Validation of new collaborative programmes procedures manual

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Validation of new collaborative programmes procedures manual"

Transcription

1 Validation of new collaborative programmes procedures manual Author: Registrar & Deputy Chief Executive Date created: 09/04/15 Due for review: July 2015 Approval route: CQSP

2 Contents Page Glossary 3 Key definitions 4 Types of Collaboration 6 Validation 7 Timescales for new programmes 7 Development of a new partner and programme proposal 7 Planning approval 7 Programme code 8 Approval through the Education and Academic Quality Services (EAQS) 9 Recognition and articulation agreements 9 Distance Learning 9 CPD Awards 10 Joint and Dual Awards 10 Foundation Degrees 10 Planning meeting 10 Required documentation 11 Programme document 11 Programme specification 12 Module Proformas 12 Staff CVs 12 Draft Programme Guide 13 Programme mapping 13 Students comments on the proposal 13 Changes to a programme between review events 13 Scrutiny of the programme documentation at pre-validation stage 14 The validation process and event 15 Resource visits and site approval 16 Composition of a validation panel 16 The responsibilities of the validation panel 16 Roles of panel members 16 Briefing pack for the validation panel 17 The responsibilities of the programme team and link tutor 18 Programme for a validation event 18 Involvement of a Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body (PSRB) 18 Outcomes of a validation event 18 Post-validation activity 19 Validation report 19 Responses to conditions 19 Production of definitive documentation 19 Event Completion Form 20 Responses to recommendations 20 Overview report 20 Appendices Appendix 1: Contact details 21 Appendix 2: Overview of the programme approval or review process 23 Appendix 3: Articulation and Recognition Agreements 24 Appendix 4: Approval and periodic review of Collaborative CPDs 34 Appendix 5: Joint and Dual awards 37

3 Appendix 6: Guidance notes for Foundation degrees 43 Appendix 7: Record of the Planning Meeting Programme Validation 46 Appendix 8: External advisor nomination form 49 Appendix 9: Criteria for approval of an external advisor 50 Appendix 10: Support available from Professional Service teams at LJMU 52 Appendix 11: Staff CV template 54 Appendix 12: Staff qualifications policy 55 Appendix 13: Possible discussion points for a validation event 56 Appendix 14: Collaborative programmes and employability/self awareness skills 58 Appendix 15: LJMU Policies and Regulations 59 Appendix 16: Programme Specification Guidance 63 Appendix 17: Mapping guidance notes 66 Appendix 18: Level learning outcome mapping template 68 Appendix 19: Credit and module learning outcome mapping template 70 Appendix 20: Application for an amendment to an existing programme/module 73 or application for a new module Appendix 21: Review of franchise programme where internal programme has 80 been amended Appendix 22: Summary paper on the QAA UK Quality Code 81 Appendix 23: Comments from Panel Members / Critical Readers for prevalidation 82 Appendix 24: Approval of additional teaching venues policy 84 Appendix 25: Resource visit template 86 Appendix 26: Guidance for the Chair of a validation event 87 Appendix 27: Guidance for internal panel members 89 Appendix 28: Student panel members 90 Appendix 29: Guidance for external advisors 93 Appendix 30: Guidance for the event officer 94 Appendix 31: Recommended programme for an event 95 Appendix 32: Comments from Panel Members for the validation event 96 Appendix 33: Feedback Form: Validation & Review (Panel Members) 98 Appendix 34: Feedback Form: Validation & Review Programme Leaders 99 Appendix 35: Event Report template 100 2

4 Glossary AF APP APR APT AQSO CQSP CPD EAQS FD FE FHEQ FQAEC HE HEFCE HEI LJMU LSU LS LTA PDP PPP PSRB QAA QAEC QEO QSO RP(E)L SSC SBS USP VLE Academic Framework Academic Planning Panel Articulated Progression Route Academic Partnerships Team Assistant Quality Support Officer Collaborative Quality and Standards Panel Certificate of Professional Development Education and Academic Quality Services Foundation Degree Further Education Framework for Higher Education Qualifications Faculty Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee Higher Education Higher Education Funding Council for England Higher Education Institution Liverpool John Moores University Liverpool Students Union Library Services Learning, Teaching and Assessment Personal Development Planning Programme Proposal Proforma Professional Statutory Regulatory Body Quality Assurance Agency Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee Quality Enhancement Officer Quality Support Officer Collaborative Provision Recognition of Prior (Experiential) Learning Sector Skills Council Subject Benchmark Statement University Standing Panel Virtual Learning Environment 3

5 Key Definitions Please use the following terminology which is in line with the QAA and the LJMU Academic Framework. Term Also known as What it means Academic standards Credit External Examiner Faculty / School Standards/ Threshold standards Standards are the level of achievement that a student has to reach to gain an academic award (for example, a degree). For similar awards, the threshold level of achievement should be the same for any UK award. So an engineering degree from one university should reach the same level as it does in another university. One credit equates to ten notional hours of learning. External examiners are appointed from other universities to all taught programmes to ensure that academic standards are being maintained and are in line with other universities, and that assessment is being carried out fairly and equitably. The University is structured into a number of Faculties and Schools. For the full University Structure, please see Information Public Information This is any information published by a university or college about the higher education courses they offer or the resources they provide. It also includes any information in course handbooks, prospectuses or on any public website. Intended Learning Outcomes Learning opportunities Learning Outcomes Quality (of Learning opportunities) A description of what students should be able to do or demonstrate, in terms of particular knowledge and skills, by the end of each module and each level of their programme. Learning opportunities are everything a university or college provides in order to enable a student to achieve the level required to qualify for an award. This includes: the teaching that students receive on their programmes of study the contribution students make to their own learning the academic and personal support they receive which enable them to progress through their courses access to libraries access to online resources or a virtual learning environment 4

6 Module A programme is divided into levels and each level into a series of smaller units of study called modules. Module proformas Programme Programme Specification The UK Quality Code for Higher Education Module Specifications The Quality Code Core module compulsory components of the programme. Optional module modules that can be chosen from a specified group, in order to gain the credit required for the programme. The options that are available are agreed and confirmed within the programme specification. Documents which provide key information on specific modules which make up a programme, including information on syllabus content, and how a module is taught and assessed. An approved course of study, comprising of modules (core and / or optional), that provides a coherent learning experience and leads to an award. A document containing specific information about an individual programme of study, about its intended learning outcomes and the means by which these outcomes are achieved and demonstrated. The 'Quality Code' is a series of documents put together by QAA, with input from universities, colleges and students across the UK. These documents are split into three Parts. Part A is about academic standards. Part B is about learning opportunities. Part C is about public information. The Quality Code sets out what everyone in the UK higher education sector requires of each other in those three areas. The Quality Code applies to all students in UK Higher Education which is reviewed by QAA. 5

7 Types of Collaboration Franchise Programme Validated Programme Dual Awards Joint Award Recognition arrangements and articulation arrangements Distance Learning Programmes Distance Taught Programmes A franchise programme one of LJMU s own approved programmes which a partner institution is approved to deliver and which leads to an LJMU award. Students on a franchise programme would be LJMU students and the University retains control and responsibility for academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities. A validated programme is one where the partner institution develops its own programme and delivers it as an LJMU validated programme leading to an LJMU award. Students on a validated programme are LJMU students and the University retains control and responsibility for academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities. A dual award is defined by LJMU as an arrangement where LJMU, together with one or more awarding bodies, provides a programme leading to separate awards and certificates being granted by all the awarding bodies. A joint award is an arrangement where LJMU, together with one or more awarding bodies, provides a jointly developed and delivered programme, leading to a single award made jointly by all the awarding bodies. A single certificate is produced, not separate certificates from each awarding body. Recognition arrangements and articulation arrangements are agreements where students who have completed a defined external programme (or an agreed part of the external programme), which is owned by the partner institution, can enter with advanced standing to a subsequent part or level of a programme validated by LJMU. The Articulation Process is used as an alternative streamlined process to the Recognition Process where the proposed partner is well established and meets the prescribed criteria. Distance learning is where a programme does not normally require the presence of the students at the LJMU (or partner) campuses. Learners usually study these programmes overseas through the use of specially developed learning materials which can take a number of different formats and will not normally require face-to-face contact with their tutors, e.g. via e-learning. The University retains control and responsibility for academic standards and quality of learning opportunities.. A distance taught programme is one that is delivered away from the University, often overseas, by LJMU staff. It may include pastoral support and learner support from local staff but will not include teaching by them. The programme is delivered using premises and resources provided locally by the partner. The University retains control and responsibility for academic standards and quality of learning opportunities. 6

8 Validation 1. Validation is the quality assurance process used to scrutinise a proposed programme of study in order to assure Academic Board that it meets the University s expectations of standards and quality. Development of the LJMU collaborative validation and programme review process has taken account of the QAA s UK Quality Code and specifically the guidance in Chapter B10, Managing higher education provision with others. Validation is conducted through a process of peer review whereby an informed and impartial panel considers a proposal for a new programme in order to confirm that it meets the required standards and offers high quality learning opportunities for students. Collaborative validation panels have the delegated authority to make decisions regarding programme proposals on behalf of Academic Board. 2. The validation of a collaborative programme is managed in three distinct phases, as follows: a) Development and documentation of the proposed programme of study b) Validation process including a discussion meeting known as the event c) Post-event activity 3. All collaborative programme validations are managed by the Education and Academic Quality Services (EAQS), through the Head of Academic Quality (see appendix 1 for contact details), who will manage the process through to the validation and postvalidation activity. Normally validation events will be held at the partner institution. 4. This Procedures Manual is intended to provide detailed information about the validation process and the roles and responsibilities of all participants - programme leaders, link tutors, panel members, faculty staff and quality officers. 5. For Franchise collaborations the emphasis of the validation is the ability of the partner, specifically the staff and physical resources available, to be able to deliver the programmes. Timescales for new programmes 6. The timescales for the validation of a new programme can vary greatly. It should be possible to complete the validation, following Academic Planning Panel (APP) approval, within 3-4 months. See appendix 2 for an overview of the stages of the processes required. 7. For new collaborative programmes, APP approval must be achieved, ideally by January of the preceding academic year in which the programmes are starting. This is to ensure appropriate time for validation and any conditions to be met before students are recruited. Development of a new partner and programme proposal Planning Approval 8. Programme teams and link tutors will work with members of the Academic Partnerships Team (APT) to ensure that new collaborative partner or programme proposals are ready to submit for approval. 9. New proposed partners will first need to be approved for strategic fit. Evidence to inform this decision will be prepared by the Faculty lead and the APT using the Initial Assessment of Strategic Fit Checklist (IASF). APT and Finance will also undertake a 7

9 due diligence exercise on the proposed partner. The outcome of due diligence and the IASF will be submitted to the Pro Vice Chancellor (External Relations) and the University Registrar for consideration. The application is then submitted for approval by the Senior Management Team (SMT). For further details, please see the Academic Partnerships Operations Manual which is available at: All new programme proposals must receive planning approval within the faculty from the Director of School or equivalent and the Dean of Faculty. The Dean will determine whether new proposals are in line with the university/faculty strategic plans and will judge the viability and risk implications of the proposals. The Dean will confirm that, subject to validation, the programme can be introduced within existing resources or will grant approval for those requiring additional resources to proceed to validation. The proposal is then considered for approval by the Faculty Management Team (FMT). 11. The Dean is then responsible for obtaining final confirmation of approval from APP. For collaborative programmes, the completion of the due diligence process by APT is an essential part of the process, and APP will not grant approval without the completion of due diligence. Due diligence also includes an institutional visit to new partners. Further information on the due diligence process can be found in the Collaborative Manual on the APT website: Approval by APP requires submission of a completed Programme Proposal Proforma (PPP). In order to complete the PPP, it is necessary for the programme leader in conjunction with the Director of School or equivalent, the Dean, the link tutor and APT to have developed a business case for the proposal. The business case should cover market analysis, planning projections and include a risk assessment and specify the resource requirements and their costs. Programme teams must be able to demonstrate that there is a market for the proposal and that risks can be managed. Particular attention must be paid to the requirements for learner support resources, including any needs for site licences for computer software and for off campus support. Specific requirements must be agreed with the Director of Library Services (LS) prior to submission of the PPP. For collaborative proposals these requirements are subsumed within the due diligence process and the partner programme leader is supported by the project leader or link tutor and APT. 13. Following APP approval the programme can then go forward for validation. 14. Development of the proposal will be managed via the school; a minimum level of developmental support will have been identified by the school. This is to assist with the ongoing development of the programme, particularly ensuring that the documentation is produced in the appropriate format for LJMU validations. The programme leader developing the proposal in the partner institution should ensure that this support is utilised. Programme Code 15. As soon as a programme has been approved by APP, a programme code will be allocated by Academic Planning and Information Services. This programme code should be used on all correspondence with Academic Planning and Information Services regarding that specific programme. This is to ensure that appropriate validation outcomes can be matched to the correct programme. 8

10 16. Once a programme proposal has been confirmed by APP, the Quality Support Officer (QSO) will receive notification of this approval and will begin the EAQS approval process. Approval through the Education and Academic Quality Services (EAQS) 17. The approval process required might vary, depending on the type of partnership which is proposed, and the level of risk involved with the type of proposed partnership. Recognition and articulation agreements 18. Where more than 5 students per cohort are progressing from a partner organisation, a recognition or articulation agreement has to be approved. Further advice can be obtained from the Quality Support Officers. 19. As articulation and recognition arrangements carry less risk than some collaborative programmes, the validation procedures for these arrangements will be based on the categorisation of the partner. 20. The APP will confirm whether consideration through the articulation arrangement or recognition process is appropriate, based upon clear criteria outlined in the Articulation and Recognition Agreement process (see Appendix 3), and for a recognition will determine the category allocated to each partner. Its decisions and conclusions on risk will be notified to CQSP. 21. If the proposal will be considered as a Recognition, the partner institution will be categorised as either A, low risk or B, higher risk. Category A partners are likely to be well established colleges in the state education sector with a high reputation, usually approved within national standards and possibly with existing progression arrangements with universities in the UK and elsewhere. Category B partners are newer, private organisations where programmes may not so easily be referenced against national standards and quality systems may be less well regulated. 22. Those partners categorised as A will not have an institutional visit by APT or a separate visit as part of the validation event. 23. Those categorised as B will have an institutional visit as part of the due diligence process, managed by APT. Following successful due diligence and institutional approval, a validation would take place at the partner institution. Distance learning 24. For programmes incorporating an element of distance learning, the Technology Enhancement Learning team within the EAQS should be consulted to advise on effective technology enhanced learning practice and online resources for institutional and specialist learning technologies. 25. In addition to the standard documentation to support the proposal (discussed below), for a distance learning programme the programme team should submit a sample of programme materials, to cover induction and support mechanisms, and an example of at least one of type of learning resource and activity that will be delivered to students. 9

11 CPD Awards 26. The process for CPD validation will differ to that of a full programme validation as outlined within this manual. Appendix 4 gives further details of how and where the CPD programme approval can vary. Joint and Dual Awards 27. Details of the validation process for proposals for new joint or dual awards that have been approved by APP are outlined in Appendix 5. Foundation Degrees 28. For more specific advice and guidance on the LJMU approach to collaborative foundation degrees please see Appendix In all instances, whatever the type of proposal, guidance for the approval process can be provided by the QSO. Apart from the exceptions and variations stated above, most collaborative programme proposals will follow the process described below, starting with a planning meeting with the QSO. Any suggested adjustments to the process described below need to be agreed by the Head of Academic Quality. Planning Meeting 30. The Quality Support Officer (QSO) will convene a planning meeting with relevant staff which must include the involvement of partner staff (a template for the planning meeting can be found in Appendix 7). The purpose of the meeting is to: outline the process of validation confirm schedule of activity discuss panel and programme team membership discuss nomination and approval of external representation on the panel further details in appendices 8 and 9 discuss programme issues, including variances and PSRB requirements discuss documentary requirements and responsibilities discuss planned communication between link tutor and programme team identify sources of further information about University and national / international requirements The proposal will not proceed without the involvement of partner staff at this stage. Attendance can be facilitated via video conferencing. 31. The following practical arrangements will be discussed: Securing and using comments from students on the proposal External input into evaluation of the programme and suggested amendments Timing and duration of the validation event Suggested venue for and type of event Anticipated numbers at the validation event Input of programme specification onto ProdCat Input of modules onto ModCat 10

12 Involvement of Library Services (LS) representatives and any support that can be offered by the Learning and Technology Team or by the Equality and Diversity Officer (see Appendix 10). The agreed outcomes of the meeting will be confirmed in writing by the QSO with the attendees. Required documentation 32. The following documents must be produced for the validation. All documentation must be presented in English. Programme document Module Proformas (as an output from ModCat) for recognition agreements this should also include the partner s module pro-formas for the programme being recognised Programme Specification(s) (as an output from ProdCat) Draft Student Programme Guide Module indicative references CVs for relevant LJMU and partner institution staff (appendices 11 and 12) For recognition agreements only - the results of the mapping exercise carried out by the LJMU school For recognition agreements only a report of the institutional visit (if applicable) For Foundation Degrees only a mapping of the FD against the named Articulated Progression Route (APR) For franchised programmes a considerable amount of this documentation will exist as the LJMU documentation, however, it must be provided separately with all the relevant partner details shown. All documentation must refer to the collaborative partnership being validated and not simply be duplicates of the internal programme documents. Programme document 33. The programme document must be completed using the standard programme document template, available on the EAQS website. 34. The programme document provides information for the panel about the management of the proposal and is intended to supplement information contained in module proformas, programme specifications and student guides. Where information within a field is required in both the programme document and the student guides, the emphasis of this information should be different. For example information concerning induction within the Programme Document should outline the strategy employed and how induction will be managed. In the Student Guide information will relate to what the student can expect at induction. 35. When writing the programme document, the programme team should consider whether the narrative in each section would answer panel members potential queries, please see appendix 13 for some further guidance. The programme team should ensure that all documentation is written to comply with appropriate LJMU policies (see appendices 14 and 15). 11

13 Programme specification 36. A standard template is used across the University for all programme specifications, including collaborative programmes. Development of programme specifications is undertaken via the Product Catalogue (ProdCat). A brief overview of the Programme Specification section headings can be found in Appendix For Franchise programmes only the programme specification will generally match the specification for the home programme but should include some specific details related to delivery by the partner, such as in Section 10 the delivery mode and in later sections the support available at the partner institution. 38. For recognition agreements leading onto an already validated LJMU programme, a validated programme specification will already exist and this should be supplied to the panel for information. For recognitions leading to a new LJMU programme, a programme specification will need to be developed as outlined above. 39. For partnerships involving some element of recognition the table in section 10 of the programme specification should only list the LJMU modules that students will register for whilst undertaking the programme. Partner modules that form part of the recognition AND contribute towards the final degree classification should be listed in the free text box of section Colleagues in the Education and Academic Quality Services (EAQS) can further support development of the programme specification (see appendix 1 for contact details). 41. Following approval of the programme specification by the validation panel (subject to any necessary changes) Product Catalogue should be updated. The link tutor should facilitate this in accordance with school processes. 42. The programme specification can be used as a source of information for students, employers, teaching teams, internal reviews, external examiners and professional and statutory regulatory bodies. It is considered best practice to seek comments from potential employers, where appropriate, on the programme specification during the curriculum development phase. The programme specification will be reviewed and approved as part of the validation event. Module Proformas 43. A standard template is used across the University for all LJMU module proformas including collaborative programmes. Development of module proformas is undertaken via the Module Catalogue (ModCat). The link tutor should facilitate this in accordance with school processes. 44. For recognition agreements all module proformas for both partner modules and LJMU modules should be submitted as part of the event. Staff CVs 45. These should be provided in advance with the required documentation, in the format shown in appendix 11. LJMU has a staff qualifications policy for staff teaching on its programmes at partner institutions, this is shown in appendix

14 Draft Programme Guide 46. The student guide provides all the key information for students. A draft copy of the guide has to be produced for the validation event and must be completed using the standard programme handbook template, available on the EAQS website. Programme Mapping 47. For recognition or foundation degree programmes, a mapping exercise should be completed to demonstrate comparability of the programmes being considered. If the partner programme is an award of a UK HEI and, therefore, operating within the oversight of the UK QAA Quality Code the mapping can be by level learning outcomes. For all other programmes the mapping should be by module learning outcomes. Templates and guidance for mapping are provided in appendices 17, 18 and 19. Students comments on the proposal 48. Consideration by students should normally take place early in the planning and development phase of the proposal. The programme leader needs to ensure that there is appropriate student input from existing students in the area. This consultation must be confirmed in the validation documentation and noted in the event report. 49. For recognition agreements where the partner has been categorised as category B and a resource visit is necessary, the resource visit panel will meet with prospective students and look at students assessed work. A report from the resource visit will be produced which would include the discussions with the students. Changes to a programme between review events 50. Any subsequent minor changes required to the programme specification or module proformas between validation and programme review, will require approval by the appropriate Faculty Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee (FQAEC) and the resulting changes will have to be updated on ProdCat or ModCat. (See appendix 20 for a summary of the procedure for making changes). 51. Should there be any changes to the ownership of the partner during the approval period, this must be notified to the University. Some initial information will be requested to confirm whether the new ownership will result in any changes to the information agreed at the last validation or programme review such as delivery, staffing or student support. Based upon the initial response, the Head of Academic Quality will confirm whether any additional approval activity is required and what form this will take. 52. For recognition agreements if a change is made to the partner or LJMU award between validation and programme review, this will require consideration through the appropriate Faculty Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee, to confirm whether the changes impact on whether the recognition agreement is still appropriate. The QEO will advise if a re-mapping is required as part of the approval. 53. For franchise programmes, when the internal LJMU programme review takes place mid approval cycle for the partner programme, EAQS will be informed by the Quality Enhancement Officer (QEO) of any changes made to the programme, and will evaluate what quality assurance activity needs to take place with the partner institution to ensure that they can continue to run the programme. This may be a short meeting or a full review event, depending on the nature of the changes to the internal programme, see appendix

15 Scrutiny of the programme documentation at pre-validation stage 54. In cases where the link tutor is not the lead author of the documentation, it is recommended that prior to submission of the documentation for pre-validation approval, the link tutor has read and approved the documentation. 55. Considerable importance is attached to a thorough process of pre-validation, to ensure that the evidence provided to the validation panel, upon which they will be considering the proposal, is complete, accurate and up to date. 56. All documentation will be considered and approved as complete and ready for submission at pre-validation stage. The pre-validation scrutiny will take place virtually and will involve a critical analysis of the documentation to confirm that all the required documentation has been appropriately completed. The panel of critical readers will include: a Quality Support Officer (the Event Officer) an APT representative a member of staff from outside the Faculty, with experience of collaborative validation. the Faculty Registrar It is not intended that the pre-validation scrutiny should mirror the validation event. 57. The full set of documentation will be submitted electronically by the programme team to the Quality Support Officer. These will be circulated to the pre-validation panel of critical readers. The deadline for receipt of pre-validation documentation will be agreed with the QSO at the planning meeting. 58. The pre-validation panel must consider the technical requirements of the validation documentation; it must ensure the adequacy of documentation, approving, where appropriate, that the proposal proceeds to full University validation. It is not anticipated that the process will explore issues that are more properly discussed during the validation event, for example, curriculum content. 59. Pre-validation panels must examine: All required documentation as stated in paragraph 32 has been provided Module proformas: for technical consideration have they all been developed on ModCat, are they all complete? Does a proforma exist for each module? Are they accurate, up to date and complete? For recognition agreements is there sufficient information regarding modules of the partner programme? Programme specification: that the programme specification is complete and relevant information has been entered into each of the fields in the template on Prodcat. Programme document: that all sections of the template are completed with appropriate evaluative commentary. For recognition agreements that the mapping exercise has been completed and adequately reflects the alignment of the partner programme and the LJMU receiving programme. That all evidence required to support the mapping (module information for all partner and LJMU modules included in the mapping) has been submitted. For Foundation Degrees that a mapping exercise of the FD against levels 4 and 5 of the APR has been completed. That all evidence for the mapping has been submitted. 14

16 Draft programme guide: that this contains the specified information, as required within the agreed template. That the proposal demonstrates how the programme is aligned with the UK Quality Code see appendix 22 That the proposal demonstrates how the programme meets the requirements of LJMU regulations and policies 60. The pre-validation panel may specify amendments or additions to documentation that will need to be provided for the validation event. Feedback should be noted on a template (Appendix 23) and returned to the QSO. The QSO will send the combined comments to the programme leader, link tutor and critical readers. 61. An electronic copy of the amended set of documentation will be submitted by the programme team, normally 4 weeks before the validation event, to the Quality Support Officer. An annotated version of the pre-validation notes should also be submitted to indicate where changes have been made. The QSO will check this documentation against the outcomes of the critical analysis to ensure that all appropriate changes have been made. If the changes have not been made the documentation will be considered unfit for purpose and the proposal will not proceed to full validation until the amendments have been made. The validation process and event 62. The event will normally take place at the venue where the programme will be delivered, and this will then become the approved site for delivery. If the programme team feel there is a reason to hold the event at an alternative venue, this should be discussed with the event officer at the planning meeting. The type of event will be determined by the type of collaboration and will be discussed at the planning meeting. Normally, the type of event will be decided as follows: Validation required at partner institution Resource visit to partner institution followed by validation at LJMU Validation based at LJMU with no visit to partner institution required Partner staff involved in teaching, assessing or academic support of the programme / students; OR Recognition of partner institution award when the partner has been classified as category B. No partner staff involvement in the teaching or academic support of the programme / students OR In exceptional circumstances, where a recognition of a partner institution award and the partner has been classified as category B. This would need to be approved in advance by the Head of Academic Quality. Recognition of partner institution award when the partner has been classified as category A. 63. Education and Academic Quality Services will need to be informed if there is any intended change to the site of delivery or if it is intended to deliver the programme at any additional venue(s). LJMU has a process for approval of additional teaching venues which is outlined in Appendix

17 Resource visits and site approval 64. The panel undertaking a resources visit consists of the QSO, the Chair for the event and the independent external advisor, who will also attend the full event at LJMU. A template for a resources visit is shown in appendix 25, and a report of the visit will be circulated to the validation panel. 65. Once a resource visit or a validation at a site has taken place, this will then become the approved site. The Education and Academic Quality Servcies will need to be informed if there is any intended change to the site of delivery or if it is intended to deliver at any additional venue(s). This is true for any type of collaborative arrangement where a visit has taken place in the initial approval process. LJMU has a process for approval of additional teaching venues which is outlined in Appendix 24. Composition of a validation panel 66. A validation panel should comprise of: 1 Chair 1 panel member from another faculty 1 student representative (pilot for ) 1 external advisor (a second external can be nominated depending on the size, complexity or level of expertise required for the proposal) 1 Quality Support Officer as the event officer All panel membership is approved by the Pro Vice Chancellor (Education). The responsibilities of the validation panel 67. The validation panel will consider each programme proposal and is responsible for: Assessing at the point of initial design that the programme will meet the university s expectations of standards and quality Ensuring that students will be provided with the learning opportunities to achieve identified and agreed intended learning outcomes Ensuring that the programme proposal is in line with national expectations and national benchmarks Exploring issues relating to the discipline, the validity and appropriateness of the structure and content of the programme Ensuring adherence to university policies Identifying good practice in design and delivery and recommending methods of dissemination Ensuring the resources and staffing at the partner institution are adequate to deliver the programme For recognition agreements, ensuring that the mapping exercise is current and appropriate. For Foundation Degrees only ensuring that the APR stated is a suitable progression route for the programme Roles of panel members 68. All members of validation panels (except for external advisors) will have attended compulsory training organised by the Education and Academic Quality Services. These training events will be run annually, either as an updating event for those already 16

18 involved in validation and review, or as an introductory event for those that are new to the processes. EAQS will maintain a record of all staff trained for panel membership. 69. Chair: senior academic from a different faculty to that of the proposing team who will have prior experience of chairing validation events, and who should have extensive experience of collaborative programmes. The Chair is responsible for managing the conduct of the meeting, ensuring all aspects of the proposal are fully and properly considered and that all participants are afforded the opportunity to contribute to discussions (Appendix 26). 70. One panel member who will be an academic from another faculty to that of the proposing programme team who has experience of collaborative validation events, and / or will have been on appropriate training. (Appendix 27). 71. Student representative: a student representative is invited to attend as a panel member. Student representatives will be selected against criteria to ensure that their knowledge and understanding of the proposed programme is appropriate. EAQS will provide the student representatives with appropriate briefings on quality processes (Appendix 28). 72. External advisor: there will normally be one external advisor to provide the subject expertise on the panel. Normally, this will be a representative from another HEI, with relevant expertise, but could be a representative from industry or a professional body, if appropriate. External advisors are expected to provide an expert and objective judgement of the proposal, advising the panel, where appropriate, on curriculum, benchmarking, assessment and the comparability of standards (Appendix 29). 73. Event officer: a QSO will act as the event officer and will be a full member of the panel. The event officer and the Chair will liaise to ensure the smooth running of the day. The officer will draft the agenda for discussion during the day and provide advice and support to the panel on the quality criteria to be addressed, the protocols of validation and University policies to be adhered to. The event officer will ensure that all panel member comments received before the event are circulated to all panel members. The event officer has final responsibility for booking rooms, organising refreshments and setting up of panels. The event officer will be responsible for producing the validation report (Appendix 30). Briefing pack for the validation panel 74. EAQS will prepare a briefing pack of information to be sent with the programme proposal to the validation panel. The programme leader will receive details of the programme for the day, details of panel membership and a briefing paper. This pack cannot be prepared until after the programme documentation has been received. The briefing pack will contain: A list of panel members and their roles The programme for the validation event (see recommended programme in Appendix 31) Briefing paper Programme Proposal Pro-forma Planning Meeting notes Pre-validation report Procedures manual for the validation of new collaborative programmes (external panel member only) Resource visit report (if applicable) 17

19 Maps Financial claim forms (external panel member only) Programme documentation 75. A copy of the (unsigned) contract and the institutional visit report (if applicable) will be available from APT in advance of the validation event for the panel Chair and Event Officer. 76. All panel members will be asked to provide the event officer with written comments on the documentation before the validation event. These will inform the agenda for the meeting, and may be included in the final report produced by the QSO. Guidance and a template will be provided electronically in advance of the validation event (Appendix 32). Suggested discussion points for a validation event are shown in appendix 13. Ideally, a draft agenda will be drawn up by the event officer and Chair and have been shared with the programme leader(s) prior to the event. The responsibilities of the programme team and link tutor 77. The programme leader and team and the LJMU Link Tutor have responsibilities before and during the validation event, which can be summarised as follows: maintain contact with the Education and Academic Quality Services; nominate the external advisor to EAQS, following discussion with the LJMU School Director; confirm the venue for the event (including appropriate directions/room etc); ensure that there are students available to meet the panel at the review event; Programme leader: ensure that the team is motivated and engaged with the process and that appropriate student input has been secured; Programme team members: engage with the process and contribute equally to discussion. Programme for a validation event 78. An example programme for a validation event can be found in appendix 31. It is important that appropriate time is allocated to allow consideration of: consideration of the proposed programme structure the capacity of the partner to deliver the programme. Involvement of a Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body (PSRB) 79. Professional body input to the validation event will have been discussed and identified at the planning meeting and appropriate action taken to ensure the correct involvement of the PSRBs in the validation event. Outcomes of a validation event 80. At the end of the validation event, the panel will formulate its decision. The maximum period of approval that the panel can agree is varied on a risk basis. For a new programme with a new partner, the maximum period of approval is 3 years. For a new programme with an existing and established partner, the maximum period of approval is 5 years. Therefore, the outcomes of the validation event will be: Approval, with/without conditions and/or recommendations for the maximum period of approval 18

20 Approval for a fixed period less than the maximum, with/without conditions and/or recommendations Rejection, with detailed reasons 81. The validation event will conclude with verbal feedback to the programme team. The outcomes will be a specified period of approval (normally for the maximum period, though this may differ in exceptional circumstances) with any attached conditions and recommendations where necessary. Dates for receipt of responses to conditions and submission of definitive documentation will also be agreed. If a proposal is rejected, detailed reasons must be given in the validation report. Any conditions arising from a validation event will be detailed points of action that must be fulfilled satisfactorily by a given (agreed) date. The panel and the Chair will agree how responses to conditions will be considered, whether by the whole panel or by approval of the Chair only. 82. Panel members and programme leaders will be asked to complete a feedback form after the validation event, in order to identify any issues and any items of best practice from the process. These can be found in appendices 33 and 34 respectively. Post-Validation Activity Validation report 83. The conclusions of the validation event will be written immediately by the event officer for approval by the panel and sent to the programme leader for completion of any outstanding action. The full event report should normally be available within 2 working weeks of the event. A template for the validation report can be found in appendix The full event report will be circulated to the panel for approval and final sign-off will be confirmed by the Chair to the Quality Support Officer. Once approved by the panel, the validation report will then be submitted to CQSP for noting to maintain institutional oversight of the validation process. Responses to conditions 85. All responses to conditions should be returned to the QSO (using Section Five A of the report template in appendix 35 to show where/how conditions have been addressed). The QSO will ensure they are approved through the process agreed by the panel. If further action is identified, this will be relayed to the programme leader, with a new timescale for production of the further information. If no responses to conditions are received by the relevant deadline, this will be reported to CQSP for consideration. Failure to comply with conditions means that the programme details are not updated on the student database and that the programme is not in approval and cannot run or have students enrolled on it. The contract with the partner institution will only be signed following approval by the panel that all conditions have been met. Production of definitive documentation 86. One of the outcomes of all validation events will be the production of definitive documentation. 87. The complete set of definitive documentation (electronic-version only) should be forwarded to the QSO by the date specified in the event report. The definitive documentation (updated if necessary) will include: 19

21 programme specification(s) module proformas student guide programme document (including any mapping) staff CVs other relevant documentation e.g. professional body reports, additional site approval form, additional evidence submitted in response to conditions The electronic files will be stored on a shared University computer drive. This drive will hold all the formal documentation of each programme across the University and each member of University staff shall have read access to the files. Event Completion Form 88. Following submission of the definitive documents and the approval of the programme specification on ProdCat by the QSO, an event completion form will be signed by the Head of Academic Quality and a copy will be sent to the Link Tutor, Programme Leader, Partnerships Manager, Faculty Head of Operations and Faculty Registrar. Responses to recommendations 89. Recommendations are not requirements, but they are issues that may necessitate action by the programme team. Programme leaders are requested to respond to recommendations (using Section Five B of the report template in appendix 35) in the first annual report(s) that they complete. The programme team s response should show consideration of the recommendations and the outcomes of these considerations. It is expected that the programme team will indicate how the recommendations have been considered and whether (or not) any action is being taken to incorporate them in the programme. Overview report 90. At the end of each academic year, the Head of Academic Quality will produce an overview report of the validations and reviews that have taken place for collaborative programmes that year. Event reports, feedback forms and completed recommendation templates will inform the writing of the report. 91. The Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee (QAEC) will consider the report along with the reports from the faculties and specify any action to be taken at institutional level. CQSP will receive a copy for information and discussion. 20

Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Navitas UK Holdings Ltd. Hertfordshire International College

Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Navitas UK Holdings Ltd. Hertfordshire International College Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Navitas UK Holdings Ltd April 2016 Contents About this review... 1 Key findings... 2 QAA's judgements about... 2 Good practice... 2 Theme: Digital Literacies...

More information

Navitas UK Holdings Ltd Embedded College Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

Navitas UK Holdings Ltd Embedded College Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Navitas UK Holdings Ltd Embedded College Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education February 2014 Annex: Birmingham City University International College Introduction

More information

Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd

Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd June 2016 Contents About this review... 1 Key findings... 2 QAA's judgements about Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd...

More information

Higher Education Review of University of Hertfordshire

Higher Education Review of University of Hertfordshire Higher Education Review of University of Hertfordshire December 2015 Contents About this review... 1 Key findings... 2 QAA's judgements about the University of Hertfordshire... 2 Good practice... 2 Affirmation

More information

POLICY ON THE ACCREDITATION OF PRIOR CERTIFICATED AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING

POLICY ON THE ACCREDITATION OF PRIOR CERTIFICATED AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING POLICY ON THE ACCREDITATION OF PRIOR CERTIFICATED AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING 1. Definitions The term Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) covers a range of prior learning experiences. For the purpose of

More information

THE QUEEN S SCHOOL Whole School Pay Policy

THE QUEEN S SCHOOL Whole School Pay Policy The Queen s Church of England Primary School Encouraging every child to reach their full potential, nurtured and supported in a Christian community which lives by the values of Love, Compassion and Respect.

More information

Programme Specification. MSc in Palliative Care: Global Perspectives (Distance Learning) Valid from: September 2012 Faculty of Health & Life Sciences

Programme Specification. MSc in Palliative Care: Global Perspectives (Distance Learning) Valid from: September 2012 Faculty of Health & Life Sciences Programme Specification MSc in Palliative Care: Global Perspectives (Distance Learning) Valid from: September 2012 Faculty of Health & Life Sciences SECTION 1: GENERAL INFORMATION Awarding body: Teaching

More information

Chapter 2. University Committee Structure

Chapter 2. University Committee Structure Chapter 2 University Structure 2. UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE STRUCTURE This chapter provides details of the membership and terms of reference of Senate, the University s senior academic committee, and its Standing

More information

Programme Specification. BSc (Hons) RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT

Programme Specification. BSc (Hons) RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT Programme Specification BSc (Hons) RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT D GUIDE SEPTEMBER 2016 ROYAL AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, CIRENCESTER PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION BSc (Hons) RURAL LAND MANAGEMENT NB The information contained

More information

REGULATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDY. September i -

REGULATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDY. September i - REGULATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDY September 2013 - i - REGULATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDY Approved by CIT Academic Council, April 2013 - ii - TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION: THE RESEARCH

More information

Teaching Excellence Framework

Teaching Excellence Framework Teaching Excellence Framework Role specification: Subject Pilot and Year Three Panel members and assessors 13 September 2017 Contents Background... 2 Introduction... 2 Application process... 3 Subject

More information

Programme Specification. MSc in International Real Estate

Programme Specification. MSc in International Real Estate Programme Specification MSc in International Real Estate IRE GUIDE OCTOBER 2014 ROYAL AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, CIRENCESTER PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION MSc International Real Estate NB The information contained

More information

Accreditation of Prior Experiential and Certificated Learning (APECL) Guidance for Applicants/Students

Accreditation of Prior Experiential and Certificated Learning (APECL) Guidance for Applicants/Students Accreditation of Prior Experiential and Certificated Learning (APECL) Guidance for Applicants/Students The following guidance notes set provide an overview for applicants and students in relation to making

More information

An APEL Framework for the East of England

An APEL Framework for the East of England T H E L I F E L O N G L E A R N I N G N E T W O R K F O R T H E E A S T O F E N G L A N D An APEL Framework for the East of England Developing core principles and best practice Part of the Regional Credit

More information

Institutional review. University of Wales, Newport. November 2010

Institutional review. University of Wales, Newport. November 2010 Institutional review University of Wales, Newport November 2010 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2011 ISBN 978 1 84979 260 8 All QAA's publications are available on our website www.qaa.ac.uk

More information

USC VITERBI SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

USC VITERBI SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING USC VITERBI SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING APPOINTMENTS, PROMOTIONS AND TENURE (APT) GUIDELINES Office of the Dean USC Viterbi School of Engineering OHE 200- MC 1450 Revised 2016 PREFACE This document serves as

More information

Introduction 3. Outcomes of the Institutional audit 3. Institutional approach to quality enhancement 3

Introduction 3. Outcomes of the Institutional audit 3. Institutional approach to quality enhancement 3 De Montfort University March 2009 Annex to the report Contents Introduction 3 Outcomes of the Institutional audit 3 Institutional approach to quality enhancement 3 Institutional arrangements for postgraduate

More information

LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY Department of Electrical Engineering Job Description

LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY Department of Electrical Engineering Job Description LIVERPOOL JOHN MOORES UNIVERSITY Department of Electrical Engineering Job Description Vacancy ref: 2121 Title: Lecturer or Senior Lecturer (Sensor Technologies) (Appointment to Senior Lecturer will be

More information

University of the Arts London (UAL) Diploma in Professional Studies Art and Design Date of production/revision May 2015

University of the Arts London (UAL) Diploma in Professional Studies Art and Design Date of production/revision May 2015 Programme Specification Every taught course of study leading to a UAL award is required to have a Programme Specification. This summarises the course aims, learning outcomes, teaching, learning and assessment

More information

Personal Tutoring at Staffordshire University

Personal Tutoring at Staffordshire University Personal Tutoring at Staffordshire University Staff Guidelines 1 Contents Introduction 3 Staff Development for Personal Tutors 3 Roles and responsibilities of personal tutors 3 Frequency of meetings 4

More information

Recognition of Prior Learning

Recognition of Prior Learning Page 1 of 19 Recognition of Prior Learning ACADEMIC POLICY Approved by Academic Council on 25 th April 2012 Version number: v5 Last updated: 25 th April 2012 Page 2 of 19 Policy Title Recognition of Prior

More information

University of Essex Access Agreement

University of Essex Access Agreement University of Essex Access Agreement Updated in August 2009 to include new tuition fee and bursary provision for 2010 entry 1. Context The University of Essex is academically a strong institution, with

More information

Course Specification Executive MBA via e-learning (MBUSP)

Course Specification Executive MBA via e-learning (MBUSP) LEEDS BECKETT UNIVERSITY Course Specification Executive MBA via e-learning 2017-18 (MBUSP) www.leedsbeckett.ac.uk Course Specification Executive MBA via e-learning Faculty: School: Faculty of Business

More information

Programme Specification

Programme Specification Programme Specification Awarding Body/Institution Teaching Institution Queen Mary, University of London Queen Mary, University of London Name of Final Award and Programme Title MSc Accounting and Finance

More information

PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION KEY FACTS

PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION KEY FACTS PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION KEY FACTS Programme name Foundation Degree in Ophthalmic Dispensing Award Foundation Degree School School of Health Sciences Department or equivalent Division of Optometry and Visual

More information

P920 Higher Nationals Recognition of Prior Learning

P920 Higher Nationals Recognition of Prior Learning P920 Higher Nationals Recognition of Prior Learning 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Peterborough Regional College is committed to ensuring the decision making process and outcomes for admitting students with prior

More information

Programme Specification

Programme Specification Programme Specification Title: Accounting and Finance Final Award: Master of Science (MSc) With Exit Awards at: Postgraduate Certificate (PG Cert) Postgraduate Diploma (PG Dip) Master of Science (MSc)

More information

Quality Assurance of Teaching, Learning and Assessment

Quality Assurance of Teaching, Learning and Assessment CHAPTER 6 Quality Assurance of Teaching, Learning and Assessment Updated October 2015 Table of Contents Section Page INTRODUCTION 3 1 QUALITY ASSURANCE OF TEACHING STAFF 4 Responsibilities 4 Staff qualifications

More information

Qualification handbook

Qualification handbook Qualification handbook BIIAB Level 3 Award in 601/5960/1 Version 1 April 2015 Table of Contents 1. About the BIIAB Level 3 Award in... 1 2. About this pack... 2 3. BIIAB Customer Service... 2 4. What are

More information

Nottingham Trent University Course Specification

Nottingham Trent University Course Specification Nottingham Trent University Course Specification Basic Course Information 1. Awarding Institution: Nottingham Trent University 2. School/Campus: Nottingham Business School / City 3. Final Award, Course

More information

Associate Professor of Electrical Power Systems Engineering (CAE17/06RA) School of Creative Arts and Engineering / Engineering

Associate Professor of Electrical Power Systems Engineering (CAE17/06RA) School of Creative Arts and Engineering / Engineering Job Description General Details Job title: School/Department Normal Workbase: Tenure: Hours/FT: Grade/Salary: Associate Professor of lectrical Power Systems ngineering (CA17/06RA) School of Creative Arts

More information

Consent for Further Education Colleges to Invest in Companies September 2011

Consent for Further Education Colleges to Invest in Companies September 2011 Consent for Further Education Colleges to Invest in Companies September 2011 Of interest to college principals and finance directors as well as staff within the Skills Funding Agency. Summary This guidance

More information

BSc (Hons) Banking Practice and Management (Full-time programmes of study)

BSc (Hons) Banking Practice and Management (Full-time programmes of study) BSc (Hons) Banking Practice and Management (Full-time programmes of study) The London Institute of Banking & Finance is a registered charity, incorporated by Royal Charter. Programme Specification 1. GENERAL

More information

Foundation Certificate in Higher Education

Foundation Certificate in Higher Education Programme Specification Foundation Certificate in Higher Education Certificate of Credit in English for Academic Purposes Certificate of Credit in Study Skills for Higher Educaiton Certificate of Credit

More information

Guidance on the University Health and Safety Management System

Guidance on the University Health and Safety Management System Newcastle University Safety Office 1 Kensington Terrace Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU Tel 0191 222 6274 University Safety Policy Guidance Guidance on the University Health and Safety Management System Document

More information

Practice Learning Handbook

Practice Learning Handbook Southwest Regional Partnership 2 Step Up to Social Work University of the West of England Holistic Assessment of Practice Learning in Social Work Practice Learning Handbook Post Graduate Diploma in Social

More information

Programme Specification

Programme Specification Programme Specification Title of Course: Foundation Year in Science, Computing & Mathematics Date Specification Produced: January 2013 Date Specification Last Revised: May 2013 This Programme Specification

More information

PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION

PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION 1 Awarding Institution Newcastle University 2 Teaching Institution Newcastle University 3 Final Award MSc 4 Programme Title Digital Architecture 5 UCAS/Programme Code 5112 6 Programme

More information

2007 No. xxxx EDUCATION, ENGLAND. The Further Education Teachers Qualifications (England) Regulations 2007

2007 No. xxxx EDUCATION, ENGLAND. The Further Education Teachers Qualifications (England) Regulations 2007 Please note: these Regulations are draft - they have been made but are still subject to Parliamentary Approval. They S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2007 No. xxxx EDUCATION, ENGLAND The Further

More information

Practice Learning Handbook

Practice Learning Handbook Southwest Regional Partnership 2 Step Up to Social Work University of the West of England Holistic Assessment of Practice Learning in Social Work Practice Learning Handbook Post Graduate Diploma in Social

More information

PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION

PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION 1 Awarding Institution Newcastle University 2 Teaching Institution Newcastle University 3 Final Award M.Sc. 4 Programme Title Industrial and Commercial Biotechnology 5 UCAS/Programme

More information

Pearson BTEC Level 3 Award in Education and Training

Pearson BTEC Level 3 Award in Education and Training Pearson BTEC Level 3 Award in Education and Training Specification BTEC Specialist qualification First teaching September 2013 Issue 3 Edexcel, BTEC and LCCI qualifications Edexcel, BTEC and LCCI qualifications

More information

General study plan for third-cycle programmes in Sociology

General study plan for third-cycle programmes in Sociology Date of adoption: 07/06/2017 Ref. no: 2017/3223-4.1.1.2 Faculty of Social Sciences Third-cycle education at Linnaeus University is regulated by the Swedish Higher Education Act and Higher Education Ordinance

More information

Individual Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program Faculty/Student HANDBOOK

Individual Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program Faculty/Student HANDBOOK Individual Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program at Washington State University 2017-2018 Faculty/Student HANDBOOK Revised August 2017 For information on the Individual Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program

More information

Programme Specification

Programme Specification School of Law, Criminology and Political Science Title of Programme: LLB (Hons); LLB (Hons) Commercial Law; LLB (Hons) Criminal Justice, LLB (Hons) Government and Politics; LLB (Hons) with a Year Abroad;

More information

Quality assurance of Authority-registered subjects and short courses

Quality assurance of Authority-registered subjects and short courses Quality assurance of Authority-registered subjects and short courses 170133 The State of Queensland () 2017 PO Box 307 Spring Hill QLD 4004 Australia 154 Melbourne Street, South Brisbane Phone: (07) 3864

More information

PROPOSED MERGER - RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION

PROPOSED MERGER - RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROPOSED MERGER - RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION Paston Sixth Form College and City College Norwich Vision for the future of outstanding Post-16 Education in North East Norfolk Date of Issue: 22 September

More information

Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech

Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech Rev Date Purpose of Issue / Description of Change Equality Impact Assessment Completed 1. October 2011 Initial Issue 2. 8 th June 2015 Revision version 2 28 th July

More information

Anglia Ruskin University Assessment Offences

Anglia Ruskin University Assessment Offences Introduction Anglia Ruskin University Assessment Offences 1. As an academic community, London School of Marketing recognises that the principles of truth, honesty and mutual respect are central to the

More information

UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM CODE OF PRACTICE ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE PROCEDURE

UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM CODE OF PRACTICE ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE PROCEDURE UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM CODE OF PRACTICE ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE PROCEDURE 1 Index of points 1. Introduction 2. Definition of Leave of Absence 3. Implications of Leave of Absence 4. Imposed Leave of Absence

More information

CARDIFF UNIVERSITY OF WALES UNITED KINGDOM. Christine Daniels 1. CONTEXT: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WALES AND OTHER SYSTEMS

CARDIFF UNIVERSITY OF WALES UNITED KINGDOM. Christine Daniels 1. CONTEXT: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WALES AND OTHER SYSTEMS CARDIFF UNIVERSITY OF WALES UNITED KINGDOM Christine Daniels 1. CONTEXT: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WALES AND OTHER SYSTEMS Cardiff is one of Britain s major universities, with its own Royal Charter and a history

More information

Master in Science in Chemistry with Biomedicine - UMSH4CSCB

Master in Science in Chemistry with Biomedicine - UMSH4CSCB Master in Science in Chemistry with Biomedicine - UMSH4CSCB Academic year modifications to take effect 2016/7 Description and rationale for changes Please describe as clearly and precisely as possible

More information

Programme Specification

Programme Specification School of Law, Criminology and Political Science Title of Programme: Programme Code: LLB (Hons); LLB (Hons) Commercial Law; LLB (Hons) Criminal Justice, LLB (Hons) Government and Politics; LLB (Hons) with

More information

THREE-YEAR COURSES FASHION STYLING & CREATIVE DIRECTION Version 02

THREE-YEAR COURSES FASHION STYLING & CREATIVE DIRECTION Version 02 THREE-YEAR COURSES FASHION STYLING & CREATIVE DIRECTION Version 02 Undergraduate programmes Three-year course Fashion Styling & Creative Direction 02 Brief descriptive summary Over the past 80 years Istituto

More information

5 Early years providers

5 Early years providers 5 Early years providers What this chapter covers This chapter explains the action early years providers should take to meet their duties in relation to identifying and supporting all children with special

More information

DICE - Final Report. Project Information Project Acronym DICE Project Title

DICE - Final Report. Project Information Project Acronym DICE Project Title DICE - Final Report Project Information Project Acronym DICE Project Title Digital Communication Enhancement Start Date November 2011 End Date July 2012 Lead Institution London School of Economics and

More information

Exclusions Policy. Policy reviewed: May 2016 Policy review date: May OAT Model Policy

Exclusions Policy. Policy reviewed: May 2016 Policy review date: May OAT Model Policy Exclusions Policy Policy reviewed: May 2016 Policy review date: May 2018 OAT Model Policy 1 Contents Action to be invoked by Senior Staff in Serious Disciplinary Matters 1. When a serious incident occurs,

More information

Mandatory Review of Social Skills Qualifications. Consultation document for Approval to List

Mandatory Review of Social Skills Qualifications. Consultation document for Approval to List Mandatory Review of Social Skills Qualifications Consultation document for Approval to List February 2015 Prepared by: National Qualifications Services on behalf of the Social Skills Governance Group 1

More information

Programme Specification

Programme Specification Programme Specification Title: Journalism (War and International Human Rights) Final Award: Master of Arts (MA) With Exit Awards at: Postgraduate Certificate (PG Cert) Postgraduate Diploma (PG Dip) Master

More information

AUTHORITATIVE SOURCES ADULT AND COMMUNITY LEARNING LEARNING PROGRAMMES

AUTHORITATIVE SOURCES ADULT AND COMMUNITY LEARNING LEARNING PROGRAMMES AUTHORITATIVE SOURCES ADULT AND COMMUNITY LEARNING LEARNING PROGRAMMES AUGUST 2001 Contents Sources 2 The White Paper Learning to Succeed 3 The Learning and Skills Council Prospectus 5 Post-16 Funding

More information

Teacher of English. MPS/UPS Information for Applicants

Teacher of English. MPS/UPS Information for Applicants Teacher of English MPS/UPS Information for Applicants Start date : Easter or September 2018 Weavers Academy Striving for success, focusing on learning Dear Applicant Thank you for showing an interest in

More information

Directorate Children & Young People Policy Directive Complaints Procedure for MOD Schools

Directorate Children & Young People Policy Directive Complaints Procedure for MOD Schools Directorate Children & Young People Policy Directive 3.2.8 Complaints Procedure for MOD Schools Version 2.0 January 2017 Preface Authorisation 1. This DCYP Policy Directive has been authorised for use

More information

STUDENT AND ACADEMIC SERVICES

STUDENT AND ACADEMIC SERVICES STUDENT AND ACADEMIC SERVICES Admissions Division International Admissions Administrator (3 posts available) Full Time, Fixed Term for 12 months Grade D: 21,220-25,298 per annum De Montfort University

More information

Liverpool Hope University ITE Partnership Handbook

Liverpool Hope University ITE Partnership Handbook School of Teacher Education Liverpool Hope University ITE Partnership Handbook Welcome Liverpool Hope University is unlike any other university in the United Kingdom. Its work has been shaped for over

More information

Student Assessment Policy: Education and Counselling

Student Assessment Policy: Education and Counselling Student Assessment Policy: Education and Counselling Title: Student Assessment Policy: Education and Counselling Author: Academic Dean Approved by: Academic Board Date: February 2014 Review date: February

More information

HDR Presentation of Thesis Procedures pro-030 Version: 2.01

HDR Presentation of Thesis Procedures pro-030 Version: 2.01 HDR Presentation of Thesis Procedures pro-030 To be read in conjunction with: Research Practice Policy Version: 2.01 Last amendment: 02 April 2014 Next Review: Apr 2016 Approved By: Academic Board Date:

More information

Initial teacher training in vocational subjects

Initial teacher training in vocational subjects Initial teacher training in vocational subjects This report looks at the quality of initial teacher training in vocational subjects. Based on visits to the 14 providers that undertake this training, it

More information

University of Cambridge: Programme Specifications POSTGRADUATE ADVANCED CERTIFICATE IN EDUCATIONAL STUDIES. June 2012

University of Cambridge: Programme Specifications POSTGRADUATE ADVANCED CERTIFICATE IN EDUCATIONAL STUDIES. June 2012 University of Cambridge: Programme Specifications Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information in this programme specification. Programme specifications are produced and then reviewed

More information

Last Editorial Change:

Last Editorial Change: POLICY ON SCHOLARLY INTEGRITY (Pursuant to the Framework Agreement) University Policy No.: AC1105 (B) Classification: Academic and Students Approving Authority: Board of Governors Effective Date: December/12

More information

IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON ACCESS AGREEMENT

IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON ACCESS AGREEMENT IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON ACCESS AGREEMENT BACKGROUND 1. This Access Agreement for Imperial College London is framed by the College s mission, our admissions requirements and our commitment to widening participation.

More information

MASTER S COURSES FASHION START-UP

MASTER S COURSES FASHION START-UP MASTER S COURSES FASHION START-UP Postgraduate Programmes Master s Course Fashion Start-Up 02 Brief Descriptive Summary Over the past 80 years Istituto Marangoni has grown and developed alongside the thriving

More information

Head of Music Job Description. TLR 2c

Head of Music Job Description. TLR 2c Head of Music Job Description TLR 2c This job description forms part of the contract of employment of the successful applicant. The appointment is subject to the conditions of employment of Teachers contained

More information

Special Educational Needs Policy (including Disability)

Special Educational Needs Policy (including Disability) Special Educational Needs Policy (including Disability) To be reviewed annually Chair of Governors, Lyn Schlich Signed January 2017 East Preston Infant School SPECIAL EDUCATION NEEDS [SEN] POLICY CONTENTS

More information

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BOARD PhD PROGRAM REVIEW PROTOCOL

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BOARD PhD PROGRAM REVIEW PROTOCOL DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BOARD PhD PROGRAM REVIEW PROTOCOL Overview of the Doctor of Philosophy Board The Doctor of Philosophy Board (DPB) is a standing committee of the Johns Hopkins University that reports

More information

value equivalent 6. Attendance Full-time Part-time Distance learning Mode of attendance 5 days pw n/a n/a

value equivalent 6. Attendance Full-time Part-time Distance learning Mode of attendance 5 days pw n/a n/a PROGRAMME APPROVAL FORM SECTION 1 THE PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION 1. Programme title and designation Orthodontics 2. Final award Award Title Credit ECTS Any special criteria value equivalent MSc Orthodontics

More information

CAUL Principles and Guidelines for Library Services to Onshore Students at Remote Campuses to Support Teaching and Learning

CAUL Principles and Guidelines for Library Services to Onshore Students at Remote Campuses to Support Teaching and Learning CAUL Principles and Guidelines for Library Services to Onshore Students at Remote Campuses to Support Teaching and Learning Context The following guidelines have been developed as an aid for Australian

More information

MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY

MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY Stockport College: BA(Hons) Childhood Studies MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY PS1 PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION 0 Brief Overview (i) Brief Descriptive Summary This programme covers key themes in working with

More information

b) Allegation means information in any form forwarded to a Dean relating to possible Misconduct in Scholarly Activity.

b) Allegation means information in any form forwarded to a Dean relating to possible Misconduct in Scholarly Activity. University Policy University Procedure Instructions/Forms Integrity in Scholarly Activity Policy Classification Research Approval Authority General Faculties Council Implementation Authority Provost and

More information

This Access Agreement is for only, to align with the WPSA and in light of the Browne Review.

This Access Agreement is for only, to align with the WPSA and in light of the Browne Review. University of Essex Access Agreement 2011-12 The University of Essex Access Agreement has been updated in October 2010 to include new tuition fee and bursary provision for 2011 entry and account for the

More information

Specification. BTEC Specialist qualifications. Edexcel BTEC Level 1 Award/Certificate/Extended Certificate in Construction Skills (QCF)

Specification. BTEC Specialist qualifications. Edexcel BTEC Level 1 Award/Certificate/Extended Certificate in Construction Skills (QCF) Specification BTEC Specialist qualifications Edexcel BTEC Level 1 Award/Certificate/Extended Certificate in Construction Skills (QCF) Supplementary information For first teaching September 2010 Edexcel,

More information

EDUCATION AND TRAINING (QCF) Qualification Specification

EDUCATION AND TRAINING (QCF) Qualification Specification Level 3 Award in EDUCATION AND TRAINING (QCF) Qualification Specification Qualification Recognition Number: 601/0129/5 Qualification Reference: L3AET This document is copyright under the Berne Convention.

More information

Level 6. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) Fee for 2017/18 is 9,250*

Level 6. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) Fee for 2017/18 is 9,250* Programme Specification: Undergraduate For students starting in Academic Year 2017/2018 1. Course Summary Names of programme(s) and award title(s) Award type Mode of study Framework of Higher Education

More information

BSc (Hons) Marketing

BSc (Hons) Marketing FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT FACULTY OF MEDIA AND COMMUNICATION PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION Version 1.6-0917 May 2017 May 2017 1 2015 Bournemouth University Document date: May 2017 Circulation: General Bournemouth

More information

GCSE English Language 2012 An investigation into the outcomes for candidates in Wales

GCSE English Language 2012 An investigation into the outcomes for candidates in Wales GCSE English Language 2012 An investigation into the outcomes for candidates in Wales Qualifications and Learning Division 10 September 2012 GCSE English Language 2012 An investigation into the outcomes

More information

Programme Specification

Programme Specification Programme Specification Title: Crisis and Disaster Management Final Award: Master of Science (MSc) With Exit Awards at: Postgraduate Certificate (PG Cert) Postgraduate Diploma (PG Dip) Master of Science

More information

Idsall External Examinations Policy

Idsall External Examinations Policy Idsall External Examinations Policy Sponsorship & Review 1 Sponsor Mr D Crichton, Deputy Headteacher 2 Written and Approved October 2014 3 Next Review Date October 2016 This policy should be read in conjunction

More information

SOAS Student Disciplinary Procedure 2016/17

SOAS Student Disciplinary Procedure 2016/17 SOAS Student Disciplinary Procedure 2016/17 1 Introduction and general principles 1.1 Persons registering as students of SOAS become members of the School and as such commit themselves to abiding by its

More information

Post-16 transport to education and training. Statutory guidance for local authorities

Post-16 transport to education and training. Statutory guidance for local authorities Post-16 transport to education and training Statutory guidance for local authorities February 2014 Contents Summary 3 Key points 4 The policy landscape 4 Extent and coverage of the 16-18 transport duty

More information

Qualification Guidance

Qualification Guidance Qualification Guidance For awarding organisations Award in Education and Training (QCF) Updated May 2013 Contents Glossary... 2 Section 1 Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this document... 3 1.2 How to use this

More information

University of Essex NOVEMBER Institutional audit

University of Essex NOVEMBER Institutional audit University of Essex NOVEMBER 2003 Institutional audit Published by Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Southgate House Southgate Street Gloucester GL1 1UB Tel 01452 557000 Fax 01452 557070 Email

More information

Pharmaceutical Medicine

Pharmaceutical Medicine Specialty specific guidance on documents to be supplied in evidence for an application for entry onto the Specialist Register with a Certificate of Eligibility for Specialist Registration (CESR) Pharmaceutical

More information

H2020 Marie Skłodowska Curie Innovative Training Networks Informal guidelines for the Mid-Term Meeting

H2020 Marie Skłodowska Curie Innovative Training Networks Informal guidelines for the Mid-Term Meeting H2020 Marie Skłodowska Curie Innovative Training Networks Informal guidelines for the Mid-Term Meeting These guidelines are not an official document of the Research Executive Agency services. June 2016

More information

Briefing document CII Continuing Professional Development (CPD) scheme.

Briefing document CII Continuing Professional Development (CPD) scheme. Briefing document CII Continuing Professional Development (CPD) scheme www.thepfs.org 2 Contents 3 What is Continuing Professional Development > 4 Who needs to complete the CII CPD scheme > 5 What does

More information

Curriculum Policy. November Independent Boarding and Day School for Boys and Girls. Royal Hospital School. ISI reference.

Curriculum Policy. November Independent Boarding and Day School for Boys and Girls. Royal Hospital School. ISI reference. Curriculum Policy Independent Boarding and Day School for Boys and Girls Royal Hospital School November 2017 ISI reference Key author Reviewing body Approval body Approval frequency 2a Director of Curriculum,

More information

Arts, Humanities and Social Science Faculty

Arts, Humanities and Social Science Faculty LLB Law For students entering Part 1 in 2013/4 Awarding Institution: Teaching Institution: Relevant QAA subject Benchmarking group(s): Faculty: Programme length: Date of specification: Programme Director:

More information

HARPER ADAMS UNIVERSITY Programme Specification

HARPER ADAMS UNIVERSITY Programme Specification HARPER ADAMS UNIVERSITY Programme Specification 1 Awarding Institution: Harper Adams University 2 Teaching Institution: Askham Bryan College 3 Course Accredited by: Not Applicable 4 Final Award and Level:

More information

Irtiqa a Programme: Guide for the inspection of schools in The Emirate of Abu Dhabi

Irtiqa a Programme: Guide for the inspection of schools in The Emirate of Abu Dhabi Irtiqa a Programme: Guide for the inspection of schools in The Emirate of Abu Dhabi August 2015 Table of Contents Page Irtiqa a programme vision, mission, core values and objectives 4 1. Why are schools

More information

Interim Review of the Public Engagement with Research Catalysts Programme 2012 to 2015

Interim Review of the Public Engagement with Research Catalysts Programme 2012 to 2015 Interim Review of the Public Engagement with Research Catalysts Programme 2012 to 2015 A report for Research Councils UK March 2016 FULL REPORT Report author: Ruth Townsley, Independent Researcher Summary

More information

Kelso School District and Kelso Education Association Teacher Evaluation Process (TPEP)

Kelso School District and Kelso Education Association Teacher Evaluation Process (TPEP) Kelso School District and Kelso Education Association 2015-2017 Teacher Evaluation Process (TPEP) Kelso School District and Kelso Education Association 2015-2017 Teacher Evaluation Process (TPEP) TABLE

More information

TABLE OF CONTENTS. By-Law 1: The Faculty Council...3

TABLE OF CONTENTS. By-Law 1: The Faculty Council...3 FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, University of Ottawa Faculty By-Laws (November 21, 2017) TABLE OF CONTENTS By-Law 1: The Faculty Council....3 1.1 Mandate... 3 1.2 Members... 3 1.3 Procedures for electing Faculty

More information