|
|
|
|
|
|
C/4.10 Course quality assurance |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4.10.1 Characteristics of a course quality assurance process 4.10.1 Characteristics of a course quality assurance processIt is expected that once courses or major changes have been approved, there will be a continuing process, consistent with quality assurance principles, of regular and proactive course improvements for each course. This process will be the responsibility of each faculty, subject to the guidelines below, and will culminate each year in a set of nested reporting processes at faculty and University level. As part of this process, it is expected particularly that faculties will ensure that QUT's responsibilities to international students as defined under the Education Services for Overseas Students (ESOS) (2000) Act continue to be observed. The quality assurance process is characterised by the collection and analysis of relevant data, with reference where possible to standards, the design and execution of an improvement process, the evaluation of the improvement, and a report on activity which is provided to the next level of organisation external to the unit undertaking, and responsible for, the quality assurance. At the individual course level, the data will include those provided by the Course Performance Report, described below, and those gathered by the faculty. The course team is responsible for the improvement process, and the report is considered by the faculty / school advisory committee, and faculty academic board. The analysis for each course will include not only analysis of relative data (eg longitudinal analysis of yearly data for trends) but also some means of comparing standards, such as comparison of data against national averages, or comparison with similar data from other universities, or benchmarking exercises if available. The quality assurance process for individual courses, however, is one of a 'nest' of three processes at different levels. Overarching the process for individual courses, there will be a more strategic and higher level process in which each faculty reports annually (the Faculty Academic Program Report) to University Academic Board through University Teaching and Learning Committee on the complete suite (the 'academic program') of courses offered by the faculty. Finally, the series of academic program reports built up year-by-year is then used by the review panel at the time of the faculty's quinquennial review, to assess the development of the faculty's academic program over the period. Full details of possible approaches to quality assurance are provided in the Guidelines for Quality Assurance of Courses published by the Office of Teaching Quality . These various aspects of academic quality assurance are addressed in more detail in the following sections. 4.10.2 Course Performance ReportThe Course Performance Report is produced annually by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic). It is an exception report which covers pre-course, in-course, and post-course data, and graduate questionnaire data, all of which are reported nationally. Faculties are required to respond to any exceptions noted for their courses in this report in terms of the actions they have taken to improve the performance parameters for the course. Faculties are also expected to supplement these data with further data of their own, as described in section C/4.10.3 below. 4.10.3 Course improvements for individual courses(a) Course data The course data available to faculties includes those provided in the Course Performance Report. However, in addition, faculties are expected to consult all their clients systematically and regularly. This includes graduates, current students, prospective and current employers, and professional bodies. Survey proformas suitable for employers, graduates and professional associations have been developed and are available on the Office of Teaching Quality website. Other useful data include Student Evaluations of Units or faculties' own surveys, focus groups, or other methodologies. In addition to analysing the adequacy of the academic aspects of the course, faculties should also assess the adequacy of relevant student services which have an impact on the quality of the students' learning and broader educational experience within the course. (b) The role of faculty / school advisory committees and faculty academic boards The course team provides a report annually on their course to the faculty / school advisory committee, which oversees and monitors the course improvements and forwards the report with comments to the faculty academic board. There is no mandatory form for the report to the faculty / school advisory committee by the course team. However, a suggested template and examples of alternative templates used by faculties are available on the Office of Teaching Quality website. Regardless of the format used, the report should address the following as appropriate:
(c) Research courses Research degrees of all types are subject to the course quality assurance process. In particular, the course report for each research course which is considered by the faculty / school advisory committee and faculty academic board must include exception reports and actions arising from the research reports to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation), and include exception data on the 10 items listed in the Research Training Quality Assurance System research training plan (see section D/5.1.6). For the purposes of these processes, each faculty should consider its Doctor of Philosophy program as one of its research courses, and not assume that the PhD is dealt with centrally and therefore separately, even though the PhD is a University-wide degree. In addition to the process described elsewhere in this section, the course report for each research course is forwarded to Research Degrees Committee for consideration at its May meeting and forwarded to University Research and Innovation Committee as part of the Faculty Centre Annual Report process.
(d) Courses offered transnationally
(e) Double degree programs Quality assurance processes are the same for double degree programs as for single degrees. The course report for a double degree program should be considered at faculty/school advisory committee and faculty academic board in each faculty at the same time as the related single degree course. 4.10.4 Strategic review of courses(a) The Faculty Academic Program Report The faculty academic board provides to University Academic Board at its May meeting each year, through the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic), University Teaching and Learning Committee and University Research and Innovation Committee as appropriate, a report on the academic program of the faculty (ie its suite of award courses) and its efforts to improve teaching and learning in the faculty. This report is of no more than 10 pages, provides an overview of the faculty's academic program, and is linked to the quinquennial review process. The faculty report is not intended to be comprehensive. Rather, it should focus on exception cases, action taken to address identified issues and the outcomes. Thus, it will provide a self-evaluative and critical analysis of trends, developments, improvements, and salient contextual issues presented in an accessible way and focussing on outcomes, particularly the verifiable quality of courses and graduates. This is a diagnostic and interpretive, rather than solely a reporting exercise, which highlights strengths and weaknesses and the faculty's responses. Detailed attachments to the report are not required, but are held in the faculty for access if necessary. Given the above, the form of the report is not prescribed. However, a possible template for reporting, and other information relating to the conduct of a quality assurance process, is available from the Office of Teaching Quality website. (b) Involvement of the quinquennial review panel An assessment from a strategic perspective of the overall suite of courses offered by a faculty occurs at the quinquennial review of the faculty. Review panels may consider, inter alia,
Review panels will consider among other documentation the set of annual faculty reports submitted to University Academic Board over the previous quinquennium in undertaking its assessment. These will be provided to the panels by the Office of Teaching Quality. The quinquennial review process, however, is not one where detailed scrutiny of individual courses can take place. Ensuring the integrity and monitoring the ongoing quality assurance and improvement processes for individual courses (see C/4.10.3) is a critical role for faculty / school advisory committees and faculty academic boards. (c) The role of Council At least once a year, University Academic Board provides strategic advice to Council which covers:
Modification History
|
