FLS PA 01 1516

Programme Approval and Review Panel Guidance

1.0 Introduction

Section 4.3 of the Academic Quality Handbook describes the role and remit of the Programme Approval Panel (

The panel should therefore focus its attention on matters that reflect this remit.

At Periodic Review, the panel will be able to draw upon the evidence set out on the Critical Review and supporting evidence, including External Examiner Reports.

2.0 Role, Remit and Lines of Enquiry

2.1 Coherence of proposal and organisation of the curriculum

  • Is there a convincing and evidence-based rationale for the overall proposal?
  • Is the programme content appropriate for the title of the award and the anticipated student market?
  • Is there evidence of student involvement in programme review and design?
  • Is the programme aligned to the Curriculum Framework?
  • Does the programme include opportunities for placement and/or study abroad and is this reflected in the proposal in accordance with the Guide to the Management of Placements and Study Abroad?

2.2 Academic Standards

  • Do the learning outcomes reflect the aims of the programme and are they set at the appropriate level against the FHEQ? Are learning outcomes articulated for all target and embedded awards?
  • Is the assessment strategy clearly articulated? Is this appropriate and does it enable students to demonstrate in full the extent to which they have achieved the programme?
  • Are the admissions requirements specific for the programme and set at an appropriate level, including those for programmes delivered overseas?
  • Are any specific arrangements for Recognition of Prior Learning explicit?

2.3 Enabling Student Achievement

  • Are the curriculum, learning and teaching methods, assessment strategy, learning resources and support arrangements designed in such a way as to give all students the opportunity to achieve the achieve the learning outcomes of the award.
  • Does the Equality Impact Assessment reflect an ‘inclusivecurriculum’?
  • Are there effective arrangements for student feedback and involvement in quality assurance?
  • Does the assessment strategy enable student feedback on summative assessment within 20 working days? Are there adequate opportunities for formative feedback?
  • What are the arrangements for induction, programme and module handbooks and do these align with University requirements?
  • Is there an effective Personal Academic Tutor system? Are there any additional student support arrangements in place?
  • Is there appropriate provision for any practical/laboratory work, including resources, support and health and safety requirements?

2.4 Compliance

  • Is the programme compliant with University Ordinances, Regulations and relevant policies? Are any waiver requests clear and justified?
  • Is there reference to relevant University guidance, for example in relation to placements, study abroad, RPL?
  • Is the programme designed according to the Higher Education Credit Framework for England?
  • Does the programmealign to relevant QAA Subject Benchmarks and/or Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body requirements?
  • In relation to overseas delivery, is the proposal complaint with any relevant in-country accreditationrequirements or regulations?
  • Is the programme aligned to the UK Quality Code?