UG/Conv/Msci New Programme SEQ

UG/conv/MSci new programme SEQ

NEW PROGRAMME(S): FULL SUBMISSION
Self-evaluation questionnaire for new undergraduate, conversion and integrated Masters programmes /

You should complete this questionnaire if you are proposing a new undergraduate, conversion, or integrated Masters programme(s) for accreditation against the requirements for Graduate Membership of the Society, including the Graduate Basis for Chartered Membership (GBC).

Please note that we offer a fast-track submission process for providers who already offer accredited undergraduate and/or conversion programmes. This means that where you are planning to offer additional programme(s) that deliver the GBC curriculum in the same way – i.e. students enrolling on your new programme(s) will be required to complete the same compulsory modules as students on your existing programmes to cover GBC requirements – you will not need to provide a full submission to us. Please see our relevant handbooks (Accreditation of new UK programmes: a guide to our application process or Accreditation through Partnership: Seeking accreditation for programmes delivered outside the UK) for further information.

The questionnaire is split into two sections:

·  Section A asks for key information about the award(s) you are submitting for accreditation, including details of who we should contact if we have queries about your application.

·  Section B invites you to self-evaluate your programme(s) against each of our eight programme standards. If you are submitting more than one new programme for accreditation and all of your new awards meet our programme standards in the same way, you may complete a single Section B.

You should provide your completed submission on three USB sticks. Please post them to:

Partnership & Accreditation Team

The British Psychological Society

St Andrews House, 48 Princess Road East

Leicester LE1 7DR

If you have any queries in relation to your submission, please contact

Section A: about your provision

1.  The programme(s)

Full name of programme as it appears on award certificate / Programme type (tick one) / Mode of study (tick all that apply) / Is the award validated? / Date of first intake / Intake from which accreditation sought
Single Honours / Joint Honours / Combined Honours / Conversion award / Integrated Masters / Full-time / Part-time / Blended learning / Distance learning / Yes / No*

If your submission covers more than one programme, please add further rows to this table as required.

* Note: If your programme has not yet been validated, please indicate the date on which the validation event (or equivalent) is planned to take place. Programme(s) must be validated or be sufficiently developed such that they are ready for internal validation before the Society will undertake a partnership visit. A partnership visit will be undertaken to all new providers, and all international provision. See our relevant handbooks (Accreditation of new UK programmes: a guide to our application process or Accreditation through Partnership: Seeking accreditation for programmes delivered outside the UK) for further information.

2. The education provider

Name of awarding institution:
Academic unit(s) in which the provision is based:
Full address (to assist us in relation to future visit planning, where required):
Name of Programme Director(s) or Co-ordinator(s): / You should tell us the name of the staff member(s) with overall academic responsibility for the provision and its delivery and development.
Franchising / International delivery arrangements: / Is the provision franchised for delivery by a partner institution? Y/N
If yes, please state the name of the partner institution.

3. The application

Who should we approach with any queries about this application? / You should tell us the name and role of who we should approach with any queries about your application, and provide us with an email address and telephone number for them.
Senior management sign off: / We require the Head of the UK academic unit in which the provision is based to confirm the accuracy of the information contained within this application, and the provision of the additional evidence outlined below.
Signature (electronic):
Name and role:
Date of submission:

4. The checklist

The sources of evidence to be supplied alongside this self-evaluation questionnaire are outlined below. This list should be considered alongside our handbook, Accreditation through Partnership: Preparing for a partnership visit.

Programme standard / Required evidence source (or equivalent alternative source if appropriate) / Enclosed?
Y/N
Programme standard 1: Programme Design / Programme specification.
Programme standard 2: Programme Content (learning, research and practice) / Module outlines.
Programme handbook.
Curriculum, research, placement (if appropriate) and/or other handbooks if applicable.
Programme standard 3: Working ethically and legally / There are no additional evidence requirements for this standard. / N/A
Programme standard 4: Selection and admissions / Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Policy. / Please provide a link
Recognition of Prior Learning Policy (if applicable). / Please provide a link
Programme standard 5: Student development and professional membership / There are no additional evidence requirements for this standard. / N/A
Programme standard 6: Academic leadership and programme delivery / CV’s / brief biographies for all staff listed in item 6.2.
Staffing plan (academic and support staff) from start to steady-state.
Plan for investment in dedicated laboratory/experimental space from start to steady-state.
Programme standard 7: Discipline specific resources / Plan for investment in library, equipment, and IT hardware/software, from start to steady-state.
Programme standard 8: Quality management and governance / An overview of any additional feedback collected by the programme in relation to quality matters (e.g. Internal Programme Review document).
Copies of minutes of key programme committees for the last year e.g. Board of Studies, Programme Board and its subgroups.
Copies of the most recent report by your external examiner(s), and your response, detailing any actions taken if available.
Responses to the report by your external examiner(s) detailing any actions taken, if applicable.
(International provision only) Detailed business case supporting collaborative delivery of the programme by external partners.

Please note that our reviewers may request clarification or ask for further information in addition to the event that the evidence sources outlined above do not adequately demonstrate fulfillment of the accreditation standards.

Section B: self-evaluation against our standards

In this part of our questionnaire, we ask you to tell us about the context in which your provision is delivered and the rationale for its development. We invite you to self-evaluate your provision against our eight programme standards.

When you complete this part of the questionnaire you must refer to the relevant accreditation standards and the associated process handbook (www.bps.org.uk/accreditationdownloads).

Context and rationale

Information required / Commentary
Why has this new programme been developed?
Please briefly outline the rationale for the development of this new programme, and describe how the programme contributes to the strategic aims of your institution.
What are the distinctive features of this provision?
Please briefly outline what you feel to be the distinctive features or strengths of this provision, using bullet points. These may relate to the provision, the academic unit in which it is based, or the education provider more generally.

Programme Standard 1: Programme Design

1.1  Please list below each of the modules of which the accredited award is comprised (note: please add rows as required):

Module code / Module title / Credits / Assessment task(s) / Mandatory/ optional / Name of module leader

Assessment

1.2  You must include a statement in your programme handbook(s) advising students that, in order to be eligible for the GBC, they must pass the empirical psychology project, and gain at least a Lower Second Class Honours degree, or its equivalent (i.e. an overall pass mark of at least 50% for conversion programmes). Please tell us where these statements are located. If students are advised of these requirements via an alternative source, please provide further information below.
Where your institution’s regulations allow students to achieve the award without passing the empirical project, please advise us of the steps you have taken to seek exemption from this regulation on the grounds of accreditation requirements.
For conversion courses, if your institution does not use a percentage-based marking scheme, please provide brief details of how your scheme will enable the Society to identify those graduates who have achieved a minimum of 50% overall (as required for the GBC).
Statement / Document/source / Page reference
Empirical project must be passed
Minimum 2ii (or equivalent) required for GBC
1.3  Is there any specific good practice you wish to highlight in relation to this standard?
For any good practice highlighted, please describe the impact of that good practice on the quality of the overall student experience, or on other aspects of delivery.
Evidence Requirements
For this programme standard we expect you to submit the following evidence sources:
·  Programme Specification
Please indicate in the evidence checklist at the front of this document which evidence sources you have provided.

Reviewers’ Comments

Standard met in full / Yes / No
Good Practice
Further information or areas for clarification / Please indicate the specific standard(s) to which your comments relate
Areas of concern (standard not met) / Please indicate the specific standard(s) you are concerned may not be met

Programme Standard 2: Programme Content (learning, research and practice)

Curriculum

2.1  Please complete the table below which sets out each of the core domains associated with the GBC curriculum, and the minimum level at which each should be delivered (taught and assessed).
Where core areas are delivered at Level 4 (Level 8 in Scotland), this must be supported by additional coverage (teaching and assessment) at Level 5 or Level 6 (Level 9 or Level 10 in Scotland) that progresses students’ knowledge and understanding in relation to those core areas.
Core domain / Minimum level required / Module codes and titles / Module(s) in which each core domain is assessed
FHEQ / SCQF
Biological psychology / 4, 5, or 6 / 8, 9, or 10
Cognitive psychology / 4, 5, or 6 / 8, 9, or 10
Developmental psychology / 4, 5, or 6 / 8, 9, or 10
Individual differences / 4, 5, or 6 / 8, 9, or 10
Social psychology / 4, 5, or 6 / 8, 9, or 10
Conceptual and historical issues in psychology / 4, 5, or 6 / 8, 9, or 10
Research methods / 5 and/ or 6 / 9 and/ or 10
Empirical project / 6 / 10 / Must be separately assessed

Programme structure

2.2  Please indicate which module(s) are required for students to complete the award, and which modules are required in order to meet the requirements for GBC.
This will enable our reviewers to evaluate the breadth and depth of coverage of GBC curriculum areas. In addition it will enable them to identify any potential distinctive or positive practice in connection with the design and delivery of your provision.
Module code / Module title / Year of delivery / Level / Required for award (Yes / No) / Required for GBC (Yes / No)

Practical work

Information required / Commentary
2.3  You should describe your approach to ensuring that students engage in practical work across the GBC curriculum that enables them to develop subject-specific skills outlined in our standards.
2.4  If relevant to your provision, you should additionally describe the ways in which practical work is supported for students undertaking psychology programmes via distance learning.
2.5 Please outline in the table below the practical work undertaken across the GBC curriculum domains, the nature and type of the practical work students will complete, the variety of methodologies and techniques covered in practical sessions, opportunities for data collection, and details of any assessments.
Core domain / Approaches (tick) / Overview of:
·  practical work undertaken
·  techniques covered
·  opportunities for data collection
·  assessments
Quantitative methods / Qualitative methods
Biological psychology
Cognitive psychology
Developmental psychology
Individual differences
Social psychology
Research methods

Research and the empirical project

Information required / Commentary
2.6  Have you reviewed your research and research methods provision against the Society’s Supplementary Guidance for research and research methods on Society accredited undergraduate and conversion programmes? / Yes / No (delete as appropriate)
2.7  Please describe how you approach project supervision across your staff team, including who undertakes supervision, how students are supported in developing their project ideas, and how supervisory workload is allocated across the team.
You should also outline how these arrangements operate where programmes are offered jointly or in combination with other Departments or across the in-country and UK provision where there is potential for supervision to be shared.
2.8  Is there any specific good practice you wish to highlight in relation to this standard?
For any good practice highlighted, please describe the impact of that good practice on the quality of the overall student experience, or on other aspects of delivery.
Evidence Requirements
For this programme standard we expect you to submit the following evidence sources:
·  Module outlines: we expect to see evidence that provides an overview of what is taught in each module. If that level of detail is not included in the module descriptor please provide the module handbook.
·  Programme handbook.
·  Curriculum, research, placement (if appropriate) and/or other handbooks, if applicable.
Please indicate in the evidence checklist at the front of this document which evidence sources you have provided.

Reviewers’ Comments

Standard met in full / Yes / No
Good Practice
Further information or areas for clarification / Please indicate the specific standard(s) to which your comments relate
Areas of concern (standard not met) / Please indicate the specific standard(s) you are concerned may not be met

Programme Standard 3: Working ethically and legally

Information required / Commentary
3.1  Please provide a brief overview of how you introduce students to ethics and ethical practice.
You should indicate teaching of ethics in relation to the submission of ethics applications for research projects and beyond.
3.2  How is students’ understanding of ethics evaluated?
You should indicate assessment of ethics in relation to the submission of ethics applications for research projects and beyond.
3.3  What procedures are in place for gaining ethical approval for students’ research?
3.4  How are students made aware of ethical and professional practice frameworks (as appropriate to their level of study)?
3.5  Have you reviewed your provision against the Society’s Guidance on teaching and assessment of ethical competence in psychology education? / Yes / No (delete as appropriate)
3.6 Is there any specific good practice you wish to highlight in relation to this standard?
For any good practice highlighted, please describe the impact of that good practice on the quality of the overall student experience, or on other aspects of delivery.
Evidence Requirements
There are no additional evidence requirements for this programme standard. However, we will expect the evidence provided in relation to Programme standard 2 to demonstrate appropriate coverage of ethics within programme content.

Reviewers’ Comments