1.Strategic fit
Principles and actions governing the changes have been approved by Senate (2 March 2010).This, together with reporting through to Executive Board (as outlined in the PVC T&L’s paper), fulfils our obligation to demonstrate institutional approval and oversight of the process.
UTLC has considered Faculty academic models which provide the overall rationale for programme changes (26 May 2010).
Faculties are staging meetings with HoS to discuss plans to address academic models.
2. Academic scrutiny
2.1 A one-stage approval process will apply. FTLC will have delegated authority from UTLC to approve major and minor programme changes.
2.2 Schools will review their curricula through teaching teams, STLC (or equivalent) and BoS in the light of their Faculty’s approach and information provided by Timetable Services and propose changes as appropriate. Schools which do not propose changes will provide Faculties with confirmation that they have considered their programmes in the light of the academic model and decided to take no action. This should be provided in the form of a summary report to FEB (due May 2011) signed off by the Head of School and Chair of FTLC.
2.3 For 2011 entry
Approval events should be held before the end of December 2010, with completion by end of January 2011 and reported to UTLC thereafter.This will mean that all changes are approved in good time for module approval and module pre-selection.The Chair of the panel (the relevant FTLC Chair) will prepare a report on action taken by the panel to approve the programme changes, with a summary of how the changes meet the expectations of the Faculty’s model for reporting to UTLC (following which UTLC must report to EB on delivery of the review’s KPIs). Changes will then begin to roll out with effect from September 2011.
2.4 For 2012 entry
Approval events will be held in each Facultyideally beforethe end of December2011 , with completion by end of January 2012 and thereafter reported to UTLC. This will mean that all changes are approved in good time for module approval and module pre-selection. The Chair of the panel (the relevant FTLC Chair) will prepare a report on action taken by the panel to approve the programme changes, with a summary of how the changes meet the expectations of the Faculty’s model for reporting to UTLC (following which UTLC must report to EB on delivery of the review’s KPIs). Changes will then begin to roll out with effect from September 2012.
2.5 The approval panel will be convened by the Faculty and should be constituted as follows:-
- Faculty Deans (one of whom will chair the panel);
- a minimum of three academic members of staff from Schools within the Faculty;
- two senior academic members of staff from different Facultiesto enhance the academic scrutiny and transparency of the process (to be identified by QuILT);
- the Faculty Quality Administrator;
- a representative from QuILT;
- a representative from Timetable Services.
2.6 Approval criteria – these will largely be driven by each faculty’s academic models but supplemented by some core genericcriteria (with others depending on the nature of the provision). FTLC must be assured that:-
- the overall relevance, coherence and intellectual integrity of the programme is appropriate;
- the necessary resources are available to support the programme;
- the content and level of the curriculum is designed to enable students to achieve the intended learning outcomes;
- the curriculum promotes progression so that the demands on the learner in intellectual challenge, skills, knowledge, conceptualisation and learning autonomy increase during the course of the programme;
- learning and teaching methods are designed to enable students to achieve the intended learning outcomes;
- the assessment methods are designed to measure student achievement of the intended learning outcomes;
- the standards of the proposed programme are compatible with the FHEQ, relevant national subject benchmarks and, where appropriate, with the requirements of professional, statutory and regulatory bodies;
- any questions or perceived difficulties raised by the external examiner have been covered and a response sent to them;
And, where relevant, that:-
- consultation has taken place with any other academic units involved in the delivery of the programme;
- the impact on partner institutions involved in any collaborative provision has been identified;
- consultation has taken place with any placement providers
2.7 Documentation
Bearing in mind that the approval meeting should concern itself with academic scrutiny of the proposals, Schools are to provide the following paperwork for major changes:
- programme regulations
- programme specifications
- MOFs
- Evidence of consultation with one external examiner (written comments in the form of an email or a letter) (not required for minor changes)
Faculties will produce paperwork demonstrating how Schools’ plans address the principles of their academic models.
2.8Externality
Externals are to be asked for the views on any impact changes may have on the coherence of the curricula and are not being asked to comment on the review per se. Consultation should take place during the review process rather than presenting them with a fait accompli, so that comments can be incorporated into the redesign. QuILT/Faculties should provide a general explanatory letter emphasising the constructive purposes of the review which Schools can then personalise and attach proposed changes to. Schools are responsible for seeking the views of externals as they are the normal first line of responsibility for liaising with external examiners.
3.Post-approval
Approval of programme changes will be recorded by QuILT and reported to UTLC in the customary way.
Approval of individual modules in MOFS and updating of the module links to programmes in SAP Student Lifecycle Management need to be achieved by April pre-registration.
4.Timing
It is intended that changes are introduced for 2011/12 which means having issues resolved by the end of calendar year 2010. Changes for stage 1 of 3 year programmes should come into effect in 2011/12 and where possible also for stage 2 cohorts.
In HaSS, the majority of changes to Stage 1 will come into effect in 2012/13. Some other changes will take longer (e.g. review of combined honours arrangements).
Timescale #1 (for programme changes due for implementation in September 2011 – mostly applicable to SAgE)
When / What / ResponsibleJune-November 2010 / Schools review their programmes (following Faculty priorities). Consultation with external advisers. Cross-faculty consultation between Deans to deal with any major issues arising from changes which impact on shared provision / HoS
October / Production of guidance and statistics to Schools to assist them in their review of the curricula - this should include statistics about eg numbers of students and shared use of modules; things to consider eg requisites; ideas for simplification; suggested pressure points to consider first; KPIs. / Timetabling; Faculties
December / Deadline for formal submission of major programme revisions for approval to FTLC (documentation as above) / HoS
December /January 2011 / Proposals to be considered for approval / Chairs of FTLC
31 January / Deadline for approval of major programme revisions;
MOFS amended for any consequential changes submitted to FTLC
February / Programme regulations amended where necessary and feasible to restrict excessive module choice / HoS
28 February / Deadline for submission of programme regulations for 2011/12 to FTLC / HoS
March / Update SAP SLcM with new pathways and module-programme links / Faculty Q&SA/Ms/QuILT
September / Changes rolled out
Timescale #2 (for programme changes due for implementation in September 2012 – mostly applicable to HaSS)
When / What / ResponsibleOctober 2010 / Production of guidance and statistics to Schools to assist them in their review of the curricula - this should include statistics about eg numbers of students and shared use of modules; things to consider eg requisites; ideas for simplification; suggested pressure points to consider first; KPIs. / Timetabling; Faculties
December / Schools to submit short action plan for FEB to review / HoS
February 2011 / Programme regulations amended where necessary and feasible to restrict excessive module choice / HoS
28 February / Deadline for submission of programme regulations for 2011/12 to FTLC / HoS
Spring-Summer / Schools follow Faculty implementation plans for consideration and agreement of programme changes necessary to comply with Faculty academic models Schools review their programmes (using Faculty guidance and timetabling guidance – see below – on what they are asked to consider).
Consultation with external advisers. / HoS; Schools: teaching teams and Boards of Studies (with student reps)
Current external examiners
November-December / Cross-faculty meeting of Deans to deal with any major issues arising from changes which impact on shared provision / Chairs of FTLCs
1 December / Deadline for formal submission of major programme revisions for approval to FTLC (documentation as above)
December/January 2012 / Proposals to be considered for approval by a Panel in each faculty with cross-institutional representation. / Chairs of FTLC
31 January / Deadline for approval of major programme revisions;
MOFS amended for any consequential changes submitted to FTLC
February / Reports from each of the Faculties of the review exercise to UTLC / Chairs of FTLC/Faculty QMs
28 February / Deadline for formal submission of minor programme changes to FTLC / HoS
March / Update SAP SLcM with new pathways and module-programme links / Faculty Q&SA/Ms/QuILT
31 March / Minor programme changes approved / Chair of FTLC
April-July / Completion of all Stage 2 module revision and approval process (for implementation in 2011/12) / Schools
Faculties
September 2012 / Changes rolled out to Stage 1, and where feasible Stage 2
September 2013 / Further roll out of changes to later Stages
Simon Meacher
Lauraine Pye
September 2010
1