|
|
|
|
|
|
C/4.6 Course quality assurance |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4.6.1 Policy principles 4.6.1 Policy principlesQUT is committed to ensuring that its courses are relevant, current and provide students with a high quality learning experience. A robust quality assurance system is integral to maintenance of the quality of the University’s courses. Course quality assurance at QUT is a continuous process, incorporating regular monitoring, review, benchmarking and improvement of the University’s courses. QUT's course quality assurance is based on the following principles:
The Learning and Teaching Unit website provides detailed information including procedures, resources and templates to support course quality assurance. 4.6.2 Policy outcomesThe policy for course quality assurance is designed to:
4.6.3 Course quality assurance processQUT’s approach to course quality assurance involves an ongoing cycle of monitoring and improvement that requires a minimum level of review for all courses and more intense levels of examination for under-performing courses. Course quality assurance entails an annual cycle comprising three formal reporting components for all courses:
Course quality assurance is linked to corporate reviews, external accreditation and reporting to QUT Council. The cyclical nature of course quality assurance is closely connected to the curriculum development and approval process (see C/4.1 ). Course quality assurance informs the development and improvement of courses and monitors the progress of curriculum changes. Coursework programs can be classified as high performing, underperforming or higher risk. Levels of risk, performance criteria and weightings are applied according to QUT priorities, national performance indicators and to accommodate contextual factors. These are approved by the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Learning and Teaching). QUT defines minimum student intakes for both undergraduate and postgraduate courses in the criteria used to identify 'underperforming' courses. The Vice-Chancellor may, in accordance with minimum intakes, decide not to have an intake into a course if applications are insufficient to achieve viability. Courses identified as 'underperforming' receive greater scrutiny in ICRs and the CCPR until the courses are no longer identified as underperforming or they are phased out or discontinued. ICRs include specific actions to improve the performance of the course, and may require the gathering and analysis of additional data to track the results of actions taken. (a) Individual Course Reports The primary purpose of the Individual Course Reports (ICR) is to prompt an annual review of each course’s performance, drawing on quality and viability data. Reporting is a critical and diagnostic analysis focusing on significant trends and issues, action taken and outcomes. Actions from ICRs will often involve the development and improvement of curriculum and pedagogical approaches. ICRs are prepared by faculties for all award courses including research courses and customised education award courses, as well as for non-award or CPE programs that articulate to award courses. Guidelines for quality assurance of other customised education programs are available on the Learning and Teaching Unit website. Faculties prepare separate ICRs where study areas within a course are substantially distinctive. ICRs for double degrees are considered by each partner faculty. Courses offered transnationally are reported separately and include additional requirements. ICRs are considered and approved by faculty academic boards for submission to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) for coursework courses or the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) for research courses. Detailed procedures relating to preparation of ICRs and reporting requirements are available on the Learning and Teaching Unit website. (b) Consolidated Courses Performance Report The primary purpose of the Consolidated Courses Performance Report (CCPR) is to provide an overall evaluation to identify high performing and ‘underperforming’ courses using three broad categories: Viability, Quality of Learning Environment, and Outcomes. The CCPR is prepared by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) and draws on University-wide quality data and Individual Course Reports. The CCPR is considered through University Learning and Teaching Committee and University Academic Board for academic quality matters, and Vice-Chancellor’s Advisory Committee for viability and risk matters, and normally coincides with the commencement of the University’s annual planning cycle. Detailed procedures relating to preparation of CCPRs and reporting requirements are available on the Learning and Teaching Unit website. (c) Strategic Faculty Courses Update The primary purpose of the Strategic Faculty Courses Update (SFCU) is to provide an overview of the anticipated strategic direction of the faculty's academic programs and an indication of curriculum actions likely to occur in the following year. The SFCU is the initiating step for curriculum development and approval, and plans for curriculum development are informed by the faculty's consideration of its Individual Courses Reports, the Consolidated Courses Performance Report and 'underperforming' courses. The SFCU is contained within the Planning and Budget Package under the oversight of the Division of Finance and Resource Planning. It is prepared by the executive dean of faculty and considered by Vice-Chancellor's Advisory Committee. Detailed procedures relating to preparation of SFCUs and reporting requirements are available on the Learning and Teaching Unit website.
4.6.4 Role of corporate reviewsCorporate reviews form a core part of the University's planning and quality assurance framework (see A/2.3 ) The corporate review of a faculty includes an external assessment, from a strategic perspective, of the overall suite of courses offered. 4.6.5 External review and accreditationExternal review and accreditation contributes to Course Quality Assurance through the independent validation of professionally recognised standards, and facilitates benchmarking. Faculties with courses that are not covered by professional accreditation are expected to include external review approaches as part of periodic curriculum approval and review between corporate review cycles. 4.6.6 Roles and responsibilitiesDeputy Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) Approves amendments to Course Quality Assurance procedures (Learning and Teaching Unit website). University committees and officers Specific responsibilities of University committees and officers relating to course quality assurance are provided in the protocols (Learning and Teaching Unit website). Related DocumentsMOPP A/2.3 Corporate reviews MOPP A/2.4 QUT Quality Framework MOPP C/4.1 Curriculum development and approval Learning and Teaching Unit websiteModification History
|
