Course Development and Review Policy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this policy is to outline the development and review processes for Leaders Institute (LI) courses.

SCOPE

All courses

COURSE DEVELOPMENT

The development and review of courses is overseen by Development Committee. Development of courses (including nested courses) must use the LI Course Template and follow the principles of:

• alignment to the LI Strategic Plan;

• mapping to AQF levels and LI Graduate Attributes;

• conformity to the Higher Education Standards (Threshold Standards) and professional accrediting bodies.

Course Advisory Committee (CAC) is an ad-hoc subcommittee of Development Committee that is convened to develop or review courses. The Chair is appointed by Development Committee. In addition to relevant LI academic staff, membership of CAC includes at least two external academic and professional experts in the field.

Development Committee may also appoint ad hoc specialist subcommittees or advisory groups to assist in its role.

COURSE REVIEW

Courses are subject to a regular cycle of review to support ongoing academic quality and continuous improvement of academic processes and outcomes. Any changes to an accredited course must follow the procedures outlined below.

1. Annual Course Report

The relevant Program Directors submit an Annual Course Report to the Vice President Academic to be included in the LI Annual Academic Report. The Annual Course Report includes data on student enrolments, grade distribution and performance (progression, attrition, completions), as well as stakeholder feedback, evidence of improvements and goals for the following year. The LI Annual Academic Report is tabled by the Vice President Academic to Academic Board to ensure ongoing monitoring of performance, reviews and implementation of improvements.

2. Comprehensive Review

All accredited courses are subject to a four yearly comprehensive review. This is overseen by Development Committee in line with the procedures below.

3. Reaccreditation Application

A reaccreditation review is conducted as part of the reaccreditation application process. This is overseen by Development Committee in line with the procedures below.

4. Minor Review

A minor course review includes minor changes to an accredited course, such as progression rules and revisions to specialisations. A proposal for minor review is tabled to Development Committee for recommendation to Academic Board. The procedures below are not required.

PROCEDURES

COURSE DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE

1. Proposal

A proposal for course development (including nested courses) must be tabled to Development Committee, including:

• course title(s)

• commencement date

• delivery site

• delivery modes

• rationale

• market research

• academic staff

• proposed budget for development If the proposal is accepted by Development Committee, it is tabled to Executive Management Team (EMT) and Academic Board for recommendation to Governing Board.

2. Recommendation of Executive Management Team and Academic Board

If the proposal is accepted by Development Committee, it is tabled to Executive Management Team and Academic Board for recommendation to Governing Board.

3. Approval by Governing Board

If it is recommended by both Academic Board and Executive Management Team, the proposal is tabled to Governing Board for approval.

4. Course Advisory Committee is appointed

If approved by Governing Board, Development Committee will appoint a CAC to oversee the development of the course, including benchmarking and external peer review of unit outlines.

5. External Expert Review

CAC commissions an External Expert Reviewer nationally recognised in the field to ensure rigorous and appropriate content and processes. The External Expert Reviewer submits a report to CAC for review.

6. Recommendation by Development Committee

CAC tables the Course Accreditation Application to Development Committee for consideration, including the external moderator’s report and CAC’s response to the report. After review by Development Committee, the Course Accreditation Application is tabled to Academic Board for approval.

7. Approval by Academic Board

Academic Board reviews the Course Accreditation Application and, once satisfied, tasks Development Committee to submit the application to the relevant accrediting bodies if required.

8. Feedback to Stakeholders

Program Directors put in place mechanisms and processes (including websites), to ensure all stakeholders, including students, are informed of the new course or changes to an existing course. No advertising or promotion of a new course is permitted until approval has been granted by the relevant accrediting agency.

PROCEDURES

1. Appointment of Course Advisory Committee

In line with the course review schedule, Development Committee appoints a CAC which includes the Program Director, other relevant academic staff and at least one external expert from a relevant field. The chair is nominated by Development Committee.

2. Course Review

CAC will undertake the review, including analysis of the following information as relevant:

• Annual Course Reports

• QILT data

• Benchmarking

• Admission criteria

• Course structure

• Nested courses

• Course rationale

• Course learning outcomes

• LI graduate attributes

• Library and information resources

• effectiveness of assessment and how assessments contribute to student learning

• mapping learning outcomes, graduate attributes and assessments

• Proposals for improvements

3. External Expert Review

CAC commissions an External Expert Reviewer nationally recognised in the field to ensure rigorous and appropriate content and processes. The External Expert Reviewer submits a report to CAC for review.

4. Recommendation by Development Committee

CAC tables a report to Development Committee for consideration, including recommended improvements to the course. The Comprehensive Review Report or Course Reaccreditation Application is reviewed by Development Committee for recommendation to Academic Board. A final report from Development Committee is tabled to Academic Board for approval. If the recommendations require a substantial change to the course, the CAC is tasked with preparing a Reaccreditation Application to TEQSA.

5. Approval by Academic Board

Academic Board reviews the Comprehensive Review Report or Reaccreditation Application and, once satisfied, tasks Development Committee to submit a Material Change Notification or Course Reaccreditation Application to the relevant accrediting bodies.

6. Feedback to Stakeholders

Program Directors put in place mechanisms and processes (including websites), to ensure all stakeholders, including students, are informed of the changes. No advertising or promotion of major course revisions are permitted until approval has been granted by the relevant accrediting agency.