Prior to final submission to the College Learning and Teaching Committee, it is useful to ask a colleague or member of Academic Quality Services to review the programme to identify any weaknesses or missing elements. This will speed up the approval process.
What should I Look for When Reviewing a Proposal Before Submission?
The Programme Approval Committee has established checklists for undergraduate, postgraduate research and collaborative programmes to aid during the review process. These checklists are available for proposers and Committee members to use to reflect on when reviewing proposals prior to submission. In summary, any review should reflect on whether the programme meets the required external standards, is informed by relevant employment outcomes and has a clear curriculum map and assessment strategy which delivers effective, inclusive and authentic learning.
Reviewing and Submitting a Proposal
Once you have finalised all documentation required and fully completed all relevant sections on the Programme Approval and Management system, you will then need to review your proposal and submit it for review by your College/School’s Learning and Teaching or Postgraduate Research Committee.
Where is Externality within the Process?
Externality is essential to assuring the quality of new programmes and is central to the process. There are several levels of externality required within the Programme Development and Approval process. Before submitting a programme for review you should ensure that the entire proposal has been sent to your chosen External Subject Specialist for review and comment, along with the External Subject Specialist’s Report form. In addition, you should endeavour to liaise with Employers during the development phase, and provide a completed Employer’s Report form.
Where required by the Programme Approval Committee, an independent External Subject Specialist will be recruited to join the Committee.
How do I Submit a Programme for Review and Approval?
Once you have reviewed your proposal and are confident that it is complete, ensure that it is saved and then click ‘Submit for Acceptance’ on the bottom of the Programme Approval and Management system screen. This will generate automated notifications to ensure your proposal will then be subject to initial scrutiny and review.
What is Initial Scrutiny?
Once submitted for review, all programme proposals are subject to initial scrutiny to establish that the proposal has been fully completed to the standard expected by the University. Only programmes that pass initial scrutiny will progress to review by the Programme Approval Committee.
Why is there an Initial Scrutiny on New Programme Proposals?
Initial scrutiny has been implemented to ensure that any proposals considered by the Programme Approval Committee are complete and meet the minimum standards expected. This speeds up the review and approval process by enabling the Committee to focus on the key academic elements of the programme in full knowledge of key facts, rather than operating within complete information. The Committee has spent large amounts of time in previous years reviewing incomplete programmes which have been rejected by the Committee on a number of occasions. The purpose of initial scrutiny, therefore, is to reduce time wastage and maximise efficiency.
Who Reviews Proposals During the Initial Scrutiny Phase?
All new programme proposals are scrutinised by a member of Academic Quality Services, normally the Academic Quality Enhancement Officer assigned to the proposing College/School. The scrutineer will seek to ensure the programme proposal is fully complete and meets minimum standards to be progressed to the Programme Approval Committee for review.
What Happens if my Proposal does not Pass Initial Scrutiny?
If your proposal is incomplete or does not meet the required standards, it will be referred back to the proposing College/School with feedback for enhancement. The College’s/School’s assigned Academic Quality Engagement Officer will work with the Programme Proposer to ensure to proposal is completed and brought up to standard where necessary. This approach maximises the chances of a successful outcome, and makes best use of the Committee’s time.