results and their analysis form part of the Annual Program Audit Report (see below). Surveys used include the Student Exit Survey, Graduate Employment Survey, Graduate Employer Survey. Requirement For each academic program: Each programme learning outcome is to be assessed at least once over a three year period. A minimum of 30% of programme learning outcomes must be assessed each academic year. Each Academic Faculty identifies assessments to provide evidence of student achievement of each Programme Learning Outcome (PLO). Faculties then interpret the results and provide an action plan to address any shortcomings. Typically, the assessments used to provide evidence are assessments from towards graduation e.g. courses in year 3 or year 4 of the programme. The designated assessments should be common assessments i.e. the assessment instrument (oral defence, portfolio, project, report, test etc.), marking scheme or rubric, grading and standards of achievement should be the same for all students taking the assessment across the system. Academic Faculties must ensure that the following are kept for example in the relevant electronic Course File (ecaf): Copies of the assessment instrument Marking scheme/rubric Details of moderation process Samples of student work reflecting the range of performance - wherever possible Quantitative analysis of results 5.5

42 Process HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Academic Faculty Long Term (3-Year) PLO Assessment Plan Modifications to Plan Academic Faculty Annual PLO Assessment Plan Academic Faculty Evaluate impact of action plan Academic Faculty Assess students PLO Assessment Process Academic Faculty Implement Actions for improving student learning Academic Faculty Report Results Action Plan for improving student learning Program & Curricula Department Review Report & Action Plan 5.6

43 Long Term (3-Year) Assessment Plan Continuous Quality Improvement Cycle ASSESS EVALUATE Action Plans for CQI CHANGE Implement Action Plans ASSESS Evaluate Change Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Sample PLO Schedule (ABET Inc.) Curriculum Maps Course learning outcomes are mapped to programme learning outcomes to show how each course contributes to student achievement of the outcomes. The mappings monitor that each programme learning outcome is adequately covered through the curriculum and that all courses are aligned to the outcomes. Mapping reports are available from the Academic Faculty. Sample curriculum map 5.7

44 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Course PLO1 PLO2 PLO3 HSW 1003 Introduced HSW 1023 Introduced Introduced HSW 1033 Introduced Introduced HSW 1223 Introduced Reinforced HSW 1233 Introduced Reinforced HSW 1313 Introduced Reinforced Reinforced HSW 2013 Introduced Reinforced Reinforced HSW 2033 Introduced Reinforced HSW 2133 Reinforced Reinforced HSC 2203 Reinforced HSW 2143 Reinforced Reinforced HSW 2323 Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced HSW 2333 Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced HSW 3013 Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced HSW 3103 Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced HSW 3023 Reinforced Reinforced HSW 3033 Reinforced Reinforced HSW 3223 Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced HSW 3943-WP Reinforced Reinforced Reinforced HSC 4003 Reinforced HSW 4223 Reinforced Reinforced Assessed/Mastered HSW 4233 Assessed/Mastered Assessed/Mastered Assessed/Mastered HSW 4033 Reinforced HSW 4243 Reinforced HSW 4928 Assessed/Mastered Assessed/Mastered Assessed/Mastered HSC 4006 Assessed/Mastered HSW 4303 Assessed/Mastered Assessed/Mastered Assessed/Mastered (Bachelor of Social Work) Method Each Academic Faculty develops a long term plan for each program to ensure that evidence is collected of student achievement for each programme learning outcome at least once every 3-years by a: Direct assessment in a required course such as a final assessment, capstone project, external assessment etc. Common assessment instrument (oral defense, portfolio, project, report, test etc.), marking scheme/rubric, grading system, moderation process, and standards of achievement. Academic Faculties select the most valid assessments to be used as evidence of student achievement of programme learning outcomes from year 3 or year 4 BAS courses, and from year 2 Diploma courses. Best practice indicates that Faculties should identify a number of different assessment tasks to provide for a wider sampling of student learning allowing students to demonstrate a wider range of knowledge, skills and competencies than can be observed from reliance on a single form of assessment such as a written examination. 5.8

45 The designated assessment must provide sufficient depth and scope to produce valid evidence of student achievement of the targeted programme learning outcome. In cases where no single assessment is sufficient, a number of assessment may be designated. Each designated assessment becomes a common assessment i.e. the assessment instrument (oral defence, portfolio, project, report, test etc.), marking scheme or rubric, grading and standards of achievement are the same for all students taking the assessment across the system. Illustration: 3-Year PLO Assessment Plan PLO Programme Learning Outcome An ability to apply knowledge of computing and mathematics appropriate to the discipline CIS 3003: FWA 2 An ability to analyze a problem, and identify and define the computing requirements appropriate to its solution 3 An ability to analyse a problem, and identify and define the computing requirements appropriate to its solution. CIS 4906: Capstone project CIS 4906: Capstone project 4 An ability to function effectively on teams to accomplish a common goal CIS 4103: CSA 5 An understanding of professional, ethical, legal, security and social issues and responsibilities CIS 3103: CSA etc Annual Programme Learning Outcome Assessment In each academic year, it is expected that for each program, evidence of student achievement will be collected for a minimum of 30% of each of programme s learning outcomes. Process Step Process When By Action Plan Develop assessment plans for each PLO Designate assessments for each PLO Start of academic year Faculty Academic Committee Submit to Executive Dean to review and recommend for approval by Program & Curricula Department Do Implement assessment plan consistently across classes and delivery sites Throughout academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team) Administer assessments Collect data from direct assessment Throughout academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team) Mark and record results 5.9

46 Check Analyze data Identify shortcomings and/or anomalies Each Fall and Spring semester HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Academic Faculty Input to Annual Program Audit and Program & Curricula Department Develop action plans to address shortcomings and/or anomalies End of each semester Academic Faculty (Course Team) Minor modifications: submit to Executive Dean for approval Major modifications: submit to Executive Dean to review and recommend for approval by Academic Council Input into Annual Program Audit Act Implement action plans e.g. modify curriculum, assessment, resource allocation (instructors, learning resources, physical resources, budget) Following semester Academic Faculty (Course Team) Update: curriculum management system, programme and course documentation Monitor effectiveness of actions. Report effectiveness of QA process Throughout academic year Academic Faculty and Program & Curricula Department Input to Annual Program Audit Annual Programme Learning Outcome Assessment Plan and Report The Plan describes how the Long Term Plan will be implemented in the academic year and the standard to be used for evaluating student achievement. When completed, the Report provides the results of the assessment used as evidence, the analysis of the results, and plans to deal with any shortfalls in meeting expectations (e.g. issues related to the assessment task used etc.) and to improve student learning (e.g. modifications to teaching & learning strategies, materials etc.). Annual Program Learning Outcome Assessment Report The template provides: 1) the assessment plan for the year 2) when completed forms the annual assessment report The template is completed to report assessment results for the system as a whole and then to report the results campus by campus. Rows can be added to report multiple assessments for a single PLO including additional direct assessment or indirect assessments (e.g. surveys). 5.10

47 System-wide Summary HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual PLO No. PLO wording Course code Assessment Task/Instrument Target Location All Campuses No. of Students Result Analysis Areas for Action Breakdown by Campus - add a new row(s) for each campus as required. PLO No. PLO wording Course code Assessment Task/Instrument Target Campus No. of Students Result Analysis Areas for Action Notes Target: the default (80% of students achieving standard) may be changed to reflect the academic judgment of the level of challenge of the assessment task. Analysis: Focus should be on identifying areas for improving student learning e.g. curriculum, delivery, resources, student progression etc. Areas for Action: Summarise key areas for improvement. Use the separate Action Plan Template to provide detail & timelines. Important: a 'Timeline' is required for each action. Actions to improve the assessment itself or target set affect the quality of the process and do not improve student learning. They should be noted here but not be included in the detailed Action Plan. Areas for Action Actions for improvement are the key outcomes of the assessment process and should be completed for the System and separately by each campus. The purpose of these actions is to improve student learning and provide evidence to stakeholders and accreditation agencies of the use of assessment results to improve the quality of the academic program and to enhance student learning. Each area for action should have its own Action Plan which provides further details and timelines of the actions to be taken. Action Plan Template Objective Priority Action to be taken Success indicator(s) Owner Target date Status Evaluation 5.11

48 Responsibilities: Programme Learning Outcome Assessment Program Learning Outcome Assessment (PLOA) Program & Curricula Department Initiates the PLO Assessment process Provides PLOA templates for plans and reports Reviews Faculty PLOA plans Reviews PLOA Reports from Academic Faculties Publishes PLOA Plans and Reports Approves any update/change to published plans Academic Faculty The Faculty Executive Dean with the support of the Faculty Academic Committee and faculty members: Submits a 3-year PLOA plan for each program for review by Programme and Curricula Department Ensures that 100% of PLOs are assessed over a 3 year period with at least 30% of all PLOs assessed in each academic year Produces an Annual PLOA plan for each Diploma, Higher Diploma and Bachelor program Implements the annual assessment plan consistently across classes and delivery sites and collects data Analyzes data and develops action plans Reports results and analysis and action plans to Programme and Curricula Department Ensures that an electronic file containing copies of each PLO assessment and samples of student work reflecting range of performance is maintained Ensures that action plans to improve program quality are implemented and evaluated Timeline Action Responsibility When Annual PLO Assessment Plan Draft Academic Faculty By end of March Plan Endorsement Program & Curriculum Department By end of April PLO Assessment Administration Academic Faculty Fall & Spring Semesters Annual PLO Assessment Report & Action Plan completed Review of Program Reports & Action Plans Academic Faculty Program & Curriculum Department By end of August By end of September 5.12

49 Annual Academic Programme Audit HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Purpose The purpose of the Annual Academic Program Audit is to evaluate key indicators to identify any issues and take action to improve program quality. Requirement Each Academic Faculty is required to complete an annual internal review for each programme and major under its responsibility. The report is a critical evaluation of: Need for the programme by business and society Demand for the programme by students Curriculum Student learning Faculty Resourcing Continuous Quality Improvement Processes Process Academic Faculty Annual PLO Assessments Academic Faculty Annual Program Audit Report Review program quality indicators Evaluate actions for quality improvement Academic Faculty Implement Actions for quality improvement Academic Council Approve Actions for quality improvement Annual Program Audit Report Process Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee Endorse Report & Action Plan Recommend quality improvement measures Academic Faculty Action Plan to improve program quality Program & Curricula Department Review Report & Action PLan 5.13

50 Responsibilities: Annual Program Audit HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Program Review Component Programs and Curricula Department Academic Faculty CQA Committee Academic Council Annual Program Audit Initiates the Annual Program Audit process Ensures the implementation of the Annual Program Audit Report process Provides templates for Annual Program Audit Reports Endorses the nominated Audit Team for each programme Reviews the Annual Program Audit Report for each program The Faculty Executive Dean with the support of the Faculty Academic Committee and faculty members: Identify an Audit Team for each programme Conduct Annual Program Audit critically evaluating the need, demand, resourcing and quality for each programme Complete Annual Program Audit Report including Action Plan for improvement for each programme Recommends academic programs to undergo immediate cyclical program review to the Academic Council Recommends measures for improving programme quality to Academic Council Receives reports from the Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee Approves academic programs to undergo immediate cyclical program review to the Academic Council Endorses recommendations for improving programme quality Publishes all Annual Program Audit Reports Recommends academic programs for further review to the Programme Quality Review Committee Provides an Annual Academic Affairs Program Audit Report to the Programme Quality Review Committee Submits an Annual Faculty Program Audit Report reviewing & summarizing programme reports to Program and Curricula Department Implements Action Plan and recommendations from Academic Council for improving programme quality 5.14

51 Timeline Action Responsibility By end of Annual Programme Audit Report completed for each active programme and major Faculty Executive Dean October 2017 Annual Faculty Executive Summary completed Faculty Executive Dean November 2017 Review Annual Academic Affairs Report completed Recommendations for improving programs and review process Manager Program Review and Improvement Executive Dean Program and Curricula Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee December 2017 January 2018 February 2018 Endorsement of CQA Committee recommendations Academic Council March 2018 Evidence Key Focus Area Student Learning Main Evidence Program learning outcome assessment reports Satisfaction surveys: Exiting Students, Graduates (alumni), Graduate Employers Curriculum: currency & relevance Satisfaction surveys: Graduates (Alumni), Graduate Employers; Faculty Evaluation (Program Effectiveness Survey) Industry Advisory Committee / Industry Advisory Board Feedback Cohort Analysis Demand/Need for the program Institutional Research Data: Student enrolment, attrition, at-risk students, CGPA, graduation rate Employment Rates; Satisfaction surveys: Exiting Students, Graduates (alumni), Graduate Employers; Industry Advisory Committee / Industry Advisory Board Feedback Feedback from learners Resources: faculty, teaching & learning, facilities Satisfaction surveys: Exiting Students, Graduates (alumni Faculty Complement analysis, Workload data Faculty Evaluation (Program Effectiveness Survey) Satisfaction Surveys: Student Services, Staff Services Sources of Evidence Programme Learning Outcome (PLO) Assessment Reports PLO Assessment Reports are available from the Academic Faculty refer above for further detail. The requirement is: Each programme learning outcome is assessed at least once over a three year period A minimum of 30% of programme learning outcomes are assessed each academic year. 5.15

52 Assessment Reports Reports of student performance on course assessments are published after each Semester either on the Portal egradebook or the Academic Programme Review Dashboard of the IEMS. The following reports are available: egradebook Reports The following are available through the HCT Intranet Portal and report the median, mean, and distribution of grades for coursework and final assessments: CSA (Common Specification Assessment) Analysis Report by Academic Faculty CSA Analysis Report by campus CSA Analysis Report by course CSA Analysis Report by CRN Course Learning Outcome Report (under development) Dashboard Reports The following are available through the Academic Programme Review Dashboard of the IEMS and report grade distributions and grade point averages by course and programme: Grade Distribution Report by Academic Faculty Grade Distribution Report by Course Average Course Grade Point Average Cumulative Grade Point Average by Programme Cohort Analysis The following data are available through the Academic Programme Review Dashboard of the IEMS: Enrolment Attrition rate Average class absences Students on probation Graduation rate Employment rate Surveys The following surveys are available through the Academic Programme Review Dashboard of the IEMS: Internal Student Satisfaction with Programme (Every Term) Campus Programme Chair Survey (Every Year) External Graduate Satisfaction Survey (Every Term) Graduate Employer Survey (Every Year) External Stakeholder Input The following are available from the Academic Faculty: Industry Advisory Committee feedback Accreditation reports 5.16

53 Cyclical Programme Review HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Purpose The purpose of the Cyclical Program Review is to decide on whether to continue offering the program or to teach-out the program at the HCT or at particular campuses. Requirement Each active programme and major is required to undergo a periodic review notwithstanding any national or international accreditation. However, Academic Faculties are recommended to synchronise the HCT s Cyclical Program Review with external program accreditation reviews wherever feasible. The Cyclical Program Review is a critical evaluation of the academic quality and demand for the program over the previous years and is based on evidence and trend analysis provided by the Annual Program Audit Reports produced in that period. Programmes are periodically reviewed according to length of credential: Two Year Diplomas: every 3 years Three Year Higher Diplomas: every 4 years Four Year Bachelors: every 5 years Two Year Masters: every 3 years 5.17

54 Process HCT Academic Quality Assurance Manual Academic Faculty Annual PLO Assessments Annual Program Audit Reports Academic Faculty Self-Study Bachelor s: every 5 years Higher Diploma: every 4 years Diploma: every 3 years Decision Continuance - Academic Council Discontinue at campus(es) Executive Committee Close program - Board of Trustees External Review Team Report Cyclical Program Review Cycle Academic Council Recommendation Program & Curricula Department Review Curriculum Quality Assurance Committee Review Self-study The responsible Academic Faculty completes a Self-Study including analyses of its: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (i.e. SWOT analysis); Need by industry and society; Demand by students; Academic quality e.g. are students achieving the programme learning outcomes; are academic standards consistently maintained, are faculty delivering the program appropriate qualified and experienced etc; Budget efficiency. For further information refer to the Program Review Site 5.18

55 External Review Team Report The External Review Team (ERT) is appointed by the Executive Dean Programme & Curriculum in consultation with the relevant Executive Dean. The ERT: Verifies and evaluates the Self-study. Makes site visits - depending on the nature of the program and the evidence presented in the selfstudy, the ERT, after consultation with the ADVC Programme & Curriculum, may make site visits to all or a sample of campuses and delivery sites to evaluate facilities and resources. Interviews program managers, faculty, current students, alumni, and external stakeholders (e.g. employers), as feasible. Makes a recommendation for continuance of the program. 5.19

56 Responsibilities: Cyclical Program Review (CPR) Programs and Curricula Department Academic Faculty External Review Team CQA Committee Academic Council Executive Committee Board of Trustees Initiates the CPR process Ensures the implementation of the CPR process Provides templates for CPR Approves the review team responsible for writing the Program Self-Study Report Approves the External Review Team responsible for reviewing the Program Self-Study Report and conducting campus visits Reviews the CPR Report for each academic program Recommends the internal team to write Self-Study Team for each programme under review Recommends the External Review Team to evaluate the program Completes Program Self- Study Report including critically evaluation of previous Annual Program Audit Reports for each programme under review Makes a recommendation on the continuation of the program Implements recommendations from Academic Council for improving programme quality Critically evaluates the Program Self-Study Report Conducts campus visits evaluating teaching and learning resources, facilities, and interviewing stakeholders including students and faculty Makes a recommendation on the continuation of the program Approves the timetable for the CPR of each academic program Receives and reviews CPR Reports Makes recommendations for program continuance to Academic Council Makes recommendations for improving programme quality to Academic Council Approves continuance of an academic program Recommends discontinuation of an academic program at one or more campuses or across the HCT Endorses recommendations for improving programme quality Approves discontinuation of an academic program at one or more campuses Approves discontinuation of an academic program across the HCT 5.20

57 Timeline Action Responsibility By end of Calendar for program cyclical review Programmes nominated in addition to the calendar cyclical review CQA Committee CQA Committee April May Programme Self Study Completed Faculty Executive Dean October Programme Quality Review Completed External Review Team November Recommendation Programme & Curriculum Department December Endorses recommendations Academic Council January Continuance: Executive Committee Programme Review Decisions Change and areas of improvement made to programme and courses Discontinuance at a campus: Executive Committee Discontinuance across HCT: Board of Trustees Faculty Executive Dean February As appropriate Policy and Procedures LP225 Course & Program Review 5.21

58 Chapter 6: Course Quality Review Contents Structures & Responsibilities 6.1 Processes 6.3 Structures & Responsibilities Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs Program and Curricula Department, Academic Affairs Curriculum Development Section The section is responsible for supporting Academic Faculty s in the design and development academic courses. Program Review and Improvement Section The section is responsible for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the course review and continuous quality improvement processes. Academic Faculty Faculty Academic Committee A FAC is a standing committee of Academic Council responsible for ensuring that the Faculty s academic courses are fit-for-purpose and viable. The FAC is responsible for reviewing each course at least once every three years to ensure its currency and relevance. Curriculum Leader The Curriculum Leader (CL) provides academic leadership and oversight for one or more courses within their area of expertise. As courses may be offered by a number of programs, the CL ensures that the courses offered are current with developments in the discipline and workplace. Course Team The course team is responsible for course delivery and evaluation. The Team contributes to the planning and on-going monitoring of the course highlighting any issues to the Course Team Leader (see below). After instruction is complete, the Team critically evaluates the delivery of the course in the course file and by completing the Faculty Course Evaluation Survey. Course Team Leader (CTL) The CTL provides academic leadership to the instructors delivering the course (the course team). The CTL monitors the delivery of the course and course assessments across classes and campuses, and reviews course grades. Each semester, the CTL submits a Course Report to the Faculty Academic Committee evaluating the delivery of the course and student success in meeting course learning outcomes, and proposing action plans to deal with issues. CTLs are appointed by the FAC based on experience and credentials in the field of study. Programme Chair (PC) The PC supervises instructors to ensure that the syllabus, assessment, and classroom teaching methodology complies with the approved course outline, and reviews course grades. The PC liaises with College Dean of Academic Operations to ensure that the course is adequately resourced. 6.1

59 Campuses Dean of Academic Operations (DAO) The DAO liaises with Faculty PCs and the College Director to ensure the effective delivery of the course through the optimal utilization of the campus teaching and learning, human, and physical (e.g. labs and workshops) resources. The DAO also ensures campus support for the administration of course examinations. DAOs are appointed at each campus by the Vice Chancellor and report directly to the College Director. Students Students evaluate course delivery by completing the Course Evaluation Survey, and evaluate the effectiveness of the instructor by completing the Student Faculty Evaluation Survey. Timeline Semester Review: each course is reviewed to ensure that students are effectively supported in achieving learning outcomes Cyclical Review: each course is reviewed at least once every three years to ensure it is educationally current and contributing effectively to the programme(s) it is part of. 6.2

60 Processes Purpose The review of course delivery is designed to monitor and evaluate the curriculum, teaching, learning resources, physical resources and to take action to improve student experience and learning. Overview Inputs Process Grade Reports Assessment Reports Heads of Campus Academic Operations Major change Consult Course File Review Course Team Leader - Course Report Faculty Academic Committee - Approve minor change - Recommend major change Executive Dean Major Change - Endorse Academic Council Major Change - Approve Surveys Executive Dean Programme & Curriculum Major Change - Endorse Industry Advisory Committee Input 6.3

61 Quality Assurance Cycle Step Process When By Action Plan Develop/Review Course Learning Outcomes for the course aligned to programme learning outcomes Start of academic year Faculty Academic Committee in consultation with Manager Curriculum Development Submit for approval to Executive Dean Update: CMS, course documentation Allocate resources (instructors, learning resources, physical resources, budget) to deliver the course curriculum consistently across classes and delivery sites Start of academic year Faculty Academic Committee Submit for approval to Executive Dean Update: CMS, course documentation Develop curriculum aligned to course learning outcomes Start of academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team) in consultation with Manager Curriculum Development Submit for approval to Faculty Academic Committee Update: CMS, course documentation Do Deliver curriculum consistently across classes and delivery sites Maintain course files Throughout academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team Instructors) Deliver course CheckEvaluate course files Analyze assessment data Identify shortcomings and/or anomalies Throughout academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team Leader) Submit to Faculty Academic Committee for review Develop action plans to address shortcomings and/or anomalies Each Fall and Spring semester Academic Faculty (Course Team Leader) Modifications to course delivery, curriculum, assessment, resourcing etc. Act Modify course delivery Throughout semester Academic Faculty (Course Team, Campus Program Chair, Campus Dean of Academic Operations Minor changes to sequencing of content or assessment and learning activities Allocation of educational, physical resources, instructors, support staff Modify curriculum, assessment, resource allocation (instructors, learning resources, physical resources, budget) Following semester Academic Faculty (Course Team) Update: CMS, programme and course documentation 6.4

62 Monitor effectiveness of actions. Report effectiveness of QA process Throughout academic year Academic Faculty and Manager Program Review & Improvement Input to planning process Improve QA process Cyclical Course Review At least once every 3 years Faculty Academic Team Continue: Executive Dean Discontinue: Academic Council Modification or discontinuation to a programme core course: Academic Council (Note: major changes to or discontinuation of a programme core course require approval by CAA) Grade and Assessment Reports egradebook: the following reports are available through the HCT Intranet Portal and report the median, mean, and distribution of grades for coursework and final assessments: CSA (Common Specification Assessment) Analysis Report by the Academic Faculty CSA Analysis Report by campus CSA Analysis Report by course CSA Analysis Report by CRN Course Learning Outcome Report Academic Programme Review Dashboard: the following reports are available through the Institutional Effectiveness Management System and provide grade distributions and grade point averages by course: Grade Distribution Report by Academic Faculty Grade Distribution Report by Course Average Course Grade Point Average Course File Review Course files are live documents that provide information on course delivery and student performance for input into the quality assurance process. Course files provide evidence that the course has been delivered according to curriculum documents and academic standards, and identify areas for improvement in terms of course delivery, teaching and learning, and assessment. They are a key component and serve as evidence of continuous quality assurance. Maintenance and Accessibility Course files are kept up-to-date as the course is being taught especially after each assessment contributing to the final course mark. The Files are electronic and accessible to internal quality assurance stakeholders including but not limited to the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs and the Department of Organizational Excellence. 6.5

63 Content Course files must include or provide working electronic links to the following: Syllabi for the current semester and the previous semester Copies of all instructor teaching materials; Copies of each assessment task; Marking scheme or rubric plus any model answers for each assessment; Examples of student work graded at Grades A, B, C, D, and F if available for each assessment instruments; Instructor review covering: o appropriateness of the course learning outcomes; o extent to which the syllabus was covered; o extent to which learning outcomes were met (with evidence); o appropriateness of textbooks and other learning resources; o appropriateness of assessment tasks to course learning outcomes; o appropriateness of the balance of assessment tasks; o appropriateness of prerequisites; o general comments on any problems encountered with the course or resources; Marks and grade distributions for each assessment and for the final course grade; Summary of student feedback on the evaluation of the course. Quality Assurance Process Regular monitoring The Course Team Leader (CTL) should review course files after each scheduled assessment contributing to the final course mark to ensure that its administration and marking has followed course and academic standards. Issues should be dealt with in consultation with the instructor and, where appropriate, with the respective campus Programme Chair. Course Report The CTL should complete a Course Report and submit to the Faculty Academic Committee (FAC) within two weeks of the end of the course. The Report should be as brief as possible but provide the information required to address any issues that may require dealing with before the next delivery of the course. The Report should: Critically evaluate: o student achievement of course learning outcomes o the syllabus, content, learning activities o etexts, other learning resources, and educational technology o each assessment contributing to the final course mark o instructor feedback o student feedback Explain any problems or issues that have affected or may affect the course in the future Recommend any changes to improve student learning, and the efficiency and effectiveness of course delivery. 6.6

64 FAC Review The FAC should review each CTL Report approving minor changes and recommending major changes to the Executive Dean. FAC reviews should be recorded and available to internal quality assurance stakeholders including but not limited to the Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Affairs and the Department of Organizational Excellence. Surveys The following surveys are used in the review of courses Faculty Course Evaluation Survey: available from Institutional Effectiveness Management System Student Faculty Evaluation Survey: available from the Executive Dean of the Academic Faculty 6.7

65 Chapter 7: Assessment and Grading Contents Structures & Responsibilities 7.1 Assessment Processes 7.3 Grading Processes 7.6 Policy and Procedures 7.9 Structures & Responsibilities Academic Faculties Executive Dean (ED) The ED for each Academic Faculty is accountable for ensuring that the assessment provision meets the requirements of HCT policy and procedure, and the academic standards appropriate to the field and level of the course, and to the National Qualifications Framework (QFEmirates). The ED approves final course grades prior to their release to students and has the discretion to establish a Faculty Grade Review Committee to investigate and resolve any issues prior to finalizing results. Faculty Academic Committee (FAC) The FAC is responsible for reviewing and approving the assessment strategy for each course. Course Team The course team is responsible for implementing the course assessment strategy and the HCT s Assessment & Grading procedures and guidelines course delivery and evaluation. The Team contributes to on-going monitoring of the course highlighting any issues related to assessment and grading to the Course Team Leader (see below). After instruction is complete, the Team critically evaluates the course assessments in the course file and by completing the Faculty Course Evaluation Survey. The course team consists of the instructors delivering the course across the campuses Course Team Leader (CTL) The CTL ensures a common understanding of assessment requirements and standards of achievement by all instructors delivering the course and that the academic rigor of each assessment task is aligned to the relevant level of the QFEmirates, appropriate to the field of the course. The CTL also verifies that assessments and grades are consistent across campuses and sections. Each semester, the CTL submits a Course Report to the Faculty Academic Committee evaluating the course assessment provision and proposing action plans to deal with issues. CTLs are appointed by the FAC based on experience and credentials in the field of study. Programme Chair (PC) The PC supervises instructors to ensure that assessment complies with the approved course assessment strategy, and reviews course grades to verify that grading at the campus is fair and equitable identifying any anomalies for further action. The Executive Dean appoints at least one PC at each campus delivering Faculty programs. Appointments are based on experience and credentials. 7.1

66 Teaching and Learning Unit (T&L), Education Technologies Division T&L designs and delivers professional development activities to promote effective assessment practices including publishing a Faculty guide to assessment which describes the institution s principles and approach to assessment including task development, and marking and grading student work. The Unit is headed by a Director and has a Professional Development and Practice team which provides training to faculty. Organizational Effectiveness (OE) Department OE monitors, audits and reports on assessment practices and grades across academic Faculties, programs, courses, and campuses and oversees the development and administration of Faculty- Wide Assessments. Campus Operations Division The Dean of Academic Operations at each campus is responsible for the security and administration of Faculty-Wide Assessments. 7.2

67 Assessment Processes Course Learning Outcome Assessment Student achievement of course learning outcomes is assessed by embedded course assessments. Overview Process When By Action Review assessment strategy Start of academic year Faculty Academic Committee Update: CMS, course documentation Develop at least one summative assessment for each Course Learning Outcome Implement assessment strategy Start of academic year Throughout academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team) Academic Faculty (Course Team) Prepare assessment tasks and required resources Administer assessments consistently across classes and campuses Collect data Throughout academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team) Mark and record results Report data End of each semester Organizational Excellence Publish assessment reports Analyze data Identify shortcomings and/or anomalies Throughout academic year Academic Faculty and Organizational Excellence Submit for review to Faculty Academic Committee Develop action plans to address shortcomings and/or anomalies Throughout academic year Academic Faculty (Course Team) Submit to Faculty Academic Committee to review and recommend for approval by Executive Dean Implement action plans. Following semester Academic Faculty (Course Team) Actions: modify assessment task, marking scheme or rubric, conditions of assessment, resources etc Update assessment documentation Provide required training to course team Monitor effectiveness of actions Report effectiveness of QA process Throughout academic year Academic Faculty and Organizational Excellence Input to planning process Assessment Strategies Faculties develop assessment strategies for each course that measure student achievement of intended learning outcomes which instructors are required to follow. These methods of evaluation 7.3

68 are published on the curriculum management system (CMS). The assessment strategies are also included in the course outlines which are given to students at the start of the course. The Assessment Strategy stipulates each assessment that contributes to the final course mark providing information regarding: Assessment tasks e.g. exam, project, portfolio etc. Weighting of each assessment i.e. percentage contribution of the task to the final course mark Course learning outcomes addressed by each task Course teams develop and administer assessment tasks in line with the Assessment Strategies ensuring consistency in meeting course requirements and academic standards across campuses. Common Assessments (CA) A CA is an assessment task that is developed and marked in accordance with an assessment specification approved by the Faculty Executive Dean. The assessment task (e.g. portfolio, project, oral defence, written test etc.) is the same for all students and provides a means of comparing student performance across classes and campuses. Taken together the CAs in any particular course will assess student achievement of each course learning outcome. Faculty-wide Assessments (FWA) A FWA is a form of Common Assessment in which all students registered in the same course sit a common invigilated written examination. Each exam is prepared by the appropriate course team leader and moderated by the Faculty Academic Committee and Executive Dean prior to administration. The exams are administered under strict security. See diagram below. The results of each FWA are analyzed by the Academic Faculty to determine if any moderation is required prior to being finalized and released to students. 7.4

69 FWA development and administration process 7.5