PERIODIC COLLABORATIVE

PARTNERSHIP AND PROGRAMME REVIEW

Review of partnership and programmes with

Name of Partner and University Department

for the name of programmes/area

Date

1.Context

The purposes of the Periodic Collaborative Partnership and Programme Review[1]areto provide confirmation at programme level of the continued validity and relevance of the curriculum, confirmation of the effectiveness of annual monitoring and review processes, and confirmation of the fitness of the partnership arrangement.

The review also includes a visit to the Partner to meet students and staff and to view the facilities.

Recommendations are categorised under two levels of priority:

Conditions: These refer to important matters that contravene any of the University’s policies or that the review panel believes need to be addressed to ensure the continued validity and relevance of the curriculum, or the effectiveness of annual review processes or the fitness of the partnership arrangements. Conditions will specify a maximum date by which these must be met.

Recommendations: These refer to matters that the review panel believes have the potential to enhance the validity and relevance of the curriculum, the effectiveness of annual review processes or the partnership arrangements.

The review outcomes, together with an accompanying Action Plan, which should be discussed with the Partner, on conditions are considered by the Faculty Executive Committee and the University Quality Assurance Committee. Recommendations do not need to be included in the Action Plan, however, these must be considered by the course team and discussed at Board of Studies.

The Associate Dean (Academic) will monitor progress on meeting the conditions in the Report by the due date and provide confirmation to the Dean and Head of Department when all conditions have been satisfactorily addressed.

2.Provision in Scope:

Course Code (inc F/P/S) / Course Name: / Total Student Numbers: / Total Number f.t.e.s:

Note: Student numbers as at December XXX (ie 2016) (numbers available from QMD)

3.Panel Membership

Chair
External Assessor
Panel Member
Student Member
Deputy Academic Registrar (QMD)
Associate Dean (Academic
Associate Dean (Students)
Partner Representative (in attendance)

4.Course Team Members

Name of School/Department:

Name of Partner:

5.Outcomes[2]

5.1 (a) Continued validity and relevance of the curriculum for all

Programmes considered at this eventYes/No

Or

(b) For the following programmes:

___Yes

For the following programmes:

___No

NB Where any or all programmes are given a ‘no’ for this outcome, the outcome for ‘Effective Annual Monitoring and Review Processes’ must also be ‘no’.

5.2Effective Annual Monitoring and Review Processes[3]Yes/No

5.3Fitness of Partnership Arrangements Confirmed for a further three years Yes/No

5.4If the partner visit occurs at the same time as the review, please include the following statement:

The panel also considered the learning environment and resources to be fit/not to be fit for purpose.

and attach the partner visit report as an Annex to this report

6.Key Strengths of Provision

7.Conditions

To be met by date

8.Recommendations

[1] See Programme Monitoring and Review Policy and Operational Handbook for further details

[2]‘Yes’ outcomes necessarily includes adherence to the requirements of the QAA Quality Code

[3] It is possible to receive a ‘no’ here despite a ‘yes’ under 5.1 due to another aspect of provision. For the procedure in the event of any ‘no’ outcome, please see the Operational Handbook paragraphs 3.27 and 3.28