Programme and Course
Approval
David A Watt
www.gla.ac.uk/services/senateoffice/qea/
progdesignapproval/progapproval
Background (1)
 QAA requires the University to ensure that all
programme proposals are thoroughly scrutinised.
 Senate has ultimate responsibility for all
academic matters including programme and
course approval.
 The programme and course approval process
is managed by the Academic Standards
Committee (ASC) supported by the Senate
Office.
2
Background (2)
 Senate has delegated responsibility as follows:
College
scrutiny
ASC
audit
new programmes
√
√
major changes to programmes
√
√
minor changes to programmes
√
new courses
√
changes to courses
√
3
PIP
 PIP is a database of programmes and courses.
– A course is “a self-contained unit of study on a
particular topic ...”.
– A programme is “a set of compulsory and elective
courses leading to a defined award ...”.
 PIP contains programme specifications, course
specifications, and proposal-related documents.
– When a programme or course is proposed, its
specification must be uploaded into PIP.
– PIP records the status of each proposal as it proceeds
through the process.
4
New programmes: School (1)
 Suppose that a School wishes to propose a new
programme.
 A working group develops the proposal and
documents it:
– proposal support document (rationale)
– programme specification
– course specifications (for any new courses).
5
New programmes: School (2)
 The School consults on the proposal:
– School Learning & Teaching Committee
– students
– external examiners
– employers
– university services (e.g., CRB, LTC, RIO).
 The School must address all criticisms.
– If a criticism is rejected, the reasons must be
documented.
6
New programmes: School (3)
 The School uploads the proposal into PIP:
– proposal support document
– programme specification
– any course specifications
– records of consultations.
 For a new PGT programme, the School also
submits a budget plan to the College.
– A PGT costing model is currently being piloted by
Finance Office.
7
New programmes: College
 The College Board of Studies (BoS) has
authority to approve programme proposals on
behalf of the College.
 The BoS considers the proposal and budget
plan.
 The BoS must scrutinise all aspects of the
proposal:
– Does the proposal have academic merit?
– Have consultations been properly conducted?
– Is the budget plan sound?
8
New programmes: PAG (1)
 Academic Standards Committee (ASC) has
delegated authority to approve programme
proposals on behalf of Senate.
 ASC has established four Programme Approval
Groups (PAGs).
– There is one PAG for each College.
– This is composed of three senior academics from the
other Colleges, assisted by a Senate Office clerk.
9
New programmes: PAG (2)
 The BoS submits to the Senate Office:
– proposal support document
– programme specification
– relevant BoS minutes
– new regulations (if required).
 The PAG audits the work of the BoS:
– Is all documentation in order?
– Does the programme specification comply with
University guidelines and the SCQF?
– Have consultations been properly conducted?
10
Suites of programmes
 Suppose that a School wishes to propose a suite
of programmes with similar structure.
 In the proposal support document, list all the
programmes and explain their relationship to one
another.
 Submit the proposal support document and one
representative programme specification for
consultations, College BoS approval, and PAG
approval.
 Then submit all remaining programme
specifications, for approval by the BoS convener.
11
Changed programmes (1)
 Suppose that a School wishes to propose
changes to an existing programme (or suite of
programmes).
 If the changes are minor, they can be approved
by the College BoS alone.
 If the changes are major, they must be approved
by the College BoS and the PAG.
12
Changed programmes (2)
 Examples of changes to a PGT programme:
Major change
Minor change
Title
—
title change
Contents
major changes to component
courses totalling ≥30 credits
major changes to
<30 credits, or minor
changes to all
Structure
shift of ≥30 credits between core,
electives, and dissertation
shift of <30 credits
Assessment shift of weight between core and
electives affecting ≥30 credits
shift of weight
affecting <30 credits
Delivery
introduction of parttime delivery
introduction of distance learning
to existing programme
13
Timetable for programme proposals
Proposal stage
Semester 1 Semester 2
Fast-track
summer
Oct – Jan
Sep – Oct
Nov – Feb
late Oct
mid Mar
at least 6 wks
before launch
PAG meeting
early Nov
late Mar
at least 4 wks
before launch
PAG report to ASC
mid Nov
early Apr
immediate
ASC report to Senate
early Dec
mid May
mid Oct
Documentation into PIP
Consideration by College
Submission to Senate
Office
14
Marketing
 Start marketing as soon as the proposal is
developed (as long as possible before launch).
 Initially market proposed new programmes with
the caveat “subject to Senate approval”.
 Remove the caveat as soon as ASC approval is
confirmed.
15
Summary
 The programme and course approval process is
robust but flexible to user needs.
– The fast-track cycle caters for late but genuinely urgent
proposals (where authorised by the Clerk of Senate
and ASC convener).
– The Semester 1 cycle was established recently in
response to one Faculty’s rapid PGT developments.
– This session, the Semester 1 timetable has been
adapted to cater for the expected upsurge in PGT
proposals.
16