handbook/C... · Web view1.1.2 Level 4 and 5 will be called a Higher National Diploma 1.2 Higher...

C-Annex 7

Student Learning & Experience Committee

Guidance for Course Teams for the Approval of New and Periodic

Review of Courses

Owner: Academic Registry Version number: 2.0Effective date: November 2017 (Academic Year 2017-18)Date of next review: July 2018

This document is part of the University Quality Handbook which governs the University’s academic provision.

C-Annex 7

C O N T E N T S

1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................12. THE FORMAT OF THE COURSE APPROVAL/PERIODIC REVIEW

EVENT...............................................................................32.1 Using this Guidance.............................................................42.2 QAA Quality Code.................................................................62.3 Support................................................................................82.4 Course Approval/Periodic Review Event Documentation.....92.5 Course(s) Approval Documentation (CAD)/Course Evaluation

Document (CED)................................................................102.5.1 Tips for Developing a Good CAD/CED.................................142.6 Completing the Programme Specification..........................152.7 Completing the Student Course Handbook........................222.8 What Conclusions will the Panel Reach?............................242.8.1 Conclusion – Quality and Standards...................................252.8.2 Conclusions – Commendations...........................................262.8.3 Conclusions – Transferable Good Practice..........................262.8.4 Conclusions – Conditions and Recommendations..............26

DOCUMENTATION TEMPLATES..................................................28COURSE APPROVAL DOCUMENT (CAD)......................................29COURSE EVALUATION DOCUMENT (CED)....................................44PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION TEMPLATE...................................61FRAMEWORK FOR HIGHER EDUCATION QUALIFICATIONS AND BOLOGNA CYCLE NOTES FOR COURSE TEAMS............................67TABLE 1: FHEQ LEVELS OF STUDY............................................68LEARNING RESOURCE GUIDELINES............................................69NOTES FOR COURSE TEAMS ON COMPENSATABLE MODULES, IN-MODULE RETAKE, EXCEPTIONAL THIRD ATTEMPT AND VARIANCE...............................................................................................71ASSESSMENT REGULATION CHARACTERISTICS TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE COURSE APPROVAL AND PERIODIC REVIEW PROCESS:................................................................................77GUIDANCE FOR APPROVING MODULES......................................83GUIDANCE - DESIGNING MAJOR/ MINOR AWARDS.......................88GUIDANCE - DESIGNING HIGHER AND DEGREE APPRENTICESHIPS

.......................................................................................90

Page i of 112Quality Handbook Section C

C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE - AWARDS CONTAINING WORKPLACE/RELATED LEARNING........................................................................94

GUIDANCE – COURSES DELIVERED BY DISTANCE LEARNING........97GUIDANCE - DESIGN OF FOUNDATION DEGREES.......................102GUIDANCE - DESIGN OF HIGHER NATIONAL AWARDS................105GUIDANCE - ADDITIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE COURSES – 2017 REGULATIONS........................................................................107

iiQuality Handbook Section C

C-Annex 7

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

AAP Assessment, Award & Progression RegulationsAR Academic RegistryAR(LTE) Academic Registry (Learning, Teaching & Enhancement)AR(QS) Academic Registry (Quality & Standards)AR(SERA)

Academic Registry (Secretariat, External Review & Audit)

CAD Course Approval DocumentCAMS Credit Accumulation & Modular SchemeCED Course Evaluation DocumentCME Continuous Monitoring and EnhancementDBS Disclosure and Barring ServiceDL Distance LearningDLHE Destination of Leavers of Higher EducationEPA End Point AssessmentETA Exceptional Third AttemptFCD Finance & Commercial DevelopmentFEHEA Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher

Education AreaFHEQ Framework for Higher Education QualificationsFQ-EHEA Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher

Education AreaGL Guided LearningHDAs Higher Degree ApprenticeshipsHEI Higher Education InstituteHESA Higher Education Statistics AgencyHNs Higher Nationals IELTS International English Language Test SystemIMR In-module RetakeISB International Student BarometerJACS Joint Academic Coding System

Page iii of 112Quality Handbook Section C

C-Annex 7

KIS Key Information SetKSB Knowledge, Skills & BehaviourLEO Longitudinal Educational OutcomesLTS Learning and Teaching StrategyNMC National Midwifery CouncilNOS National Occupational StandardsPASS Peer Assisted Study Scheme PDP Personal Development PlanningPSRB Professional, Statutory and Regulatory BodiesQAA Quality Assurance AgencyRIT Research Informed TeachingRLO Reading Lists OnlineRPCL Recognition of Prior Certificated LearningRPEL Recognition of Prior Experiential LearningRPL Recognition of Prior LearningSLEC Student Learning & Experience CommitteeSLS Student & Library ServicesSSLESC School Student Learning & Experience Sub-CommitteeTEL Technology Enhanced LearningTQS Threshold Quality StandardsTQT Total Qualification TimeTU Teesside UniversityUAB University Academic BoardWPL Workplace Learning

ivQuality Handbook Section C

C-Annex 7

1. INTRODUCTION

This Guidance has been designed to be used as an electronic resource and not as a hardcopy resource due to the number of hyperlinks it contains. This guidance will focus on the University Course Approval/Periodic Review Event. Guidance on the approval process for provision with Collaborative Partners can be found in Section E: Institutional Approval and Review of Collaborative Partner and Approval, Monitoring and Periodic Review of Collaborative Provision Courses of the Quality Handbook.

The University has specific processes for approving new and reviewing courses, and in addition to this guidance, in preparation for the Event you should also read the following documentation:

Quality Handbook Section C: Approval & Review of Teesside University Provision

Credit Accumulation and Modular Scheme (CAMS) Assessment & Feedback Policy University Level Descriptors 2014 Assessment, Award & Progression Regulations

The University Course Approval and Periodic Review consists of consideration of the course documentation at an Approval Event from which a judgement and event report will be produced. The report includes the Conditions and Recommendation for the Course Team to address. The process results in a judgement on the course(s) in terms of the confidence that can be reasonably placed in the Course Team’s present and future management of the quality, the student learning and experience of the course(s) for which it is responsible and the academic standards of the associated award.

Page 1 of 112Quality Handbook Section C

http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/index.cfm?folder=student%20regulations&name=Assessment%20Regulations

http://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lttees/tu-level-descriptors/

http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/Assessment%20&%20Feedback%20Policy.doc

http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/CAMS.doc

http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/C%20-%20Approval%20&%20Review%20of%20Programmes.doc

http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/C%20-%20Approval%20&%20Review%20of%20Programmes.doc

http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/E%20-%20Institutional%20Approval%20&%20Review.doc



C-Annex 7

You will be given a date by which you have to provide a response to the Conditions and Recommendations and submit any revised documentation.

The Event Chair will ensure that you have addressed the conditions before formal ‘sign-off’ specifying the course(s) for forwarding to the University Student Learning & Experience Committee (SLEC).

The documentation will be submitted to the next meeting of SLEC, usually within 2 to 4 weeks. The SLEC will consider if the University’s process has been followed appropriately and, if so, formally sign-off the course(s), on behalf of the University. In the case of new course(s) the ‘subject to approval’ flag will then be removed in marketing material.

The Course Approval/Periodic Review Panel will be provided with the documentation that has been produced about the course(s).

The following two stages of the approval process are managed by your School and are briefly explained below:


Critical Read Process Stage – your School has the responsibility to ensure that the documentation produced for the final event is of an appropriate standard. Your School’s Senior Administrator/nominee will be able to advise you of this process. The Critical Read process should approve the documentation on behalf of the School prior to submission to the University Course Approval/Periodic Review Event

Module Event Stage - the modules for the course will normally have been considered via a School module process and specific guidance in relation to the new Assessment Award & Progression Regulations (AAP) (2014), and implications for learning and teaching, and assessment design is included in guidance found here. The Module Event should take place prior to the New Course Approval/Periodic Review Event. Guidance on the development and design of modules for course design are available from Academic Registry (Learning & Teaching Enhancement), see Section 2.3 below.

C-Annex 7


C-Annex 7

2. THE FORMAT OF THE COURSE APPROVAL/PERIODIC REVIEW EVENT

The Panel for the Course Approval / Periodic Review Event will include:

Chair: the Dean (or nominee) of the relevant School. Academic staff member from the relevant School and

independent of the course(s) under consideration. Representative from Academic Registry. External Academic expert from a Higher Education Institute

(HEI). Secretary: normally from the proposing/host School.

This may be supplemented, as appropriate by:

Department of Academic Enterprise, Head of Skills or nominee (for HDA approval/review activity)

Student Panel Member. Panel member(s) from Academic Registry (Quality & Standards)

(AR (QS)) database and external to the relevant School. An independent employer/practitioner. A service-user. PSRB representatives. Academic Librarian. A distance learning expert (a requirement for distance learning

courses).

The meeting will take the following format:


Brief presentation by Course Team – normally 10 minutes to the Panel at the start of the meeting. This gives you an opportunity to succinctly convey key strengths of your course or use the opportunity to clarify any significant matters that have arisen since the course documentation was disseminated. It should not repeat detailed information that has already been provided to the Panel. It is also an opportunity to draw the Panel’s attention to the innovative and distinctive aspects of your course.

C-Annex 7

.

2.1 Using this Guidance

In addition to providing you with information about the process, this Guide highlights key University and Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) requirements, and provides a series of prompt


Panel private meeting – the panel generate an agenda for the discussion with the Course Team.

Course Team re-join the meeting - to discuss the issues the Panel wants to raise and the Chair will ensure that the discussion is facilitated in a collegiate way to encourage a productive exchange of views between peers. The Panel will have been provided with the ‘Issues for Discussion and Conclusion’ pages, which forms the basis for setting the agenda for the discussion (Guidance for Panel Members for the Approval of New and Existing University Courses including Partnership Provision).

Student Meeting - in the case of Periodic Review only, following the discussion with the Team the Panel will normally meet with a group of current students and/or graduates to explore student consultation and feedback processes, and how students have contributed to the enhancement of the course. Alternatively Panel members will have received feedback from student questionnaires with their documentation for the event.

Private Meeting of the Panel - following the conclusion of all the discussions the panel will meet to determine the conclusions

Conclusion - you will then be invited to re-join the meeting to receive verbal feedback on the conclusions and recommendations.

C-Annex 7

questions to ensure that you address relevant issues when producing appropriate documentation, and preparing for the Approval/Periodic Review Event.You should:

Tasks Supplementary Information

1 Use the Course Approval Document (CAD) or Course Evaluation Document (CED), keep documentation concise and, wherever possible, use and refer to existing documentation as identified later in this Guide.

See page 29 for the CAD template and page 43 for the CED template. When approving a ‘framework’ suite of course(s) it may be sensible to provide one CAD/CED for all course(s).If you are unsure or wish to clarify if this applies to your Event you can seek guidance from AR (QS).

2 Incorporate the key features of the University’s Learning and Teaching Strategy (LTS) with a particular focus on the Goal (3 As, 3 Cs):

‘to educate our students in their chosen discipline to become confident, critical, creative, adaptable, articulate and aspiring’

The LTS can be found here.

3. Incorporate the key features of the University’s strategic agenda for:

Teesside University 2020

International Research and

Innovation Enterprise and Business

Engagement

Teesside University 2020

4 Reflect the QAA’s Quality Code Part A (see further information below in 2.2)

The QAA Quality Code can be found here

5 Use any relevant QAA Subject Benchmark Statements, Doctoral and Master Qualification Characteristics or

The QAA Subject UG and PG Benchmark Statements can be found here

The Doctoral Degree


http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/subject-benchmark-statements

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code

https://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/docrepo/about/teesside_2020.pdf

http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/Learning%20and%20Teaching%20Strategy.pdf

C-Annex 7

Tasks Supplementary Information

Foundation Degree Qualification Characteristics Statements

Characteristics Statements (updated Sept-15) here

The Master’s Degree Characteristics Statements (updated Sept-15) here

The Foundation Degree Characteristics Statements (updated Sept-15) here

Qualifications involving more than one degree awarding body (Dual/Joint Awards) here

6 Consider the Learning Resources Guidelines

Guidelines can be found here

7 ICT Resources Requirements at Course Level

Seek advice from your School e-Learning Co-ordinator

2.2 QAA Quality Code

Teesside University (TU) has mapped its processes and practices against the QAA Quality Code, ensuring alignment, and reflecting these within the University’s policies and procedures. It is, therefore, explicitly embedded in University practice.

The Quality Code includes the following components: Part A: Setting and maintaining threshold academic

standards incorporating the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications in England, Wales, Northern Ireland (FHEQ), and the Scottish Credit & Qualifications Framework, subject benchmarks, the Doctoral and Master Qualification Characteristics or Foundation Degree Qualification Characteristics Statements and the requirements for Programme Specifications.

Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality including 11 chapters covering all aspects of the student and course lifecycle. Chapter B6 incorporates the Guidelines on the


http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/quality-code-part-b

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/quality-code-part-a

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/quality-code-part-a

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/AssuringStandardsAndQuality/quality-code/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/characteristics-statements




C-Annex 7

Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Part C: Information about higher education provision is shorter and is not sub-divided into Chapters. It addresses how providers produce information that it is fit for purpose, accessible and trustworthy.

The requirements of the QAA Quality Code have been incorporated into the following:

University Level Descriptors, which are based on the FHEQ. University CAMS Framework (see Credit Accumulation &

Modular Scheme Framework). University Regulations. University Assessment & Feedback Policy (see Assessment &

Feedback Policy). Quality Handbook.






http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/quality-code-part-c

C-Annex 7

2.3 Support

Support is available from:1 Staff from Academic Registry (Learning & Teaching

Enhancement) (AR (LTE)) are available to work closely with Course Teams to address key issues in the specific context of your course and help you with learning and teaching issues including, for example, student retention, assessment and employability skills, as well as developing digital literacy and learning resources.

2 School support and guidance can be found from the School Academic Registry and Quality Team, Section Head/Subject Group Leader, Associate Dean for Teaching and Learning, School Learning and Teaching Co-ordinator(s) and E-Learning Co-ordinator.

3 Staff from AR (QS) can help you with quality issues including negotiating the right kind of event and documentation for your particular course/s and context. There is also detailed information available on the Academic Registry SharePoint site.

4 Staff from Academic Registry (SERA) (AR (SERA)) can advise on regulatory matters such as the application of CAMS, In-Module Retake (IMR), Exception Third Attempts (ETA), Variance and HN regulations etc.

5 Learning Resources Guidelines.6 Guidance from ICT on resource requirements at course level. 7 There are a series of guides to help support staff in the

learning and teaching role from AR (LTE) on the following topics:

Designing, Delivering and Assessing Practical and Laboratory-based Sessions

Formative Work and Feedback Guidelines for Inclusive Learning Resources Learning Outcomes Quick Guide to Meeting the ‘Threshold Quality Standard

(TQS): Use of Electronic Module Sites’ Retention and the Curriculum Work-based Learning In at the Deep End

Credit Level Descriptors 8 Staff from FCD can provide and help you obtain market

intelligence for courses in your subject area, applications and acceptances reports, course data by academic year and by protective characteristic, NSS and ISB reports. Contact [email protected] for bespoke requests.

9 For a course(s) recruiting international students, please refer


mailto:[email protected]

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/


https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/work-based-learning/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/retention-and-the-curriculum/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/meeting-threshold-quality-standard-tqs-use-electronic-module-sites/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/meeting-threshold-quality-standard-tqs-use-electronic-module-sites/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/learning-outcomes/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/guidelines-inclusive-learning-resources/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/formative-work-and-feedback/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/designing-delivering-and-assessing-practical-and-laboratory-based-sessions/

https://blogs.tees.ac.uk/lteonline/learning-and-teaching/guides/designing-delivering-and-assessing-practical-and-laboratory-based-sessions/


C-Annex 7

to the QAA document ‘Supporting and Enhancing the Experience of International Students in the UK: A Guide for UK Higher Education Providers June 2015’.

10 There is also a selection of information on the Higher Education Academy (HEA) website on Internationalisation of the Curriculum via the Knowledge Hub, by searching the theme of Internationalisation and TNE.

11 The QAA document provides guidance relating to Sustainability.

12 Guidance for Panel Members for the Approval of New and Existing University Courses provides you with the ‘Issues for the Discussion’ pages that the Panel has been provided with, and which will form the structure of the Event. This may help you in your development of the documentation.

13 Information is available to ensure that your modules comply with HESA guidance for KIS data.Refer to:KIS Learning and Assessment Method CalculationsandKIS Learning and Teaching Methods

Please note: All learning hours should be accounted for in the UTREG,

i.e. 200 learning hours for a 20-credit module and 400 hours for a 40-credit module.

The ‘written’ assessment methods is for exams only.

2.4 Course Approval/Periodic Review Event Documentation

The documentation will consist of the elements identified below.

Briefing Note outlining the purpose of the event. Title Approval form for all new or amended course titles. CAD or CED and supporting evidence, including the statement

from Student & Library Services (SLS). Supporting evidence file information for the CED being provided electronically (with hard copy made available on the day). Please refer to Section C SAP’s to ensure all relevant information is placed within the Evidence File.

Programme Specification, including stage outcomes, map of modules to outcomes and assessment chart.


https://unity3.tees.ac.uk/departments/025/15/default.aspx

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Education-sustainable-development-Guidance-June-14.pdf

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/International-Students-Guide-15.pdf



C-Annex 7

Student Handbook or electronic link (and supporting School Handbook, if relevant).

Module Specifications. Action Points and outcomes from the Critical Read process.

Workplace/Work Related/Placement Learning and/or Mentor Handbook (if appropriate).

Staff CVs – with all personal details redacted, accompanied with details of knowledge and skills of the teaching team. Only required for a Periodic Review Event if there has been significant changes to the teaching team.

Any additional mapping exercise e.g. excel spreadsheet, as required by the relevant PSRB. This is mandatory in the case of Higher and Degree Apprenticeships (HDAs) where there is a need to demonstrate mapping to the relevant HDA standards. This is also mandatory in the case of centre devised Higher National Certificates(s)/Diploma(s)1 containing closely related award titles and/ or content under the Pearson Licence Agreement.

RPL Mapping against course/module outcomes.

Where a progression arrangement has been identified (e.g. a Level 6 progression route) a course learning outcome mapping exercise should be carried out to document the advanced standing arrangements.

2.5 Course(s) Approval Documentation (CAD)/Course Evaluation Document (CED)

A robust and comprehensive CAD or CED is fundamental to a successful Course Approval/Periodic Review. The information and research presented in both the CAD and or CED should draw on external sources and involve consultation and feedback from a

1 Licensed HEIs Guide to Mapping Pearson Core Content


C-Annex 7

range of key stakeholders, including students (alumni, views of current students for all courses via focus groups, survey or on-line mechanisms etc.) with a range of protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, sex, sexual orientation) and relevant employers and other stakeholders, where possible, for example service users and carers where applicable.

The information and research should be presented in a CAD/CED, which should:

Course(s) Approval Document (CAD)1 Identify how the course(s) has been developed, include

marketing analysis using HESA data to identify feeder subjects, institutions attracting students in your subject area, consultation with key stakeholders, particularly the engagement of existing student on the design/development of curricula, and articulate the distinctive features.

2 Demonstrate the utilisation of external and internal Teesside University sources e.g. QAA Quality Code, QAA Subject Benchmark and Characteristic Statements, PSRB requirements, Apprenticeship Standards, Teesside University and School Strategies, and how they have informed the course aims and course learning outcomes.

3 Clearly articulate the course(s) design and curriculum content.

4 Include details of the course structure, learning, teaching and assessment strategy drawing on inclusive learning and teaching strategies.

5 Drawing on mechanisms for student support, induction, progression and attainment

Course(s) Evaluation Document (CED)1 Identify how the course has evolved since its original

approval (or last review exercise) and include an overview of changes (modifications) that have been made.

2 Demonstrate how enhancement has occurred on a continuous basis.

3 Include details of good practice, innovation and creativity.4 Draw upon and be supported by the Continuous Monitoring

& Enhancement (CME) Reports produced since the previous approval or review exercise, and serve to consolidate the


C-Annex 7

Course(s) Evaluation Document (CED)continuous monitoring and enhancement process.

5 Draw upon other evaluative sources, e.g. PSRB accreditation where available.

6 Identify, via the action plan, what changes and enhancements are necessary to ensure that the course remains fit-for-purpose, contemporary, and continues to meet the needs of all key stakeholders and address key University priorities.

The CED is a document that is supported by a File of Evidence; see below CED Supporting Evidence for details of the contents required for the File of Evidence.

Where no issues have emerged or no changes have been made under a particular heading, then it is sufficient to note that. Where issues have emerged, then it should be noted where these were discussed and what action was taken, with reference to the appropriate section of the Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report.

An example:Assessment

as documented in the Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report [see Section X] following feedback from students, the assessment strategy for module X was amended and subsequent evaluation (as documented in Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report (see Section C), has confirmed that this change has been beneficial.

Whilst the quality of student feedback is generally identified as a strength by External Examiners [see Annual Report for External Examiner X], following a review of NSS data [see Continuous Monitoring Report 2015/16, Section X, strategies have been put in place to ensure that the quality and timeliness of student feedback is enhanced. The effectiveness of these


However, when preparing documentation for a ‘framework’ award or pathways within an award, to avoid duplication, you may not be required to provide a separate CAD/CED. If you are unsure if this applies, please seek advice from Academic Registry ([email protected]).


C-Annex 7

changes is currently being monitored.

CED Action Plan

The CED must include an Action Plan that documents the issues and forward looking Action Plan that have been identified throughout the CED.

Some of these actions will be addressed as part of the Periodic Review. However, there may be Recommendations that cannot be immediately addressed for a variety of reasons and these should be documented and a timescale given, identifying when further consideration will be given to them, and where they will be reported upon (e.g. School Student Learning & Experience Sub-Committee, Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report).

The Action Plan should be used to signpost the reader to Course Documentation that is provided to give further details. Some example actions are given in the template to demonstrate how this can be documented.

CED Supporting Evidence

A File of Evidence should be produced to support the CED and this should include:

Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Reports, last 3 years. Relevant External Examiner Reports, last 3 years. Evidence of consultation with stakeholders (current students,

employers, alumni, local education institutions). RPL Mapping against course/module outcomes.

NSS data (you may need to request permission to view this data your Admin Office should be able to help), last 3 years.


https://unity3.tees.ac.uk/departments/025/13/05/National%20Student%20Survey/Forms/Main.aspx

C-Annex 7

Destination of Leavers of HE (DLHE) data, last 3 years. Longitudinal Educational Outcomes (LEO) – graduate outcomes

for the subject(s) area. PSRB reports, if appropriate. Course Board minutes, last 3 years. Progression statistics, last 3 years. Programme Specification prior to the Periodic Review. Previous Approval/Periodic Review Report. If there have been any modifications to your course please

provide details on any Modification of Course(s) between Scheduled Reviews (Level 2b & Level 3).

The File of Evidence is made available to the Panel Members electronically (e.g. via a CD) and a hard copy will be made available for the Panel during the Periodic Review Event.

CAD/CED Templates The CAD will follow the Template provided on page 29, of the CED will follow the Template provided on page 44.

2.5.1 Tips for Developing a Good CAD/CED

DO:1 Access examples of CADs/CEDs to help you get a feel for

what the CAD/CED should look like. 2 Show evidence of comprehensive internal and external key

stakeholder consultation and feedback. Demonstrate reflection on this feedback and describe how is has informed the design/review of the course(s).

3 CED - Link each of the evaluative points to the action plan where appropriate. It may help to include the action within the CED (see the example CED for MCh Orthopaedics for how to do this) in addition to including it in the action plan.

4 CED - Link to specific sections of Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Reports in supporting evidence to signpost the reader, rather than just referring to a whole document.

5 Ensure that the QAA Quality Code section B6 Assessment of Students and the Recognition of Prior Learning




https://unity3.tees.ac.uk/departments/058/RQS/approval/SitePages/Home.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fdepartments%2F058%2FRQS%2Fapproval%2FDocumentation%20Templates%2FSAMPLE%20-%20Approval%20and%20Review%20Documentation&FolderCTID=0x012000BAB74618BE24FC4D922CF62370C5DF40&View=%7B9297E301-3AE9-4F5F-B01D-F842532CEF06%7D&InitialTabId=Ribbon.Read&VisibilityContext=WSSTabPersistence


http://sqlreporting.tees.ac.uk/Reports/Pages/Folder.aspx?ItemPath=%2FStudents%2FStudent+Services%2FDLHE&ViewMode=List

C-Annex 7

have been consulted in relation to workplace and work-related learning requirements and or RPL Policy.

6 Seek support from your School Learning & Teaching Co-ordinator or staff from AR (LTE).

7 Contact Finance & Commercial Development (FCD) for support in relation to collation and analysis of relevant statistics. Ensure that you include evaluative comments about it in the relevant section of the CAD/CED.

8 CED - Include full information about the revisions you have made to the new course, Section 1.

2.6 Completing the Programme Specification

Programme Specifications are required for each named main award title and each named intermediate award title. The Programme Specification should be entered into the online Programme Catalogue.The online Programme Catalogue allows you to copy a Programme Specification which can then be used as a basis for different pathways where there is similarity between awards within a framework, or pathways within an award.A word version of the Programme Specification can be located in this document.

The purpose of the Programme Specification is to:

Provide a clear description and overview of the learning outcomes.

Include information about the course structure. Detail the learning and teaching strategies.


However, when preparing documentation for a ‘framework’ award or pathways within an award you may not be required to provide separate Programme Specification Documents. If you are unsure if this applies, please seek advice from Academic Registry ([email protected]).

https://programmecatalogue.tees.ac.uk/ProgrammeCatalogue/Programme/List.aspx


C-Annex 7

Detail the assessment strategies. Detail the support available to students. Highlight the distinctive features of the course.

The Programme Specification is made available to:

Approval/Periodic Review Panels. The general public as part of the provision of the Wider

Information Set. Quality Assurance Agency.

You should avoid being too specific in the Programme Specification such as including timetables and the names of course staff, as such details become out-of-date and are more relevant to the Student Handbook.

The Programme Specification is also used to: Produce the Diploma Supplement which is issued to students on

completion of their course. Supplement the quantitative data given as part of the Key

Information Set (KIS).Guidance for Completing Individual Sections of the

Programme SpecificationSection 1Awarding Institution/Body

This is always Teesside University

Section 2 Teaching Institution

This is the Institution where the majority of the course is delivered.

Section 3: Collaborating Organisations (including type)

Not Applicable

Section 4: Delivery Location(s)(if different from TU)

Please include all approved delivery locations for the course.

When new delivery location(s) (site) is approved, the Programme Specification should be revised to include the additional


C-Annex 7

Guidance for Completing Individual Sections of the Programme Specification

location(s).Section 5: Course Externally Accredited by(e.g. PSRB)

Please include any external bodies (e.g. PSRBs) that have accredited the course.

Do not include any arrangements where accreditation is pending confirmation.

Section 6: Award Title(s)

Please provide the award title(s) exactly as they are presented on the Title Approval Form.

NB: Please note that if the title includes a symbol ‘&’, this will have to be replaced with ‘and’

Section 7: Lead School

This is the TU School who has been nominated as the lead for the course.

Section 8: Additional Contributing Schools

This refers to TU School(s) who provide more than one core module to a course.

Section 9: FHEQ Level

Please see Table 1 for more information.

Section 10: Bologna Cycle

Please see Table 1 for more information.

Section 11: JACS Code and Description

The JACS code relates to the subject groupings that are used to code provision. This information is provided by FCD.

Section 12: Mode of Attendance(full-time and part-time)

This relates to full-time, part-time, distance learning or sandwich modes of attendance and approved via the Title Approval form.

Where courses are delivered in more than one mode, then additional information and structure diagrams or entry point must be included to demonstrate the sequencing of modules and other appropriate arrangements for the different modes (e.g. support for students).

Section 13: Relevant QAA Subject Benchmarking Group(s)

The QAA has developed benchmarking statements for a wide variety of subject areas. These are an important external reference point that must be taken into consideration when designing or reviewing your course.

Please check your Subject Benchmarking Statement to ensure that any relevant subject benchmark statements are identified




C-Annex 7


and used and they are up-to-date. Section 14:Relevant Additional External Reference Points (e.g. National Occupational Standards, PSRB Standards)

Please provide the names of relevant PSRBs or National Occupational Standards (NOS), e.g. National Midwifery Council (NMC) Standards of Proficiency, British Psychological Society (BPS), British Computing Society (BCS), Engineering Council, National Council for the Training of Journalists (NCTJ), etc.

Section 15: Date of Production/Revision

The date of the initial approval should remain and the date of subsequent Periodic Reviews should be added.

Section 16:Criteria for Admission to the Course (if different from standard University criteria)

Please detail the standard criteria for undergraduate and for postgraduate entry. Please use this section to identify any additional entry criteria that are stipulated (e.g. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), additional International English Language Test System (IELTS) or interview).

For DBS checks identified within the entry criteria, please ensure the level of check required is confirmed i.e. Standard, Enhanced Check and or Enhanced with List Checks.(Standard check: Checks for spent and unspent convictions, cautions, reprimands and final warnings)

Enhanced check: Standard check plus any additional information held by local police that’s reasonably considered relevant to the role being applied for.

(Enhanced with list check: Includes a check of the DBS barred lists.)

For International student entrants please use the standard University IELTS requirements statement (where applicable) Details of the criteria and process for non-standard entry such as Advanced Standing and Recognition of Prior Learning should be


https://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/admissions/english.cfm

https://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/admissions/english.cfm

https://www.gov.uk/disclosure-barring-service-check/dbs-barred-lists

http://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/postgrad/pg_entryreq.cfm

http://www.tees.ac.uk/sections/fulltime/ug_entryreq.cfm

C-Annex 7


included.Section 17: Educational Aims of the Course

Please state the broad intentions of the course – the general direction in which the course is intended to take students.

The aims should be clearly stated, achievable and contextualised to your course.

Section 18:Learning Outcomes

The Course Learning Outcomes must be clearly stated in accordance with the categories of outcomes identified by QAA:

Personal and Transferable Skills. Research Knowledge and Cognitive Skills. Professional Skills.

Course Outcomes must articulate what the student will be expected to know and will be able to do on completion of the course.

The descriptors should be contextualised to suit the needs of specific disciplinary and professional contexts.

The course learning outcomes must reflect:

Relevant QAA Subject Benchmark Statements.

Relevant QAA requirements e.g. Foundation Degree Benchmark and Masters Characteristics.

The University Credit Level Descriptors.

TU Learning and Teaching Strategy (LTS). Relevant PSRB requirements.

Section 19:Key Learning & Teaching Methods

Provide an overview of how learning is facilitated and the key methods used throughout the course.

When devising your Learning & Teaching Strategy, please refer to the TU Learning and Teaching Strategy (LTS) including how the goal will be addressed and take account of the needs of students with protected characteristics i.e. developments for inclusive




C-Annex 7


learning (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, sex, sexual orientation).

Refer to guidelines when developing a blended/distance learning aspects to your course.

Section 20:Key Assessment Methods

Provide an overview of the assessment methods used during the course taking into account of the needs of students with protected characteristics i.e. development of inclusive assessment (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, sex, sexual orientation).

When devising your Assessment Strategy, please refer to:

Learning and Teaching Strategy 2015-2020.

2014 Assessment, Award & Progression Regulations.

Details of the re-assessment strategy should also be included.

Section 21: Course Modules

The modules that comprise each stage of the course should be accurately stated. Please refer to CAMS to ensure modules apply the principles with regards to module structure, whilst also ensuring you take into account the needs of students with protected characteristics.

You should also record if modules are non-compensatable, use exceptional third sits, In-Module Retake or Variance in the appropriate column.

There is a requirement to submit applications for Variance to the SLEC.

Section 22: Course Structure

This section requires a brief narrative, providing details of how the modules are structured across the Academic Year and the rationale.

It should explain the way in which different






C-Annex 7


elements of the course are linked and sequenced to provide students with a coherent learning experience, which will satisfy the course aims and outcomes and enhance student retention.

The following must be provided:

Information about all modes of delivery (e.g. full-time, part-time, distance learning).

A course structure diagram for each mode of delivery.

Structure diagram should include week numbers, term/block pattern, number of credits and level of study.

Information on intended intakes, e.g., September, February.

Section 23: Support for Students and their Learning

This section should summarise the different types of student support that will be provided for full-time and/or part-time/work place learning or distance learning. There should be a clear strategy for academic support and guidance, which is consistent with the student profile and course aims.

This will encompass:

Student induction (initial and at transition points).

Personal tutor support. Monitoring of student progress, etc.

(particularly for first year students). Personal development planning. Integrated feedback strategy

(formative/summative). Academic skills development. Careers guidance. Availability of Library resources.

Section 24: Distinctive Features

This section should identify any distinctive features of the course which will be of interest to students, employers and other


C-Annex 7


external audiences (e.g. first year initiatives, work-related learning). This is a valuable opportunity to market the course by highlighting attractive and interesting features.Examples might include: Strong links with employers, industry,

PSRBs. Development of employability skills. Leading edge course (in terms of content

and/or teaching approaches). Innovative teaching and assessment

methods. The quality and range of learner support. Strength of the teaching team in terms,

for example, of industrial experience, expertise and research and scholarly activity.


C-Annex 7

2.7 Completing the Student Course Handbook

The University has Threshold Quality Standards2 (TQSs) which state the minimum requirements for the content of both School generic and award specific handbooks. Your School may also have produced a standard template that will help you.

It is also good practice, if possible, to seek the views of your students on the content of your proposed handbook, or ask existing students to write a section of it, e.g. a section on how to use this handbook.

This is an extremely important part of the course documentation and provides the student (and Panel) with:

A good ‘feel’ for what their course will be like in practice. The outcomes of the course and an overview of individual

modules. Full information on the different types of support and guidance

that will be available to the students, particularly in the first year. An overview of the learning and teaching strategies used and how

these may differ across different stages of the course (including opportunities for Personal Development Planning (PDP) and e-learning)

The nature and timing of the assessments (including formative work) that students will have and how they will receive feedback on their work.

Details of progression opportunities. Details of work-related learning opportunities. Any additional costs that the students will incur in relation to the purchase of

specialist equipment or an external trips or visits.

2 TQS - subject to further review in 2017-18


http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/D3%20-%20TQS.doc

C-Annex 7

It is important that the handbook is written in plain English, using a user-friendly style (good examples can be found here). We would also recommend you consult the ‘Guidelines for Inclusive Learning Resources’ within the Threshold Quality Standards3 (TQSs) when developing your course handbook.

It is generally not appropriate to cut and paste information prepared specifically for the Approval events, as this is addressing a different audience.

The Handbook should either cover all pathways and modes of delivery, or separate handbooks can be provided for different pathways and modes. However for the Event it may be possible to provide an exemplar handbook, if, for instance, one award is delivered across multiple locations. If you wish to clarify if this applies to your Event you can seek guidance from AR (QS). The Student Handbook can be made available to the Panel via an electronic link.

It is important that students are provided with, or signposted to, information about their specific learning experience.

The Handbook must include the University standard text on:

Academic Misconduct Extenuating Circumstances

And the following statement on external examiners:

3 TQS - subject to further review in 2016-17


https://unity3.tees.ac.uk/Departments/USEC/OmbudsOffice/MitCircs/default.aspx

https://unity3.tees.ac.uk/Departments/USEC/OmbudsOffice/AcademicMisconduct/default.aspx



C-Annex 7

If your School uses a general Handbook, then please include a copy of this or the web link.

2.8 What Conclusions will the Panel Reach?


External Examining Standard Statement Students often ask questions about how we know that their degree is broadly of the same standard as degrees awarded for similar courses by other universities. In the UK we have a system called external examining which is one of several ways that we confirm that standards are met. An External Examiner is generally an experienced lecturer from another University who offers an independent view as to whether the work of students on the course is of the correct standard. The External Examiner does this by looking at a sample of work (e.g. assignments, exam answers, dissertations), discussing the work with your lecturers and attending the assessment boards to endorse results. They then produce an annual report which tells us about any concerns they have and any good practice they have identified. The External Examiners’ reports are made available to students via the ‘courses’ tab in E:vision.

The main External Examiner for your course is [insert name here] and they work at [insert place of work here]. Sometimes, your modules may have a different External Examiner and your Module Leader can provide details on request.Please note that students are not permitted to contact External Examiners directly and External Examiners will not respond to any communication from individual students. If you have any concerns about your course then please speak to your Course Leader.

C-Annex 7

In the case of Periodic Review, based on the CED and discussion at the Event, the Panel will be asked to consider whether or not the Course Team has undertaken a sufficiently robust and rigorous evaluation of the course, and has ensured that it remains current and valid in the light of developing knowledge in the discipline, practice in its application, and developments in learning and teaching.

The latter judgement would be appropriate if following a review of the CED and discussion with the Course Team, there is insufficient detail provided or evidence of rigour in the Periodic Review process. If there is further action required to enhance the Periodic Review process then, depending upon the conclusion on quality and practice, the course(s) could still continue in approval but would require a further Periodic Review in the short to medium term.

For both the Course Approval and Periodic Review, the Panel will make recommendations to SLEC under the following headings:

2.8.1 Conclusion – Quality and Standards

This relates to the confidence that can be placed in the Course Team’s approach to setting, maintaining and enhancing academic standards, and on the likelihood that the students will be able to achieve those standards through the learning opportunities and support provided to them.


The judgement will be either:

No further action required to enhance the review processOR

Further action required to enhance the review process

C-Annex 7

The Panel may, under certain circumstances, request an Interim Review or enhanced annual monitoring.

2.8.2 Conclusions – CommendationsThe Panel may wish to make a commendation(s); this is considered formal praise and support for the Course Team for undertaking practice that is considered above the norm e.g. employer engagement, collegiate approach to design and or delivery. Commendations are not necessarily the same as transferrable good practice.

2.8.3 Conclusions – Transferable Good Practice The Panel will identify aspects of the course which are particularly advanced/inventive/new and which represent transferable good practice qualities.

2.8.4 Conclusions – Conditions and RecommendationsThe Panel will set Conditions (these must be addressed prior to the commencement of the course or, exceptionally, by a specified date after the commencement of the course), Recommendations for further


The judgement will be either:Approved – in the Course Team’s approach to setting, maintaining and enhancing academic standards and that the course(s) can be recommended for approval. The normal approval period is 6 years unless a full Periodic Review is stipulated earlier

orNot Approved – in the Course Team’s approach to setting, maintaining and enhancing academic standards and that the course(s) cannot be recommended for approval. This would only be applied in exceptional circumstances, in consultation with AR (QS).

C-Annex 7

enhancement, issues for the School to consider/address, and issues for the University to consider/address.

Please note: if the discussion at the Course Approval/Periodic Review Event has provided sufficient clarity regarding an issue, then the Course Team should only be required to revise the course documentation to confirm that such a record is viewed as essential.


C-Annex 7

DOCUMENTATION TEMPLATES


C-Annex 7

COURSE APPROVAL DOCUMENT (CAD)

KEY DESIGN ISSUES

1. Consultation Process (new award):

The Title Approval form (PD1) gives the rationale and demand for the course(s). It also gives information about the initial consultation and market testing that was carried out to support the business case.

Please provide a summary of the following:

Market intelligence in support of the development and design of the course(s) which includes potential numbers and where these will be derived from (local market, national, international).

Summarise data and trends from similar courses in the region and nationally (by protected characteristics, entry criteria, applications etc.).

How the course(s) align to the University and School Portfolio/Curriculum Strategies:

Teesside University 2020 LTS (3A’s and 3C’s) International Research and Innovation Enterprise and Business Engagement

How has the consultation informed the course(s) unique selling points (distinctive features in Programme Specification).

Please give details of the consultation undertaken and how this has informed the development of the course(s). This should include, where relevant, key stakeholders, including Collaborative Partners where relevant, such as:


C-Annex 7

Alumni, current students (with a range of protected characteristics age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, sex, sexual orientation) from a range of the School’s courses.

Feeder Schools and Colleges. Employers. Reference points such PSRBs, sector bodies. Service users (if appropriate).(Evidence of consultation with key stakeholders should be included in the Evidence File).

2. External Reference Sources:

Please give brief details of how key external reference sources have been considered in the development of the course(s):

FHEQ. QAA Subject Benchmark Statements, Doctoral, Master, Foundation

Degree, Characteristics Statements. PSRB requirements where relevant and or National

initiatives/drivers. National Occupation Standards/Sector Skills

Councils/Apprenticeship Standard(s).

3. Criteria for Admission to the Course:

Please provide a clear rationale for the entry requirements (make clear the process for non-standard entry e.g. RPL mapping activity) advance


C-Annex 7

standing arrangements, interviews, IELTS requirements, DBS etc. to facilitate successful progression.

4a. Course Aims:

Using the information identified in sections 1, 2 and 3 above describe how this consultation/information has informed the aims of the course(s) (philosophy/ethos).

4b. Course Learning Outcomes:

Describe how this consultation/information described in sections 1 and 2 above i.e. LTS Goal (3As, 3C.s), QAA Subject Benchmark Statements, University Level Descriptors) has informed the following:

Course Learning Outcomes. Stage Learning Outcomes. Map of Learning Outcomes to Modules. If appropriate, ensure Intermediate awards clearly articulate the

Learning Outcomes.

5. Course Structure and Curriculum Design:

Using the information identified in the sections above, describe how this consultation/information has informed the course structure and curriculum design of the course(s) to ensure inclusivity (refer to LTS, Teesside University 2020, Employability and Internationalisation Strategies).


C-Annex 7

Comment on Rationale for proposed Course Structure and Curriculum Design in relation to: Module development and delivery – please refer to CAMS principles. Utilisation of non-standard number of credits e.g. PgCert 70 credits,

making clear possible implications to assessment, progression and how marks/grades will enable classification/grading to be calculated.

Modes of study (e.g. FT, PT, distance learning). Sequencing of modules. Distribution of credit and learning hours (CAMS, KIS). Integration and development of Portfolio Development Planning

(PDP). Facilitation of student progression, retention, and achievement.

6. Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy:

Using the information identified in the sections above, reflect and summarise: How the curriculum is informed by the Learning and Teaching

Strategy (LTS), and or School Strategy. How staff research (RIT) has informed learning, teaching and

assessment. Promotion of assessment for learning and high-quality prompt

feedback (refer to Assessment and Feedback Policy). Promotion of research-engaged learning e.g. Student as Researcher

scheme, Staff Scholarship/development. Facilitation of retention, progression, and attainment e.g. Peer

Assisted Study Scheme (PASS), formative pieces to support skills development and transition between stages.

Role of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL), blended learning (see here for guidance) and digital literacy to enhance the students learning experience.

Development of internationalisation (cultural diversity, etc., research) and globalisation (student mobility).

Promotion of skills for employability and personal development/workplace or work-related learning; providing details on how work related learning is managed, supported, assessed and moderated.

Assessment and Reassessment Strategy (including use of compensation, In-Module Retake, exceptional third attempt, variance as applicable), refer to Notes for Course Teams on Compensatable Modules, In-module Retake (IMR), Exceptional Third


C-Annex 7

Attempt (ETA) and Variance.

Ensure that the needs of students with protected characteristics have been considered with regards to inclusive learning and assessment.Further information on Internationalisation is available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/

7. Learning Resources:

Please use the box below to:

Identify any specialist resources that are necessary to deliver the course(s) and how their availability is assured, including liaison with ICT.

Include how additional staff development needs arising from this course will be met.

For each module within a course a list of indicative resources (print and electronic) needs to be created in Reading List Online (RLO) to enable the Academic Librarian to complete the Library Statement regarding availability of these resources and/or any license restrictions.

8. Student Support

Consider the support needs of the target audience for the course. Provide a summary justifying and evaluating the support mechanism and strategies available: Academic and pastoral, paying particular attention to arrangements

out of the normal academic calendar e.g. summer period. Opportunities for students to develop study/learning/library,

research and digital literacy skills. The mechanisms for monitoring and supporting student

engagement to promote successful completion, referring to your integrated feedback strategy (formative/summative feedback (type



C-Annex 7

and timeliness)). The integration of the Peer Assisted Study Scheme (PASS).

Outline the arrangement: For induction for new entrants. Support during summer periods. International students. Arrangements supporting skills development, progression and

retention between stages.

9. Student Handbook:

Ensure you have consulted the Guidance for Inclusive Learning, TQS: Informing Students and TQS: Student Learning in the Workplace.

10. Quality Issues:

Please comment on:

Variance requirements, including non compensatable modules. Transition arrangements for ‘big bang’ implementation. It is

essential that evidence of student consultation and agreement with ‘big bang’ implementation is provided with the CAD.

PSRBs requirements/mapping.

Refer to Guidance - Notes for Course/Course Teams on Compensatable Modules, In-module Retake (IMR), Exceptional Third Attempt (ETA) and Variance.


C-Annex 7

11. Other:


C-Annex 7

Stage Outcomes (Undergraduate Awards only)

Please give the learning outcomes for interim stages of the course for each named pathway or award, e.g. for Honours degrees courses, Stage/Level 4(1) outcomes, and Stage/Level 5(2) outcomes, and for Foundation Degrees, Stage 1/Level 4 and course outcomes. Separate Stage/Level 6(3) outcomes are not required as it is assumed that these are consistent with the course outcomes in the Programme Specification. (If there have been no significant changes made to the course outcomes as part of the review, the stage outcomes from the original course documentation can be included). Please add additional rows where necessary.

Key: PTS – Personal and Transferable Skills RKC – Research, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills PS – Professional Skills

NO Course Outcome Stage/Level 5(2) Stage/Level 4(1)PTS1

RKC1

PS1


C-Annex 7

Map of Outcomes to Modules

Please provide a map for each named pathway or separate award. Insert outcomes key across the top of each column, adding in additional columns where necessary, insert module names in the left of the grid and place an ‘A’ in the box where the course outcome is assessed.

For Undergraduate courses please provide a map for each Stage, e.g. Stages 1 and 2 and course outcomes for Honours degrees, and Stage 1 and course outcomes for Foundation Degrees.

Outcome KeyModule Name PTS

1RKS1

PS1


C-Annex 7

Assessment Chart (example)

Please include all module formative assessment (f) and summative assessment (s) details.

W Date Semester 1Module 1

(f) (s)Module 2

(f) (s)Module 3

(f) (s)Module 4

(f) (s)Module 5

(f) (s)Module 6

(f) (s)0 18/09/1

7

1 25/09/17

Class discussi

on 2 02/10/1

7Essay Plan Debate

3 09/10/17

4 16/10/17

Case Study

Presentation

5 23/10/17

Seminar

6 30/10/17

7 6/11/17ICA 1 (50%) Coursework

8 13/11/17

9 20/11/17

10 27/11/17

11 04/12/17

ICA 1 (100%)


C-Annex 7

Coursework

12 11/12/17

Journal article

13 R 08/01/18

ICA 2 (50%) Coursework

14 E 15/01/18


C-Annex 7

W DateSemester 2

Module 1(f) (s)

Module 2(f) (s)

Module 3(f) (s)

Module 4(f) (s)

Module 5(f) (s)

Module 6(f) (s)

0

1Class

discussion

2 Essay Plan Debate

34 Case

StudyPresentation

5 Seminar6

7ICA 1 (50%)

Coursework

89

10

11ICA 1

(100%) Coursework

12 Journal article

13 RICA 2 (50%) Coursework

14 E


C-Annex 7


(f) (s)Module 2

(f) (s)Module 3

(f) (s)Module 4

(f) (s)Module 5

(f) (s)Module 6

(f) (s)0 18/09/17

1 25/09/17Class

discussion

2 02/10/17 Essay Plan Debate

3 09/10/174 16/10/17 Case

StudyPresentation

5 23/10/17 Seminar

6 30/10/17


8 13/11/179 20/11/17

10 27/11/17

11 04/12/17ICA 1

(100%) Coursework

12 11/12/17 Journal article

13 R 08/01/18ICA 2 (50%)

Course-work

14 E 15/01/18

NOTE:Page 43 of 112

Quality Handbook Section C

C-Annex 7

Feedback dates are in line with University Policy, i.e. 4 weeks (20 working days) after the assignment submission.ICA = In-course assignment, ECA = End-of-course assessmentG = Group Project WeekR = Revision WeekE = Examination W = Week


C-Annex 7

Statement from Student and Library Services

Student and Library Services Statement of Indicative Library Resources for [insert name of Course]

As part of the approval and periodic process, Student and Library Services (SLS) is required to provide a statement on the availability of indicative Library resources. This report is based upon an analysis of the reading lists submitted via Reading Lists Online (RLO).

Module reading list Checked in RLO Comments

Comments for attentionWhen the modules have been approved SLS will purchase appropriate numbers of copies. However please note the following:

Module reading list Comments (e.g. cost, numbers, out of print)

SubscriptionsThe following titles are not current subscriptions. Please see below for further details.

Journal/Database title

Cost Notes

Total

Skills support SLS provides a range of skills support to enable students to make best use of resources listed for this course (see http://tees.libguides.com/academic_staff/student_skills)

Please contact [name of Academic Librarian] to discuss the issues raised in this statement

[name]

Academic Librarian, [School][date]


C-Annex 7

COURSE EVALUATION DOCUMENT (CED)

KEY DESIGN ISSUES

1. Review, Evaluation & Consultation (inc. Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement (CME), entry and performance data etc.)/Overview of modifications, their impact, as appropriate, (if review of existing award)

Please give full details of how the review was conducted including which stakeholders, including Collaborative Partners where relevant, have been consulted and how the outcomes have informed the review of the course(s) e.g.:

Alumni, current students, with a range of protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, sex, sexual orientation).

Colleagues and wider University staff. Feeder Colleges/Schools. Employers. Reference points such PSRBs, sector bodies. Service users (if appropriate). How has the consultation informed the course(s) unique selling points

(distinctive features in course specification). How the course(s) align to the University and School

Portfolio/Curriculum Strategies:o Teesside University 2020o LTS (3A’s & 3C’s)o International o Research and Innovationo Enterprise and Business Engagement

(Evidence of consultation with key stakeholders to be included in the Evidence File).

Monitoring and Enhancement


C-Annex 7

Reflect on areas of good practice and any issues that have emerged regarding the appropriateness of the following aspects of the course(s) with reference to:

Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Reports, i.e. module and course evaluations, modification(s).

Student Data – 3 year summary analysis of applications and conversion, enrolments, attrition, progression within stage, degree classifications.

NSS results/DLHE Data – summary analysis of trends. External Examiners’ Reports. Student forums or meetings. Employer Advisory Groups. Other appropriate documentation.Ensure changes that have been made as part of this review and any forward looking actions are documented in the Action Plan.

2. External Reference Sources:

Please give details of any changes that have occurred to key external reference sources and how these have been considered in the review of the course(s), e.g.:

FHEQ. QAA Subject Benchmark Statements, Doctoral, Master, Foundation

Degree, Characteristics Statements. PSRB requirements PSRB requirements where relevant and or National

initiatives/drivers. National Occupation Standards/Sector Skills Councils.

3. Criteria for Admission to the Course(s):


C-Annex 7

Please provide a clear rationale for the entry requirements (make clear the process for non-standard entry e.g. RPL mapping activity) advance standing arrangements, interviews, IELTS requirements, DBS etc. to facilitate successful progression.

4a.

Course Aims: Using the information identified in sections 1, 2 and 3 above describe how this consultation/information has informed changes to the aims of the course(s) under review (philosophy/ethos).

4b.

Course Learning Outcomes:

Describe how this consultation/information described in sections 1 and 2 above i.e. LTS Goal (3A’s, 3C’s), QAA Subject Benchmark Statements, University Level Descriptors) have informed changes to:

Course Learning Outcomes. Stage Learning Outcomes. Map of Outcomes to Modules. If appropriate, ensure Intermediate awards clearly articulate the

Learning Outcomes.

5. Course Structure and Curriculum Design:


C-Annex 7

Using the information identified in the sections above, describe how this consultation/information has informed changes to the course structure and curriculum design of the course(s) under review to ensure continued inclusivity (refer to LTS, Teesside University 2020, Employability and Internationalisation Strategies) .

Comment on:

Module development and delivery – please refer to CAMS principles. Utilisation of non-standard number of credits e.g. PgCert 70 credits,

making clear possible implications to assessment, progression and progression and how marks/grades will enable classification/grading to be calculated.

Modes of study (e.g. FT, PT, distance learning etc.). Sequencing of modules. Distribution of credit and learning hours (University Credit Level

Descriptors – 2015). Progression, retention, and achievement.

6. Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy:

Using the information identified in the sections above, reflect and summarise: How the curriculum is informed by the Learning and Teaching Strategy

(LTS). How staff research (RIT) has informed learning, teaching and

assessment. Promotion of assessment for learning and high-quality prompt

feedback. Promotion of research-engaged learning. Facilitation of retention, progression, and attainment, including possible

regulatory issues e.g. non-compensation, variance. Role of Technology Enhanced Leaning (TEL), digital literacy,

blended learning (see here for guidance) and digital literacy to enhance the students learning experience.

Development of internationalisation (cultural diversity, etc, research) and globalisation (student mobility).

Promotion of skills for employability and personal development/workplace or work-related learning; providing details on how work related learning is managed, supported, assessed and moderated.

Reassessment Strategy (including use of compensation, In-Module Retake, exceptional third attempt, variance as applicable), refer to the


C-Annex 7

Notes for Course Teams on Compensatable Modules, In-module Retake (IMR), Exceptional Third Attempt (ETA) and Variance.

Ensure that the needs of students with protected characteristics have been considered with regards to inclusive learning and assessment.Further information on Internationalisation is available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/

7. Learning Resources:

Please use the box below to:

Identify any specialist resources that are necessary to deliver the course/s and how their availability is assured, including liaison with ICT.

Include how additional staff development needs arising from this course will be met.

For each module within a course a list of indicative resources (print and electronic) needs to be created in Reading List Online (RLO) to enable the Academic Librarian to complete the Library Statement regarding availability of these resources and/or any license restrictions.

8. Student Support

Consider the support needs of the target audience for the course. Provide a summary justifying and evaluating the support mechanism and strategies available: Academic and pastoral, paying particular attention to arrangements

out of the normal academic calendar e.g. summer period. Opportunities for students to develop study/learning/library. Research

and digital literacy skills. The mechanisms for monitoring and supporting student engagement

to promote successful completion, referring to your integrated feedback strategy (formative/summative feedback (type and timeliness)).

The integration of the Peer Assisted Study Scheme (PASS).



C-Annex 7

Outline the arrangement: for induction for new entrants, support during summer periods, international students, arrangements supporting skills development, progression and

retention between stages.

9. Student Handbook:

Ensure you have consulted the Guidance for Inclusive Learning, TQS: Informing Students and TQS: Student Learning in the Workplace.

10.

Quality Issues:

Please comment on:

Variance requirements, including non compensatable modules. Transition arrangements for ‘big bang’ implementation. It is essential

that evidence of student consultation and agreement with ‘big bang’ implementation is provided with the CED.

PSRBs requirements/mapping. Impact of Periodic Review on any Articulation Agreement and delivery

of the course by Collaborative Partner Institution(s). Give details in the Action Plan of any activity required to review relevant Articulation Agreements/Partner delivery of the Course.

Refer to Guidance – Notes for Course Teams on Compensatable Modules, In-Module Retake (IMR), Exceptional Third attempts (ETA) and Variance.


C-Annex 7

11.

Other:


C-Annex 7

Action Plan

Actions that have been Addressed as Part of the

Periodic ReviewLink to Course Documentation

File1. e.g. Course Outcomes updated See Programme Specification

(reference to section number)

2. Modules X and Y combined See new Module Specification for Module Z

3. E-learning strengthened See statement on E-learning/record of a discussion with the E-learning Co-ordinator (reference xx)

4. Pilot the use of electronic progress files

See revised statement on the use of progress files within the course proposal template

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.


C-Annex 7

Forward-Looking Action Plan

Please remove examples and include the actions for this course(s).

Forward-Looking Actions Timescale and Mechanism for Addressing

1. Review course outcomes following publication of revised QAA Subject Benchmark Statement 2014

To be discussed at Course Board and SSLESC, and reported on in the Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report 2017/8

2. Increase the proportion of problem-based learning incrementally following evaluation of modules and provision of appropriate staff development opportunities

Staff development provided in 2016/7 and evaluation of current activities discussed in Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report 2017/8

3. Evaluate the use of electronic progress files and identify mechanisms for embedding these in the assessment process

Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report 2017/8

4. Evaluate the use of peer assessment and consider whether it can be applied more widely across the course

Continuous Monitoring & Enhancement Report 2017/8

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.


C-Annex 7

Stage Outcomes (Undergraduate Awards only)

Please give the learning outcomes for interim stages of the course for each named pathway or award, e.g. for Honours degrees courses, Stage/Level 4(1) outcomes, and Stage/Level 5(2) outcomes, and for Foundation Degrees, Stage 1/Level 4 and course outcomes. Separate Stage/Level 6(3) outcomes are not required as it is assumed that these are consistent with the course outcomes in the Programme Specification. (If there have been no significant changes made to the course outcomes as part of the review, the stage outcomes from the original course documentation can be included). Please add additional rows where necessary.

Key: PTS – Personal and Transferable Skills RKC – Research, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills PS – Professional Skills

NO Course Outcome Stage/Level 5(2) Stage/Level 4(1)PTS1

RKC1

PS1


C-Annex 7

Map of Outcomes to Modules

Please provide a map for each named pathway or separate award. Insert outcomes key across the top of each column, adding in additional columns where necessary, insert module names in the left of the grid and place an ‘A’ in the box where the course outcome is assessed.

For Undergraduate courses please provide a map for each Stage, e.g. Stages 1 and 2 and course outcomes for Honours degrees, and Stage 1 and course outcomes for Foundation Degrees.

Outcome KeyModule Name

PTS1

RKS1

PS1


C-Annex 7

Assessment Chart (example)

Please include all module formative assessment (f) and summative assessment (s) details.


(f) (s)Module 2

(f) (s)Module 3

(f) (s)Module 4

(f) (s)Module 5

(f) (s)Module 6

(f) (s)0 18/09/17

1 25/09/17Class

discussion

2 02/10/17 Essay Plan Debate

3 09/10/174 16/10/17 Case

StudyPresentation

5 23/10/17 Seminar

6 30/10/17


8 13/11/179 20/11/17

10 27/11/17

11 04/12/17ICA 1

(100%) Coursework

12 11/12/17 Journal article

13 R 08/01/18 ICA 2 (50%) Course


C-Annex 7

work14 E 15/01/18


C-Annex 7


(f) (s)Module 2

(f) (s)Module 3

(f) (s)Module 4

(f) (s)Module 5

(f) (s)Module 6

(f) (s)0

1Class

discussion

2 Essay Plan Debate

34 Case

StudyPresentation

5 Seminar

6

7ICA 1 (50%) Coursework

89

10

11ICA 1

(100%) Coursework

12 Journal article


14 E


C-Annex 7


(f) (s)Module 2

(f) (s)Module 3

(f) (s)Module 4

(f) (s)Module 5

(f) (s)Module 6

(f) (s)0

1Class

discussion

2 Essay Plan Debate

34 Case

StudyPresentation

5 Seminar

6

7ICA 1 (50%) Coursework

89

10

11ICA 1

(100%) Coursework

12 Journal article


14 ENOTE:


C-Annex 7

Feedback dates are in line with University Policy, i.e. 4 weeks after the assignment submission.ICA = In-course assignment, ECA = End-of-course assessmentG = Group Project WeekR = Revision WeekE = Examination W = Week


C-Annex 7

Statement from Student and Library Services

Student and Library Services Statement of Indicative Library Resources for [insert name of Course]

As part of the approval and periodic process, Student and Library Services (SLS) is required to provide a statement on the availability of indicative Library resources. This report is based upon an analysis of the reading lists submitted via Reading Lists Online (RLO).

Module reading list Checked in RLO Comments

Comments for attentionWhen the modules have been approved SLS will purchase appropriate numbers of copies. However please note the following:

Module reading list Comments (e.g. cost, numbers, out of print)

SubscriptionsThe following titles are not current subscriptions. Please see below for further details.

Journal/Database title

Cost Notes

Total

Skills support SLS provides a range of skills support to enable students to make best use of resources listed for this course (see http://tees.libguides.com/academic_staff/student_skills)

Please contact [name of Academic Librarian] to discuss the issues raised in this statement

[name]

Academic Librarian, [School][date]


C-Annex 7

PROGRAMME SPECIFICATION TEMPLATE

Please see Guidance Notes in the Course Approval/Periodic Review Guidance for Course Teams to assist in the completion of this template. Please note separate Programme Specifications are required for all named Intermediate Awards (non-recruiting).

1. Awarding Institution/Body

Teesside University (TU)

2. Teaching Institution

3. Collaborating Organisations(include type)

4. Delivery Location(s)[if different from TU]

5. Course Externally Accredited by (e.g. PSRB)

6. Award Title(s)

7. Lead School

8. Additional Contributing Schools

9. FHEQ Level[see guidance]

10. Bologna Cycle[see guidance]

11. JACS Code and Description

12. Mode of Attendance[full-time or part-time]

13. Relevant QAA Subject Benchmarking Group(s)

14. Relevant Additional External Reference Points(e.g. National Occupational Standards, PSB Standards)


C-Annex 7

15. Date of Production/Revision

16. Criteria for Admission to the Course(if different from standard University criteria)

17. Educational Aims of the Course

The overall aims of the course are to:

18. Learning Outcomes

The course will enable students to develop the knowledge and skills listed below. Intended learning outcomes are identified for each category, together with the key teaching and assessment methods that will be used to achieve and assess the learning outcomes.

Personal and Transferable Skills (insert additional rows as necessary)PTS1PTS2PTS3PTS4PTS5PTS6Research, Knowledge and Cognitive Skills (insert additional rows as necessary)RKC1RKC2RKC3RKC4RKC5RKC6Professional Skills (insert additional rows as necessary)


C-Annex 7

PS1

PS2

PS3

PS4

PS5

PS6

19. Key Learning & Teaching Methods

20. Key Assessment Methods


C-Annex 7

21. Course Modules(additional copies to be completed for each named pathway)

Level

Code Title Credits Status

Compensatable

Y/N

Variance

Y/N

In-Module Re-take

Y/N

Exceptional 3rd Sit

Y/N

Level


Compensatable

Y/N

Variance

Y/N

In-Module Re-take

Y/N

Exceptional 3rd Sit

Y/N

Level


Compensatable

Y/N

Variance

Y/N

In-Module Re-take

Y/N

Exceptional 3rd Sit

Y/N

Level


Compensatable

Y/N

Variance

Y/N

In-Module Re-take

Y/N

Exceptional 3rd Sit

Y/N


C-Annex 7


C-Annex 7

22. Course Structure

Overview of structure of the modules across the Academic Year.

23. Support for Students and Their Learning

24. Distinctive Features


C-Annex 7

FRAMEWORK FOR HIGHER EDUCATION QUALIFICATIONS AND BOLOGNA CYCLE NOTES FOR COURSE TEAMS

Increasingly, higher education institutions, students and employers, operate and compete in a European and international context. The Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) is designed to meet the expectations of the Bologna Declaration and align with the Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area (FQ-EHEA). [Source: QAA 2014].

Within the FQ-EHEA, the term “cycle” is used to describe the “sequential levels identified by the Bologna Process (first cycle, second cycle and third cycle) within which all European higher education qualifications are located.

In broad terms, the first cycle corresponds to undergraduate awards (typically Bachelors Degrees with honours), the second and third cycles to postgraduate awards (typically Masters Degrees and Doctoral Degrees respectively). [Source: QAA 2014].

A range of qualifications are also available to students who have undertaken a course of study within the FQEHEA first cycle, but which do not represent the full extent of achievement for this cycle. These qualifications are referred to as higher education short cycle (within the first cycle) awards. [Source: QAA 2015].


C-Annex 7

Table 1:

TABLE 1: FHEQ LEVELS OF STUDYTypical HE qualifications

within each levelFHEQ Level4

Corresponding FQ-EHEA Cycle

Doctoral degrees (PhD, EdD,DBA, DClinPsy, etc.) 8 Third cycle (end of cycle)

qualificationsMasters degrees (MPhil, Mlitt, MRes, MA, MSc)

7

Second cycle (end of cycle) qualifications

Integrated Masters degrees (MEng, MChem, MPhys, MPharm)Primary qualifications (or first degrees) in medicine, dentistry and veterinary science (e.g. MB ChB, MB BS, BM BS, BDS, BVSc, BVMs) Postgraduate Diplomas (PgDip)Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE/ Postgraduate Diploma in Education (PGDE) Postgraduate Certificates (PgCert)Bachelors degrees with honours (BA (Hons), BSc (Hons), BEng (Hons), etc.)

6 First cycle (end of cycle qualifications)

Bachelors degrees (BA, BSc, etc.)Professional Graduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) in England, Wales and Northern IrelandGraduate diplomaGraduate certificates Foundation degrees (FdA, FdSc, etc.)

5

Short cycle (within or linked to the first cycle) qualificationsDiploma of Higher Education

(DipHE)Higher National Diplomas (HND)Higher National Certificates (HNC) 4Certification of Higher Education (CertHE)

4 The University also permits the use of Level 3 modules for pre-higher education "foundation level" study undertaken specifically to facilitate access to recognised HE awards. In exceptional circumstances, the University may also permit the use of Level 3 modules for an externally commissioned course.


C-Annex 7


C-Annex 7

LEARNING RESOURCE GUIDELINES

Below are guidance notes about learning resource issues that need to be considered and discussed with Student and Library Services (SLS).

It is important to note that licences which govern access to electronic resources normally only allow access to current staff and students from the licensed institution. Even where access has previously been granted licensing terms can change. It is therefore important to contact SLS to clarify any requirements to access electronic resources for students not based on a University campus.

Courses taught at the University campus to registered accredited University students(a) Existing curriculum area

Course will increase the number of students accessing resources in an existing curriculum area. Particularly relevant to demand for textbooks on reading lists if the same core resources will be needed.

Additional payments may be required to extend user licences to cover additional student numbers.

Digitisation may help meet demand but licences mainly cover UK publications so may not be an option where modules draw heavily on US material.

(b) New curriculum area Normally this will mean significant investment in the collection

including on-going subscriptions to journals and online databases.

Digitisation see comments in (a) above.


C-Annex 7

Courses taught to Teesside University students by distance learning or by block delivery(a) Existing curriculum area

Digitisation may help meet demand but licence mainly cover UK publications so may not be an option where modules draw heavily on US material.

There may be costs in providing electronic versions of texts even when the course covers an existing curriculum area.

Additional payments may be required to extend user licences to cover additional student numbers.

Licences may have clauses covering geographic location.

(b) New curriculum area Normally this will mean significant investment in the collection

including on-going subscriptions to journals and online databases.

See comments in (a) above about digitisation and licence restrictions.

Courses delivered by Collaborative Partner InstitutionsIt is important to contact Teesside University Student and Library Services (SLS) to clarify any requirements to access electronic resources for students not based on a Teesside University campus as even where access has previously been granted licensing terms can change. It is also important to note that licenses which govern access to electronic resources normally only allow access to current staff and students from the licensed Institution.


C-Annex 7

NOTES FOR COURSE TEAMS ON COMPENSATABLE MODULES, IN-MODULE RETAKE, EXCEPTIONAL THIRD ATTEMPT AND VARIANCE

The University operates using standard assessment and progression regulations [“the Regulations”] for all types of awards. Within the course approval and periodic review process, there is provision for courses to designate modules as “non-compensatable” and to apply for, either at approval or through the Student Learning & Experience Committee (SLEC), In-module Retake (IMR) or Exceptional Third Attempt (ETA) for individual modules within a course. There is also provision for Course Teams to seek Variance from either the Regulations or the Credit Accumulation & Modular Scheme [CAMS] Framework.

The following definitions are contained within the Regulations:

1. Compensation of Failed Module: Compensation refers to the process of deliberately balancing a limited amount of underachievement in one aspect of a student’s overall performance in a Stage of a course against the otherwise positive performance in the Stage as a whole. Where compensation is confirmed by an Assessment Board, credits will be awarded to the relevant module. (See Section 5.5, 5.6 UG/FD Regulations and Section 5.8, Taught Masters Regulations).

2. Non-Compensatable Modules: Defining a module as ‘non-compensatable’ may be detrimental to students when it comes to considering their progression profile. As such, unless there are specific and justifiable reasons for doing so, modules should normally be approved as ‘compensatable’. (see Section 5.5 of the Assessment Regulations for definitions)

However, under particular circumstances modules can be approved as ‘non-compensatable’. These circumstances normally only relate to the


C-Annex 7

defined requirements, or other such expectations, of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs) and/or where the module assesses specific aspects of professional competency associated with public health, safety or associated risks.The fact that the module may be the only place where a specific stage/learning outcome is assessed is not normally considered as sufficient grounds to approve it as ‘non-compensatable’. Only if it meets the criteria described above should it be defined as ‘non-compensatable.’

3. Resubmission: Resubmission was a feature of the 2004 Framework for Assessment, Award & Progression but is no longer a feature of the 2014 Assessment Regulations. However, the University is currently in a period of transition between these two regimes and the field must remain active in the UTREG2 system while the implementation of the new regulations is rolled-out. But given it cannot be used; the value must be set to “no”.

If for specific and defined reasons, there is a requirement for the module to include a reassessment opportunity prior to the ratification of marks by a Module Board, then it is possible to seek approval for either an In-module Retake (IMR) or Exceptional Third Attempt (ETA). See below for further details.

4. Requisites: Approving a module with associated requisites (pre- and/or co-) may be detrimental to students when it comes to considering their progression profile. It can also have unforeseen consequences for students studying courses on a part-time basis. As such, requisites should be only be used in limited and specific circumstances. Intelligent curriculum design will usually define module sequencing without the requirement for either pre-requisites or co-requisites. (refer to CAMS for further information)


C-Annex 7

However, occasionally it may be necessary to stipulate such requisites to ensure a coherent and integrated study pattern. Normally this will only relate to specific option modules and/or the relationship between research methods modules and dissertation/project modules.

5. In-Module Retakes (IMR): Under specific circumstances, it is possible to approve a specific reassessment strategy for a module which permits students to either undertake reassessment before the formal ratification of a mark by a Module Board or undertake a second reassessment opportunity. For approval to be granted, the module must meet certain criteria:

When a student retakes an assessment under 4.5.4 of the Assessment Regulations, the marks obtained in the component(s) of assessment passed at the first attempt shall stand whereas the maximum mark that may be awarded for the retaken component(s) is 40%. The mark for the module will be recalculated on the basis of the original marks for the component(s) passed at the first attempt and the marks gained in the retaken components.

If the pass mark for the module has not been attained following the in-module retake, the mark that will stand is the higher of either the original module mark or the recalculated mark following the retake.


“In-module retakes are permitted only where:The assessment is not an examination.The assessment has been subjected to full internal moderation processes.Either the module pass mark has not been attained outright; or the module pass mark has been attained but the minimum required mark in specified assessment component(s) has not been achieved.The module is designated as non-compensatable to meet specified course and/or PSRB requirements.”

C-Annex 7

Students who fail to attain the module pass mark following an In-module Retake will be eligible for reassessment as detailed in 4.5 if permitted within the course regulations and the constraints of the award.

However, the circumstances which may prompt such approval normally only relate to the defined requirements, or other such expectations, of PSRBs and/or where the module assesses specific aspects of competency that must be demonstrated (i.e. passed) before the student can study the work-based practice aspects of a professional course.

6. Exceptional Third Attempt: On a module basis, and only if approved as a specific reassessment strategy at the time of approval, courses may make arrangements for students to undertake a second reassessment opportunity (i.e. a third attempt). Third attempts should normally only be used where:

When a student is reassessed for a second time in a module under 4.5.5, the marks obtained in the component(s) of assessment passed at the first attempt shall stand whereas the maximum mark that may be awarded for the reassessed component(s) is 40% (undergraduate), 50% (postgraduate). The mark for the module will be recalculated on the basis of the original marks for the component(s) passed at the first attempt and the marks gained in the reassessed components.


“Third attempts should normally only be used where:Either the module pass mark has not been attained outright; or the module pass mark has been attained but specified assessment component(s) must meet a minimum level of achievement.

The module is designated as non-compensatable to meet specified course and/or PSRB requirements.

An In-module Retake, as described in Section 4.5.4., is not available as an approved reassessment strategy on the module.

There are no Fitness to Practise concerns (if applicable).”

C-Annex 7

If the pass mark for the module has not been attained following reassessment, the mark that will stand is the higher of either the original module mark or the recalculated mark following the reassessment.

7. Variance: Is a process whereby an application can be made to operate other than within the agreed assessment regulation(s). Applications may be made in relation to a module and/or a course. Variance can also be sought from the Threshold Quality Standards (TQS), CAMS, RPL and a small number of other assessment related processes. SLEC has overall responsibility for the approval of Variance. A Variance Register is maintained by Academic Registry which records all successful variance applications.

8. Proposal and approval of IMR and ETA: Details of whether modules are compensatable or not and the modules to which IMR and ETA is being applied should be detailed in Section 21 of the Programme Specification Template along with any modules for which a Variance application will be sought.

The Approval/Periodic Review Panels are required to give consideration to:

The Assessment strategy for the course which has led to the decision to propose modules as being non-compensatable and/or

An application for IMR or ETA (NOTE: It is not possible to apply both IMR or ETA to an individual module within a course. For IMR or ETA to be applied, the module must be non-compensatable).

Panels will advise Course Teams should not routinely designate all modules as non-compensatable or apply for either IMR or ETA for all modules.

IMR is not a direct replacement for “Resubmission” which was available in the previous regulations. Course Teams should be able to demonstrate how the non-compensatable modules, IMR or ETA designation forms part


C-Annex 7

of the assessment strategy and why it is needed in the context of the course.

The word “exceptional” does indicate that an ETA should only be approved in such circumstances. It would normally be expected that both the IMR and the ETA would be applied to support progression as a result of other requirements on the course such as PSRB requirements.

Where non-compensatable, IMR and ETA are proposed, the Approval/Periodic Review Panel will fully explore the rationale for the proposal, including:


C-Annex 7

Questioning whether the potential impact on student progression has been taken into account. Defining a module as non-compensatable may be detrimental to students when it comes to considering their progression profile.

The fact that a module may be the only place where a specific learning outcome is assessed should not normally be considered as sufficient grounds to approve it as non-compensatable.

Where a Course Team is seeking approval for an In-Module Retake or Exceptional Third Attempt the Panel should:

Explore whether the application relates to the defined requirements or other such expectations of PSRB’s and/or

Where the module assesses specific aspects of competency that must be demonstrated (i.e. passed) before the student can study the work-based practice aspects of a professional course.

Panels should also consider whether the IMR/ETA is clearly defined as a specific form of reassessment strategy on the UTREG form?

Proposal for Variance Where a Course Team is putting forward a proposal for a variance, this should be considered by the Panel but will need to be approved by SLEC. The Approval/Periodic Review Panel will consider the rationale for the proposed variance and whether this is supported or not.

Reporting in IMR, ETA and Variance The report of the approval/periodic review event should include details of the discussion relation to non-compensatable modules, IMR, ETA and Variance and should make clear the decision of the Approval/Periodic Panel in relation to non-compensatable, IMR and ETA and any recommendation in relation to the Variance proposal.

Further information relating to assessment can also be found below.


C-Annex 7

ASSESSMENT REGULATION CHARACTERISTICS TO BE CONSIDERED THROUGH THE COURSE APPROVAL AND PERIODIC REVIEW

PROCESS:

Prompts for Course Teams

Introduction

The implementation of the revised Assessment Regulations in 2014 resulted in a number of implications for other University regulations, policies, procedures, and processes. One implication related to the University’s quality processes which govern the approval of courses and modules. This document has been produced to support Panel members and Course Teams involved in the University’s course approval and periodic review processes. The guidance presents a series of criterion-referenced ‘prompt’ questions.

Approval of ModulesThe following applies to the approval of individual modules by SSLESCs and the approval of groups of modules that constitute courses of study at Module Events or Approval/Review Panels.

1.Non-compensatable Modules: If approval is being sought to approve a module as non-compensatable, is there a clear and justifiable rationale for this given the potential impact on student progression?

Under particular circumstances modules can be approved as ‘non-compensatable’. These circumstances normally only relate to the defined requirements, or other such expectations, of PSRBs and/or where the module assesses specific aspects of professional competency associated with public health, safety or associated risks.


C-Annex 7

The fact that the module may be the only place where a specific stage/learning outcome is assessed is not normally considered as sufficient grounds to approve it as ‘non-compensatable’.

2.Assessment Components: Is there a clear rationale for the number of assessment components? Additionally, the new regulations have removed the qualification mark (35%) associated with individual components of assessment. This may render redundant the need to have compound assessment tasks (i.e. components comprised of multiple elements). As such, if elements of assessment are being proposed (for example, a portfolio of two or more tasks that comprise a single component) is there clear justification for this? Is there a risk of over-assessment? Sometimes it is not evident from the information provided on the UTREG2 form that compound assessment is being employed so this may need to be explored through discussion. Elements are not recognised within the regulations.

3.In-module Retake: If approval of an In-Module Retake is being sought, is there clear and evident justification for this? Does the assessment concerned meet the following criteria as defined in Section 4.5.4 of the Assessment Regulations:

In-Module Retakes should normally only be approved to meet defined requirements, or other such expectations, of PSRBs and/or where the


“In-module retakes are permitted only where:The assessment is not an examination.The assessment has been subjected to full internal moderation processes.Either the module pass mark has not been attained outright; or the module pass mark has been attained but the minimum required mark in specified assessment component(s) has not been achieved.The module is designated as non-compensatable to meet specified course and/or PSRB requirements.”

C-Annex 7

module assesses specific aspects of competency that must be demonstrated (i.e. passed) before the student can study the work-based practice aspects of a professional course.

If approval is granted, is it clear on the UTREG2 form that it is approved as a specific Reassessment Strategy and is the rationale apparent?An In-module Retake is not a like-for-like replacement of ‘Resubmission’ and would not normally be approved on the basis that an earlier version of the module used the resubmission provision as defined in the 2004 Framework for Assessment, Award & Progression.

4.Exceptional Third Attempt: If approval of an Exceptional Third Attempt is being sought, is there clear and evident justification for this? Does the module meet the following criteria as defined in Section 4.5.5 of the Assessment Regulations?

Exceptional Third Attempts should normally only be approved to meet defined requirements, or other such expectations, of PSRBs and/or where the module assesses specific aspects of competency that must be demonstrated (i.e. passed) before the student can study the work-based/work-related practice aspects of a professional course.

If approval is granted, is it clear on the UTREG2 form that it is approved as a specific Reassessment Strategy and is the rationale apparent?


“Third attempts should normally only be used where:Either the module pass mark has not been attained outright; or the module pass mark has been attained but specified assessment component(s) must meet a minimum level of achievement.

The module is designated as non-compensatable to meet specified course and/or PSRB requirements.

An In-module Retake, as described in Section 4.5.4., is not available as an approved reassessment strategy on the module.

There are no Fitness to Practise concerns (if applicable).”

C-Annex 7

5.The use of Requisites: Approving a module with associated pre-requisites or co-requisites may be detrimental to students when it comes to considering their progression profile. It can also have unforeseen consequences for students studying courses on a part-time basis. As such, requisites should be only be used in limited and specific circumstances. Intelligent curriculum design will usually define module sequencing without the requirement for either form of requisite.

Occasionally the use of requisites may be approved where the necessity to ensure a coherent and integrated study pattern is demonstrated. Normally this will only relate to specific option modules and/or the relationship between research methods modules and dissertation/project modules.

6.Variance from the Standard Assessment Regulations: If a variance is being sought, is the need exceptional and the rationale expressed clearly? Variance to the Assessment Regulations should normally only be approved to meet the specified requirements or expectations of PSRBs or other such external bodies that accredit awards of the University. Note: whilst module variance can be approved by the Course Approval and Periodic Review via the SSLESC, Course variances can only be approved at SLEC.

Approval of CoursesCourse Approval, which may follow a Module Event or encompass the approval of modules, is where the same issues detailed above are examined in light of the course as a whole. In other words, the questions relating to decisions taken at modular level are explored and tested in terms of their impact on the course as a whole and the learning experience it offers its students. The following prompt-questions, understood in relation to the notes above, will help to ensure that such questions are adequately addressed.


C-Annex 7

1. Course Outcomes: Do the course outcomes adequately articulate the specificities of the subject/disciple and the distinctive nature of the particular course/award?

2. Assessment of Learning Outcomes: Is each Stage Outcome assessed on two separate occasions? If not, are the Course Team confident that the learning outcomes for the Stage will be achieved if the student progresses with compensation?

3. Non-compensatable Modules: Is there a clear rationale for the inclusion of any non-compensatable modules? Have the Course Team taken account of the potential impact on student progression of defining modules as “non-compensatable”? (e.g. trailing)

4. Assessment Components and Elements: Is the total number of assessment tasks (i.e. the sum of components + elements) appropriate? While ensuring that all outcomes are assessed, is there a risk of over-assessment? Is there a clear rationale in the course’s assessment strategy for the use of compound assessment tasks?

5. Formative Work and Feed-Forward Processes: Is there a clear, course-wide, approach to feed-forward processes/opportunities through the provision of formative learning tasks? Is this articulated appropriately in the course’s learning strategy?

6. In-Module Retakes (IMR) and Exceptional Third Attempts (ETA): If the course is seeking to make use of these regulatory provisions, is there a clear rationale for doing so? Is this adequately articulated in the course’s assessment and reassessment strategy? Note: The module must be non-compensatable for these provisions to apply, and it is not possible to approve both IMR and ETA for the same module.

7. The use of Requisites: If the course is seeking to ‘control’ the sequencing of modules through the use of requisites, is the need


C-Annex 7

justified and logical? Are there other ways of achieving the desired result without the need for requisites?

8. Variance from the Standard Assessment Regulations: If a variance is being sought, is the need for it exceptional and the rationale expressed clearly? Are the requested variances clearly articulated requirements of a PSRB or other such external accrediting body? If it is not a requirement per se, what evidence is there to support the variance?


C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE FOR APPROVING MODULES

1. Context of Development What is the rationale for the introduction, change, modification to, or

re-approval of the module? How have current students and/or alumni of the course participated in

the development of the module and the design of the curriculum? How will the module be incorporated within and enhance the broader

course(s) in which it will be delivered? Will the module conflict with or replicate any existing provision? If so,

what is the rationale for this? Does the module require any variance to the standard University

Assessment Regulations? If so, please refer to the Variance to the Assessment Regulations procedures.

2. Module Title, Descriptor, and Key Words Does the title accurately and succinctly convey the focus of the

module? Is the Descriptor written in a student-facing style? Thinking of the module’s potential students, does the descriptor

provide a clear overview of the module’s content, the learning and teaching strategies it employs, and the strategy used to assess student learning?

Where appropriate, does the Descriptor include a mapping to relevant PSRB or Partner frameworks?

Do the Key Words correspond to the Descriptor and the Indicative Content? Do they provide suitable searchable terms?

3. Tutors and External Examiners Have a suitable Module Leader and Tutors been identified? Has an External Examiner been identified? 4. Module Details Are the level and credit rating of the module appropriate? Are they

commensurate with the learning hours, scope of the curriculum, and learning, teaching, and assessment strategies? Do they meet CAMS requirements?

Does the Assessment Pattern correspond to the information provided in the Assessment Strategy section?

5. Compensatable/Non-compensatable If selecting ‘non-compensatable’, is there clear justification? Has the

potential impact on student progression been taken into account? (See “Note on Non-compensatable Modules” below).

6. Resubmission Is the ‘Resubmission’ field set to ‘no’? (See “Note on Resubmission”

below).


C-Annex 7

7. Delivery and Delivery PatternDelivery Mode What is the rationale for the mode of delivery (if not semester based)

and is it commensurate with the indicative content, learning hours, and delivery pattern?

Delivery Pattern How does the delivery pattern support student learning and the

achievement of the learning outcomes through the assessment strategy?

Have questions of student engagement and participation been considered in proposing the delivery pattern?

Is the ratio of contact time to independent study appropriate and does this ratio corresponds to the Level of the module and its status within the course’s overarching curriculum?

8. Requisites and Additional Information Have all necessary pre-requisites, co-requisites and other

requirements been identified? (See ‘Note on Requisites’ below).9. Module Aims Are the aims of the module articulated clearly? Is the relationship between the aims and the learning outcomes

apparent and logical?10. Indicative Content Is the module’s key content/subject matter clearly summarised? Is the scope of the module appropriate for the credit rating of the

module? Is the content commensurate with the module title and the learning

outcomes, including those in the Personal and Transferable Skills category?

11. Learning Strategy Is it clear how the students will learn throughout the module? Are appropriate formative work and feedback processes identified? How are issues related to inclusivity and accessibility addressed in the

Learning Strategy? Are the learning methods sufficiently flexible to meet the individual

learning needs of the student? Are the methods identified commensurate with the content and

delivery mode? Is there appropriate use of the VLE and/or opportunities to engage in

online/blended learning? Will lectures or other kinds of taught sessions be ‘captured’ and made

available to students? Is the Learning Strategy consistent with the delivery hours that have

been identified?12. Learning Outcomes


C-Annex 7

Are there an appropriate number of outcomes identified? Are the outcomes constructively aligned to the learning and teaching

methods and Assessment Strategy? Do the outcomes adequately correspond to the relevant University

Level Descriptors (2015) and/or Stage Outcomes of the course?13. AssessmentAssessment Strategy How does the Assessment Strategy promote learning? Does the Assessment Strategy measure achievement in all of the

Learning Outcomes of the module? Is the Assessment Strategy suitably inclusive? Are there any

unnecessary barriers to participation and/or success? Is there a clear rationale for the number of assessment components? Will elements of assessment be used (for example, a portfolio of two

or more tasks that comprise a single component)? If so, is there clear justification for this? Note: Elements are nor recognised within the Assessment Regulations.

Is it apparent which component assesses which learning outcome(s)? Is the total assessment workload commensurate with the module’s

credit rating? Is the design of the Assessment Strategy cognisant of the broader

Course Assessment Strategy? If seeking approval for an In-Module Retake or Exceptional Third

Attempt: a) are the criteria for approving this met; b) is the need clear and evident; and c) is it clearly defined as a specific form of reassessment strategy on the UTREG form? (See ‘Note on In-Module Retakes and Exceptional Third Attempts’ below).

Assessment Criteria Do the Assessment Criteria clearly relate to the learning outcomes

being assessed on the module? Do the Assessment Criteria address the various dimensions that will be

used to judge to what level a student has achieved the learning outcomes of the module?

Is the Assessment Criteria commensurate with the academic level of the module?

Are the Assessment Criteria comprehensive? Are all aspects used to gauge student performance covered (e.g. referencing, presentation, consent, confidentiality)?

Are there separate Assessment Criteria for each component of assessment and are these clearly articulated?

14. Indicative Resources


C-Annex 7

Has a suitable number and variety of resources been identified and are these listed in the appropriate category (Purchase, Essential, Recommended, Journals, Electronic)?

Are the resources up-to-date? Do the resources correspond to the Indicative Content? Has the relevant Academic Librarian been consulted? Are all of the indicative resources currently available? If not, have you

identified/supplied a budget and budget code from which the new resources will be funded?

If specialist ICT resources are required, have ITaCS been consulted?


C-Annex 7

Notes:

1. Non-Compensatable Modules: Defining a module as ‘non-compensatable’ may be detrimental to students when it comes to considering their progression profile. As such, unless there are specific and justifiable reasons for doing so, modules should normally be approved as ‘compensatable’. (see Section 5.5 of the Assessment Regulations for definitions)

However, under particular circumstances modules can be approved as ‘non-compensatable’. These circumstances normally only relate to the defined requirements, or other such expectations, of PSRBs and/or where the module assesses specific aspects of professional competency associated with public health, safety or associated risks.

The fact that the module may be the only place where a specific stage/learning outcome is assessed is not normally considered as sufficient grounds to approve it as ‘non-compensatable’. Only if it meets the criteria described above should it be defined as ‘non-compensatable.’

2.Resubmission: Resubmission was a feature of the 2004 Framework for Assessment, Award & Progression but is no longer a feature of the 2014 Assessment Regulations. However, the University is currently in a period of transition between these two regimes and the field must remain active in the UTREG2 system while the implementation of the new regulations is rolled-out. But given it cannot be used; the value must be set to “no”.

If for specific and defined reasons, there is a requirement for the module to include a reassessment opportunity prior to the ratification of marks by a Module Board, then it is possible to seek approval for either an In-module Retake or Exceptional Third Attempt. See below for further details.

3. Requisites: Approving a module with associated requisites (pre- and/or co-) may be detrimental to students when it comes to considering their progression profile. It can also have unforeseen consequences for students studying courses on a part-time basis. As such, requisites should be only be used in limited and specific circumstances. Intelligent curriculum design will usually define module sequencing without the requirement for either pre-requisites or co-requisites. (see CAMS for further information)

However, occasionally it may be necessary to stipulate such requisites to ensure a coherent and integrated study pattern. Normally this will only relate to specific option modules and/or the relationship between research methods modules and dissertation/project modules.


C-Annex 7

4. In-Module Retakes and Exceptional Third Attempts: Under specific circumstances, it is possible to approve a specific reassessment strategy for a module which permits students to either undertake reassessment before the formal ratification of a mark by a Module Board or undertake a second reassessment opportunity. For approval to be granted, the module must meet certain criteria. These are defined in Sections 4.5.4 and 4.5.5 of the Assessment Regulations. However, the circumstances which may prompt such approval normally only relate to the defined requirements, or other such expectations, of PSRBs and/or where the module assesses specific aspects of competency that must be demonstrated (i.e. passed) before the student can study the work-based practice aspects of a professional course.


C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE - DESIGNING MAJOR/MINOR AWARDS

This involves the in-depth study of one discipline (the “major”) and a less

comprehensive study of a second discipline (the “minor”).

A major/minor degree is composed of a minimum of 240 credits from the Major

subject and a maximum of 120 credits from the Minor subject, normally distributed as

detailed in Table 2 below.

An honours degree course which involves the study of subject “A” as a “major” and

subject “B” as a “minor” will be referred to as an honours degree in “A with B”.

Other than in exceptional cases, major/minor awards will involve 2 disciplines drawn

from the same School, and are therefore the responsibility of that School.

Where the major and minor are drawn from different Schools, the School delivering

the major component will act as the “home” School for the course and be the

responsibility of that School.

TABLE: STRUCTURE OF A MAJOR/MINORHONOURS DEGREE AWARD

Year Major Minor Total1 80 credits 40 credits 120 credits2 80 credits 40 credits 120 credits

Final Year 80-100 credits maximum

20-40 credits maximum 120 credits

TOTAL 240-260 credits maximum

100-120 credits maximum 360 credits

(Variants across the 3 years are permissible within the total minimum and maximum

credits stated above - subject to approval at validation.)

Dissertation

The dissertation may be based on the major field only or build on several areas of

study, subject to confirmation that:


C-Annex 7

There is no Professional Statutory Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirement which

would preclude such an approach.

The areas of study are clearly related and can be supported, in the case of a

cross-School course, through primary support from the home School and formal

agreement between the Course Leader in that School about further support

arrangements from the “Minor” School.

The formal agreement must designate the responsibilities of each School and this

must be communicated clearly to the student.


C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE - DESIGNING HIGHER AND DEGREE APPRENTICESHIPS

All Higher and Degree Apprenticeships that involve a higher education award (a qualification that sits at level 4 or above on the FHEQ) are covered by the expectations of the QAA Quality Code.

As with standard university approval/review practice set out in this document, higher and degree apprenticeships awarded by the University must ensure they meet the expectations for academic standards and course design set out by the Quality Code, irrespective of the location(s) in which these awards are delivered, who is involved in delivery, or whether they are delivered in conjunction with professional or other qualifications.

Higher and Degree Apprenticeships definitions:

Higher Apprenticeships5:Are national work-based courses based on employer need that enable individuals in employment to develop the technical knowledge and competence to perform a defined job role. As such, a higher apprenticeship is not just a learning course, but an approach to workforce development and enhancing business performance.

Degree Apprenticeships6:A model bringing together the best of higher and vocational education, and see apprentices achieving a full bachelor’s or master degree a part of their apprenticeship. These involve employers, universities, and professional bodies working in Partnership. Apprentices are employed throughout, spend part of their time at university and part with their employer.

The HDA Lifecycle

Higher and Degree Apprenticeships courses follow the course lifecycle stages as set out under Section C of the Quality Handbook for Course Approval and Periodic Review of Teesside University Provision. 5 Apprenticeships, Higher Apprenticeships and Degree Apprenticeships – A Guide for HEI’s p. 36 Apprenticeships, Higher Apprenticeships and Degree Apprenticeships – A Guide for HEI’s p. 12


C-Annex 7

HDA courses may follow either mode set out below:

Co-designed fully integrated degree course, which delivers and tests both academic learning and on-the-job training, or

Use existing undergraduate course(s) (e.g. Foundation degree or DHN and or existing named degree) to deliver the academic knowledge requirements of a profession, combined with additional training to meet the full apprenticeship training requirements, and have a separate test at the end to test occupational competence.

Examples:

The HDAs design will integrate an Occupational Apprenticeship Standard(s). Key elements of the standard(s) include distinctive competencies of Knowledge, Skills and Behaviours (KSBs) and an End Point Assessment (EPA). In co-designing a degree apprenticeship(s), the EPA will be intergraded within, and be coterminous with the completion of the degree.

Employer Engagement and Consultation:As with all course development, and in particular with HDAs, employer engagement and consultation is a key element. There are a number of areas of the University which can provide support during the course development process, e.g. Department of Academic Enterprise, Finance and Commercial Development (FCD) and Student Recruitment and Marketing (SRM). In addition, the Learning and Teaching Enhancement staff in AR will be able to provide advice and guidance to Course Teams on


Higher Apprenticeship(s) (L4-L5 FD/HN)

Higher and Degree Apprenticeship(s) (L4-L5 FD/HN +, Top Up Degree L6)

Degree Apprenticeship(s) (L4-L6)

C-Annex 7

the overall design process or on specific learning, teaching and assessment issues.

Designing HDAsInternally, every higher and degree apprenticeship course(s) must reflect the key features of the Credit Accumulation & Module Scheme, the Learning and Teaching Strategy 2016-2020 (LTS), the Credit Level Descriptors, utilise the Generic Marking Criteria (see Assessment and Feedback Policy), and comply with relevant Threshold Quality Standards (TQS)7.

Externally, courses must still comply with the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Quality Code, incorporate relevant qualification characteristics, subject benchmarks and satisfy any Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Body (PSRB) requirements.

Additional guidance is available from AR (LTE) which provide a series of guides to help support staff in their learning and teaching role. The series of booklets are available at the LTE Online website.

Use of Variance in the Design of Approval/Periodic ReviewThe University operates Institution-wide assessment regulations to ensure professional academic judgements about standards and performance are exercised in such a way that all students are treated fairly, comparatively and with consistency regardless of School, College, subject or course.

However, it is recognised that occasionally, and under specific conditions, some variance to the Regulations may be necessary. Any such variance will be exceptional and must be fully justified to, and approved by, SLEC. Variance to the Regulations will normally only be approved to meet the specified requirements or expectations of PSRBs or other such external bodies that accredit awards of the University.7 TQS – subject to review in 2017/18









C-Annex 7

The Approval Panel will seek to explore the following aspects of the design with the Course Team:

The apprenticeships degree courses offered and including work-based learning will offer a high quality student experience, and meets the need of employers and are appropriate for the delivery of HDAs.

The apprenticeship standard(s) of such course are clearly specified within the relevant course documentation.

Examine and endorse the mapping documentation to demonstrate the integration of KSB and EPA of the specified Apprenticeship Framework/Standard(s).

Ensure pre-requisite contractual documents are in place to enable flexible and responsive delivery.

Where proposals for recognition of prior certificated learning (RPCL) and recognition of experiential learning (RPEL) are to be incorporated into the non-standard entry requirements for Higher and Degree apprenticeship course(s) submitted for approval, follow individual RPL claims according the Universities RPL Policy.

Any ethical issues have been taken into account in the course design and operating plans, in line with the University’s Research Ethics Policy.

Co-delivery of all or elements of the Higher and Degree Apprenticeship(s) have been considered and approved.

Student Support arrangements are set out clearly in operational documents/ student/learner agreements to ensure successful progression.


C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE - AWARDS CONTAINING WORKPLACE/RELATED LEARNING

Workplace/Related Learning (WPL) can constitute all or part of an award at any level. It most often appears in awards with Employer Partnership involvement though the complexity of the Partnership and the level of involvement of the Employer Partner can vary. It is not particularly useful therefore to approach approval of awards containing WPL with a single set of questions, as those questions will not be relevant for all eventualities.

The Course Team should have considered a set of over-arching principles in relation to the student learning experience and provided information based on those principles.

Principles

Recognisable as Higher EducationThe Approval Panel must seek evidence which demonstrates that awards and modules containing WPL:

Meet the academic standards for credits as articulated in the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ).

Are assessed with a view to meeting those standards in a fair and rigorous manner.

The Student Learning ExperienceWPL involves at least some if not the vast majority of the learning occurring in the workplace. It is likely that students will have their own unique “learning environment” depending on the opportunities in their workplace; their capacity to attend any campus-based session, and their access to IT and HE facilities. The Approval Panel must seek evidence


C-Annex 7

which demonstrates that awards and modules containing WPL present students with multiple opportunities to: Access and use learning materials. Seek tutorial advice and support (including academic and workplace

support where relevant). Contact and engage in academic and professional discussion with other

students.

Awards will develop different strategies to enable these activities (use of the Virtual Learning Environment, residential weekends, electronic discussion boards, times when tutors are available via phone, Skype etc.). These strategies should be outlined in the Programme Specification.

Incorporating Workplace ExpertiseFor awards that contain substantial elements of WPL and assessment (including placements), it is usually the case that the student is learning from (and sometimes being assessed by) other staff in the workplace. Whatever the level of involvement of staff in employer organisations, it is the University that is ultimately responsible for the quality of standards and the rigour of the assessment. The Course Team must provide evidence which demonstrates that awards and modules contain WPL by:

Providing appropriate support to workplace mentors/supervisors/tutors (through such mechanisms as mentor workshops, mentor handbooks, e-groups etc.) to ensure that students are able to achieve the stated learning outcomes.

The assessment of professional competence undertaken in the workplace should involve both the relevant academic link tutor and practice assessor, the University Assessment and Feedback Policy provides guidance on the appropriate mechanism to support assessment and moderation.


C-Annex 7

The TQS: Student Learning in the Workplace provides additional relevant information.

An outline of arrangements should be given in the Programme Specification. Evidence of the support for workplace mentors/supervisors can best be demonstrated by submission of a Handbook alongside the course documentation. The checklist for the minimum requirements of such Handbooks can be found in the TQS Student Learning in the Workplace, Section D3 – D3-TQS 2 of the Quality Handbook.


C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE – COURSES DELIVERED BY DISTANCE LEARNING

Extract from the Quality Handbook Section C, 2.2.15 Course(s) to be delivered by Distance Learning

Where the course is delivered by distance learning (D-L) (either module(s) or the entire course) there is an expectation the Course Team will navigate the Panel through a significant sample of the materials during the Approval/ Periodic Review Event or prior to the event. The Panel will seek to assure the quality of distance learning/online materials, the security and reliability, the skills and the expertise of the staff delivering the course via these methods, and the use of appropriate mechanisms for providing timely academic support and feedback to distance learning students.

Documentation and Sample of DL/Online learning materials for approval/review:

You should provide sample media/learning/study materials for at least the first module of the course to be presented in full, together with an outline of the second module and a detailed production schedule for the development of further modules/study materials.

You should be able to demonstrate any related on-line/web-based learning materials in the appropriate virtual learning environment/platform, as requested by the Panel either prior to, or as part of the approval/review process.

The following checklist will help you to develop your learning, teaching and

assessment strategy for distance learning modules and or courses.

Inclusivity


C-Annex 7

Can the target population access the necessary hardware and software to

engage with the learning, teaching and assessment delivery?

Are there a variety of mediums used to provide learning materials in alternative

formats?

Is there an appropriate and varied assessment strategy that will not disadvantage

students?

How will flexibility in the provision of learning materials be offered to students to

provide an inclusive approach?

What provisions are to be made to maximise accessibility to learning?

Learning and Teaching Strategy What forms of communication will be used to deliver the learning content

(synchronous/asynchronous/a blend of the two)?

What is the induction process to distance learning for new independent learners?

How will socialisation in the online environment be addressed?

How will collaborative work take place between learners?

What tools and methods will be used to ensure active student engagement?

How will the Course Team ensure an equitable high-quality student experience?

How will the development of learning materials be managed?

How will the student experience be managed to avoid isolation?

If the course is to be offered in different delivery modes (face-to-face, online

distance) is there equivalence in learning outcomes, assessment strategy and

overall student experience between the different modes?

Assessment Is the assessment strategy aligned with the mode of delivery and the learning

outcomes?

Will technology be used for the assessment and how will this be managed to

ensure an equitable experience and maintain quality assurance practices?

Is there group and peer assessment and if so, how will this be managed?

How are opportunities for formative assessment embedded?

How will feedback be provided?

Resources


C-Annex 7

How will students receive induction to the Library and central resources (and do

Teesside University’s licence agreements permit this access?)?

Have resources been identified that are appropriate and accessible to distance

learners?

How will access to textbooks and resources be facilitated?

Is there a report from the Academic Librarian on the availability and accessibility

of resources?

Staffing How many cohorts per year are being proposed?

What are the FT/PT options for study?

What is your proposed staff-student ratio?

Are you able to successfully operate the pedagogic model proposed (to a high

standard) with the available staffing/resourcing?

Is there appropriate technical and administration infrastructure and resource in

place (centrally and locally) to support the delivery of the award via distance

learning?

Student Support How might student support issues/demands from distance learners differ from

face-to-face learners? How are these issues addressed?

What would you define as acceptable attendance/engagement and what is your

plan to monitor this?

What process will you follow in attempting to re-engage students who appear

disengaged (and have you factored this in to your proposal in terms of staff

resource/time?)?

What is the involvement of the Retention Support Officer (Student & Library

Services) and has this been communicated to them?

What is the involvement of the School Disability Co-ordinator and has this been

communicated to them?

What electronic peer support will be available?

How will pastoral support be managed?

Has the Student Handbook been tailored to provide specific support for distance

learning delivery?


C-Annex 7

How will skills development be supported?

Is there a code of conduct for staff and students?

How will technology support be provided?

Through what mechanism(s) do you envisage students raising queries? What is

the plan and timescales in terms of monitoring and responding to these queries?

Student Voice What mechanisms are in place to encourage students to provide feedback on

their experiences?

What mechanisms are in place to ensure effective student representation?

How will the Student Voice be facilitated in the CME process?

Staff Development and Scholarly Research What support requirements do academic staff have in order to implement,

support and assess your distance learning course?

What support requirements do administrative and technical staff have in order to

implement and support your distance learning course?

Market Research Is there a market for your course? What makes your course unique/what are its

selling points?

Is there a business case for delivering the award via distance learning?

Is there a pedagogic case for delivering the award via distance learning?

General Are all learning technologies being proposed within the award supported by

Teesside University?

Has a risk assessment been undertaken in relation to any proposed learning

technologies that are not managed or supported by Teesside University?

Has a technical specification of what learners are required to have access to

(computer, software, connectivity, speakers, microphone, etc.) been produced?

Are there any language issues and what are the English language requirements

at entry point?

If relevant, how will a worldwide delivery operate?


C-Annex 7

How will the course be marketed?

How will any timing issues for delivery and assessment be resolved?

How are ePortfolios (Portfolio@Tees) used within the course?

How will PDP operate?


C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE - DESIGN OF FOUNDATION DEGREES

Foundation Degrees have a range of distinctive characteristics not necessarily present in other qualification at Level 5, nor in the initial parts of courses that lead directly to Bachelor’s Degrees with Honours. Foundation Degrees would not normally form an intermediate award for an honours degree.

The Course Team should address the Foundation Degree distinctive principles. Further guidance can be obtained from the QAA Foundation Degree Characteristics Statements.8

Employer involvementFoundation Degrees integrate academic and workplace learning through close collaboration between employers and course providers. They are intended to equip learners with knowledge, skills and understanding relevant to their (potential) employment and, therefore, satisfying the needs of employees and employers.

The Course Team should confirm the design and development of the course has involved employers and that the needs of employees have also been considered.

Where employers will be involved in the delivery and/or assessment of the course, the specific detail should be provided on how the employers will be supported to undertake this role, e.g. what training will be provided and what ongoing support mechanisms will be put in place.

Accessibility and FlexibilityFoundation Degrees are designed to appeal to learners wishing to enter a profession as well as those seeking continuing professional development. 8 NB: The QAA Foundation Degree Characteristics Statement was reviewed by the QAA – Sept-15




C-Annex 7

They can also provide pathways for lifelong learning and the opportunity to progress to other qualifications. Flexibility on the part of the Institution, the learner and the employer is central to many aspects of Foundation Degrees.

The Course Team should provide evidence as to how the course(s) have been developed to accommodate the learning needs and requirements of different types of students on the course. The Course Team should also establish how workplace learning is integrated into the course and whether the intended mode(s) of delivery accommodates this.

PartnershipPartnership between employers, HEIs, FE Colleges and the Sector Skills Councils and/or other relevant PSRB(s) is central to the concept of Foundation Degrees. The design and delivery of Foundation Degrees are likely to be informed by the Framework(s) for Foundation Degrees of appropriate Sector Skills Council(s) and/or other relevant PSRB(s).

The Course Team should confirm that the course(s) design and delivery have been informed by the Sector Skills Councils and/or other relevant PSRB(s), as well as any other relevant benchmarks.

Articulation and ProgressionFoundation Degrees should provide recognition of the knowledge, skills and understanding that an applicant for a Foundation Degree has already developed, which may have come as a result of learning through work (paid/unpaid), or other activities and interests. Foundation Degrees provide self-standing qualifications of specific value but are also expected to provide for opportunities for further (lifelong) study which could take a number of different forms (e.g. professional body qualification, higher level (NVQ). In addition, Foundation Degrees will link to at least one course leading to a Bachelor’s Degree with Honours.


C-Annex 7

The Course Team should explore how Recognition of Prior Learning will be used to assist learners in accessing the course.The Course Team should establish what degree course(s) (or other equivalent qualifications) the award(s) under consideration lead to and how students will be prepared for potential progression. The Course Team should also establish what other opportunities are provided to promote lifelong learning.

Knowledge and UnderstandingThe QAA Foundation Degree Qualification Benchmark identifies the following generic outcomes that holders of a Foundation Degree should be able to demonstrate:

Knowledge and critical understanding of the well-established principles in their field of study and the way in which those principles have developed.

Successful application in the workplace of the range of knowledge and skills learnt throughout the course.

Ability to apply underlying concepts and principles outside the context in which they were first studied and the application of those principles in a work context.

Knowledge of the main methods of enquiry in their subject(s) and ability to evaluate critically the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems in their field of study, and apply these in a work context.

An understanding of the limits of their knowledge and how this influences analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge in their field of study and in a work context.

The Course Team should confirm that the outcomes detailed above will be delivered within the course(s) under consideration.


C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE - DESIGN OF HIGHER NATIONAL AWARDS

Higher Nationals (HNs) are offered at the University under licence from Pearson. The Licence agreement brings with it a number of conditions around the award design and mapping (Please refer to C-SAPs-Annex 21).

The HEI Licence authorises Teesside to operate and approve HNs using its own titles and modules tailored to meet local needs. However, the following condition must be adhered to:

Where a Pearson BTEC National qualification already exists with a closely related title and or content, the University course must cover the same core content as the equivalent Pearson HN course(s).

There is no such requirement for University awards where an equivalent Pearson award does not exist.

All University HNs must follow the Pearson HNs regulations, detailed on page 10 of the Pearson Centre Guide, this sets out the level and credit requirements and key guiding characteristics in the design of HNs:

1. Level and Credit Requirements for the Awards 1.1 Higher National (HN) qualifications will be available at level 4 and

level 5 are mapped to the QAA Framework for FHEQ in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

1.1.1 Level 4 will be called a Higher National Certificate1.1.2 Level 4 and 5 will be called a Higher National Diploma

1.2 Higher National Diploma (“HNDs”)


C-Annex 7

HNDs will comprise two stages of 120 credits each:

1.2.1 Stage 1 will comprise units at level 4;1.2.2 Stage 2 will comprise units at level 5.

2. Key Guiding Characteristics

2.1 Higher National qualifications will have Total Qualification Time (TQT) and Guided Learning (GL) totals as follows:

2.1.1 A HND will be worth 2400 hours of TQT and 960 hours of GL.2.2.1 A HNC will be worth 1200 hours of TQT and 480 hours of GL.

2.2 Core/ compulsory modules credit values may vary by subject but will not be less than 30% of the whole qualification.

2.3 All Higher Nationals will share the following guiding characteristics:

2.3.1 Include significant employer/industry involvement in their development and design.

2.3.2 Demonstrate access from level 3.2.3.3 Demonstrate that graduates at each level of the HN have

the requisite skills and abilities to progress to the next level of study should they so choose. This includes ensuring that HND graduates can progress to level 6.

2.3.4 Include mandatory work skills development through work experience and or/realistic work-related learning.

2.3.5 Evidence of development and assessment of students’ knowledge and skills in:

2.3.5.1 Communication, including written English, or relevant other language

2.3.5.2 Numeracy 2.3.5.3 Enterprise and commercial awareness 2.3.5.4 Problem Solving 2.3.5.5 Self-reflection and critical appraisal

For further advice and guidance, contact the University key contact for Pearson, Sue Hyman at [email protected].



C-Annex 7

GUIDANCE - ADDITIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL DOCTORATE COURSES – 2017

REGULATIONS

The Framework and Regulations for the Assessment, Progression & Award of Professional Doctorates makes reference to a number of requirements that should be established at approval/periodic review of such courses.

These guidelines detail the regulations that make reference to the approval/periodic review process and Panels will seek to ensure that these issues are addressed and recorded within course documentation.

1.1 Admission/Recognition of prior Experiential Learning [RPEL]Admission and RPEL requirements must be clearly specified at the course approval stage. It is not expected that students will be granted RPEL against the Advanced Independent Work part of the Professional Doctorate award.

1.2 Research Methods Training All Professional Doctorate courses must include an element of advanced research methods, defined as specific techniques required to conduct research in a particular discipline, minimally to the value of 60 credits or 600 hours of notional learning time. The course documentation must state clearly how and where in the course this is achieved. This aspect of the course is intended to provide the student with the skills and knowledge necessary for the pursuit of the Advanced Independent Work.

1.3 Recognition of Intermediate Achievement Subject to meeting the requisite regulations, students enrolling on a Professional Doctorate Course may exit with a Masters award. The student must achieve a minimum of 180 credits at Level 7/8, of which at least 60 credits must be achieved via a successful dissertation or


C-Annex 7

equivalent. Subject to meeting the requisite regulations for the course and credit requirements, students may also be allowed to exit with a PgC or PgD (i.e. without the requirement for at least 60 credits via a dissertation or equivalent).

The title of such awards will be determined at the approval stage of the course.Any student enrolling for a Professional Doctorate Course will not, normally, be permitted to receive an intermediate award unless s(he) withdraws (or is withdrawn) from a course holding sufficient credits for the conferment of the intermediate award.

1.4(i) Progression PointsDocumentation should clearly articulate any areas where sequencing of modules within the course is critical to course coherence and the effective “progression” of students through the course. Exit points should be made clear in the course documentation.

Each course should develop a proposal for managing progression, as appropriate to the course structure, which can be discussed at approval/review. For full-time courses, progression points are likely to be at the end of each year of study.

As a minimum, one progression point should be included at which a Progression & Award Board determines whether a student has made sufficient progress as to move to the Advanced Independent Work part of the course. For this progression point, Course Teams are also required to identify, at course approval/review, which modules must be successfully completed before the student is allowed to progress to the Advanced Independent Work. Additional progression points may be included as appropriate to the course structure.


C-Annex 7

1.4(ii) Progress on the Advanced Independent WorkWhere the Advanced Independent Work is completed following the taught modules, once per year, as agreed at Course Approval, the Progression & Award Board of the student’s course of study shall establish whether a student is still actively engaged on the Advanced Independent Work and is maintaining regular contact with the supervisors, and shall consider a report from the supervisor on the student’s progress. As a result of obtaining this report, the Progression & Award Board shall take appropriate action which may include the withdrawal from the course. The Assessment Regulations sets out further specific Regulations for the Advanced Independent Work.

A student whose Progression is not approved may not proceed and withdrawal processes may be initiated by the Progression & Award Board.

1.4 (iii) Recording of Supervision MeetingsMechanisms for the recording of supervision meetings (e.g. either through the use of log books or tutorial records) will be agreed at course approval.

1.5 Nomination of Examination TeamNomination for members of a pool of External Examiners for the Advanced Independent Work module will be forwarded to the External Examiner Sub-Committee (EESC).

Section D2: External Examiner ProcessArrangements for the nomination of the Examination Team for individual students shall be determined at course approval.

1.6 Composition of Examination Team A student shall be examined by at least two and, normally, not more than three examiners [except where Section 6.6.6, Appointment of an Additional External Examiner applies], of which at least one of whom shall


http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/DocRepo/Quality%20handbook/D2%20-%20External%20Examiner%20Process.doc

https://unity3.tees.ac.uk/sites/committees/EESC/SitePages/Home.aspx

https://unity3.tees.ac.uk/sites/committees/EESC/SitePages/Home.aspx


C-Annex 7

be an External Examiner, and at least one of whom shall have up-to-date professional expertise. The Course Leader will oversee the selection of the Examination Team following the mechanisms agreed at course approval. The student shall have no input into the selection of the Examination Team

Guideline Extracts:

From the regulations that make reference to the approval/review process and Panels should ensure that these issues are addressed within course documentation and recorded within Approval/Periodic Review reports.

Course Teams should access the full assessment regulations when considering these issues as the guidance only provides a summary rather than the full regulation.

1. Format of the Advanced Independent Work (AIW) Regulation 1.2.2 - The format of the AIW (Thesis/Dissertation) may differ according to the requirements of the area of professional practice in question and will be discussed and approved as part of Course Approval Processes.

Regulation 1.2.3 - The word length of the AIW should be commensurate with the number of credits allocated, with Level 8 outcomes and appropriate to the form of AIW presented. This should be agreed as part of the Course Approval process. Where a Course Team wishes to include more than one component for the AIW, this should be considered as part of the Course Approval process.

2. Research Methods TrainingRegulation 1.2.5 - All Professional Doctorate courses must include an element of advanced research methods, defined as specific techniques required to conduct research in a particular discipline, minimally to the value of 60 credits or 600 hours of notional learning time. The Course Document for each Professional Doctorate award must clearly state how and where in the course this is achieved.

3. Recognition of Prior LearningRegulation 3.5 – Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) requirements for each Professional Doctorate award must be clearly specified at course approval. Students will not be granted RPL against the AIW part of a Professional Doctorate award.

4. Intermediate Awards


http://www.tees.ac.uk/docs/index.cfm?folder=student%20regulations

C-Annex 7

Regulation 3.16 - If a student fails to satisfy the requirements for a primary target award, an intermediate award may be conferred if the credit requirements and associated learning outcomes for that award have been met. These requirements will be specified either at course approval or in the University’s CAMS framework. Intermediate Awards should be agreed as part of the Approval process and a Programme Specification produced. Such awards must be contained within the University Schedule of Awards.

5. In-module RetakeRegulation 4.5.4 - On a module basis, and only if approved as a specific reassessment strategy at the time of approval, courses may make arrangements for students to retake specific assessment tasks in-module before the result has been formally ratified by a Module Assessment Board. In-module Retake is not available for the Advanced Independent Work (Thesis/Dissertation).

6. Exceptional Third AttemptRegulation 4.5.5 - On a module basis, and only if approved as a specific reassessment strategy at the time of approval, courses may make arrangements for students to undertake a second reassessment opportunity (i.e. a third attempt). Exceptional Third Attempts are only available for modules at Level 7 and are not available for the Advanced Independent Work.

7. ProgressionRegulation 5 - Each course should develop a proposal for managing progression, as appropriate to the course structure, which should be agreed as part of the course approval process. As a minimum, one progression point should be included at which a Progression & Award Board determines whether a student has made sufficient progress to move to the Advanced Independent Work part of the course. Any exist points and intermediate awards should be made clear in course documentation.

8. Responsibilities of the Supervisory TeamRegulation 6.2.7 - Course Teams are required to develop a list of responsibilities of the Supervisory Team and of the student which should be discussed at approval/review. This should be clearly communicated to students, normally through the course handbook.

9. Length of the AIWRegulation 6.3.8 - The length of the AIW should conform to the word limit and other requirements as agreed at course approval, depending upon the type of AIW format required for the assessment. Specific details of the format of the AIW will be included in the Research Handbook for each course.


C-Annex 7

10. Nomination of the Examination TeamRegulation 6.4.7 - Arrangements for the nomination of the Examination Team for individual students shall be determined at course approval.


C-Annex 7

Design and Development of Curriculum: Reference Sources:

Inclusive Teaching and Learning in Higher Education as a route to Excellence, January 2017, from www.gov.uk/government/publications

The Future Growth of Degree Apprenticeships, March 2016 - from www.universitiesuk.ac.uk


http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/

http://www.gov.uk/government/publications

handbook/C... · Web view1.1.2 Level 4 and 5 will be called a Higher National Diploma 1.2 Higher...

Documents

Transcript of handbook/C... · Web view1.1.2 Level 4 and 5 will be called a Higher National Diploma 1.2 Higher...