Guide to Program Review / Program Development and Review / Teaching and Learning Services / University Services / The University of Newcastle, Australia

Home → University Services → Teaching and Learning Services → Program Development and Review → Guide to Program Review

Guide to Program Review

This guide is designed to assist you with the Program Review Process. It is hoped that this will be useful to Program Convenors, Review Team members and any other person involved with the reviewing of programs.

Please note: To clarify the impact of the Course and Program Rationalistion process, the Academic Senate External Program Review Deferrals were approved on 16 February 2005.

Policy

1. As a major component of the University's quality assurance mechanisms, the Academic Senate requires that every program in the University will be externally reviewed on a 5-year cycle approved by Academic Senate.

2. Each review must address at least the generic Terms of Reference for reviews approved by Academic Senate, but may also include more specific issues affecting the program on which guidance is sought.

3. To promote efficiencies and to achieve the best outcome from the review process, programs within one Faculty that are similar in nature should be reviewed at the same time. Prescribed and Directed Courses offered within the program(s) must also be reviewed at the same time.

4. The review team must include members external to the University with at least one employer, one senior academic and one graduate as well as University Services.

5. The report of the review team must come to Academic Senate with a response by the Faculty on the recommendations through the Academic Quality Assurance Committee.

6. Revisions to the Program resulting from a program review will be forwarded to the Academic Senate through the Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Portfolio Committee.

Suggested Timeline Official* Procedures and Documentation Assistance

Begin March/April

(1-2 months)

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

1. Program Reviews are initiated by the Pro Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty responsible for the program and should take place at least every five years on a schedule approved by Academic Senate.
Establishing
mechanisms for informing stakeholders.

1-2 months

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

2. Wherever possible for externally accredited programs the accreditation process and the Program Review should be undertaken at the same time. Program Reviews should occur at least every five years regardless of the accreditation period, and include a review of recent Business Plans and all Courses within Programs. Documentation from the accreditation process should be used to inform the Review. Where Programs are offered off-shore it must be demonstrated, through comparison with the domestic Program, that standards and compatibility have been maintained.
Accredited Programs by Faculty

3. If accreditation and the Review are to take place concurrently or are integrated, or will be undertaken by the same Team at different times, any variations in the procedures, Team membership and the Terms of Reference from those set out below must be signed off by the PVC.
See the Generic Terms of Reference for Program Reviews

4. Terms of Reference must include a requirement to review prescribed and directed courses as part of 5 yearly Program review cycle, and ask the following questions of the course under review:

i. Does the course objective meet program requirements?

ii. Does course content satisfy course objectives?

iii. Does assessment test course objectives? and

iv. Does learning support materials or facilities need to be upgraded?

1-2 months

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

5. The Program Convenor, assisted by appropriate Faculty administrative staff, is responsible for the development of the documentation necessary for the Review.

1-2 months

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

6. The Program Review will be undertaken by a Review Team consisting of:

(a) no less than four Reviewers external to the University, including at least:

one employer from a related industry/service,

one senior academic teaching in a related field,

one graduate of the Program;

(b) no less than one senior member of the Academic Staff of the University who is not teaching into the Program; and

(c) one member of the University Services Division, nominated by the Vice President (University Services)

(d)the chair shall be appointed by the Pro Vice-Chancellor from amongst the senior academic members of the Team

1-2 months

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

7. The Program Convenor, in conjunction with the Assistant Dean (Teaching and Learning) of the Faculty, will provide for the consideration of the Pro Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty:

(a) draft Terms of Reference, based on a set of generic Terms of Reference approved by the Academic Senate to which additional items may be added; and

(b) the names of at least ten possible Review Team members.

1-2 months

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

8. The Pro Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty in consultation with the Heads of Schools considers the draft Terms of Reference and the membership of the Review Team.

9. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the President of the Academic Senate and members of the Faculty are requested to comment on the draft Terms of Reference, and the proposed Review Team membership.

April/May/June

1-2 months

May-CTLPC meeting

June-
AcS meeting

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

10. After considering comments provided by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, President of Academic Senate and members of the Faculty the Pro Vice-Chancellor determines the membership of the Review Team.

11. After considering comments provided by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the President of Academic Senate, members of the Faculty and the Review Team, the Terms of Reference are finalised and approved by the Pro Vice-Chancellor.

12. Notice of the Review, including the membership of the Review Team and the Terms of Reference, is forwarded to the Academic Senate for noting.

July/August

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

13. The Review Team will visit the University, and conduct interviews with the Program Convenor, students, members of staff involved in teaching in the Program and any other person or people relevant to the Review Team's deliberations.

14.The Chair of the Review Team, in consultation with the members of the Team, will provide the Pro Vice-Chancellor with a Report reflecting its examination of the documentation provided prior to the Review, and any further information obtained during its visit to the University; and

15. The Pro Vice-Chancellor will request the Program Convenor in conjunction with the Assistant Dean (Teaching and Learning) to provide responses to the Report and the Recommendations and an Action Sheet outlining:

(a) their support or otherwise for each of the recommendations;

(b) the actions to be undertaken;

(c) who is responsible for the action; and

(d) a timeline for implementation.

The Heads of Schools who have a major role in the Program will need to be consulted in preparing this documentation.

Sept -Faculty Board

Oct -CTLPC

Nov -AcS

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

16. The Review Report, response and action sheet are forwarded by the Pro Vice-Chancellor to:

(a) the Review Team;

(b) the Faculty Board; and

(c) the Academic Senate through the Academic Quality Assurance Committee.

who will consider the material at their respective meetings.

Dec/Jan

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

17. After considering feedback from the above bodies, together with the responses and action sheet, a list of actions to be undertaken as a result of the Review is prepared by the Pro Vice-Chancellor and reported to the Academic Senate.

Jan/Feb

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

18. The Program Convenor is responsible for implementation of the actions arising from the Program Review, in accordance with the timeline indicated in the approved action sheet in consultation with the Heads of School involved in the Program.

Jan/Feb

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

19. The Program Convenor and the Assistant Dean (Teaching and Learning) must report annually to the Faculty Board on the implementation of the approved actions no later than the June/July meeting of the Faculty Board. The report should occur as part of the standard annual report on the Program's performance.

No later than June/July of the following year.

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

20. When all actions have been completed, the Faculty Board and the Academic Senate will be informed.

Check Dates:

Principal Dates

21. The outcomes of the Review and the actions resulting from the recommendations will inform the next Program Review.

Review of programs informs Course Development

If outcomes include revision of program,
see approved documentation.

Checklist for the Review Documentation

The Program Convenor must provide the following information to assist the Program Review Process

1.	A summary statement on the performance of the program, based on the information listed below
2.	A description of program and course content
3.	The Report of the previous Review indicating outcomes/implementation
4.	Annual program Performance Indicators including:
		Enrolments, Course and Program information available from NUSTAR (e.g. Average WAM of students over number of years etc) Progression and Retention Rates, CEQ (note, the CEQ has national benchmarks) CSQ
5.		Prescribed and directed course performance report that examines:
		Does the course objective meet program requirements? Does course content satisfy course objectives? Does assessment test course objectives? And Does learning support materials or facilities need to be upgraded?
6.		Staff input - submissions, surveys
7.		Student input - submissions, focus groups
8.		Results from the Graduate Destination survey
9.		A list of courses and assessment tasks within those courses aligned with the Graduate Profile Statements for your Program.
10.		A summary of Course Assessment Returns for prescribed courses, including comments by Course Coordinators on student evaluation
11.		Faculty and School Strategic Plans
12.		Any additional information relevant for the evaluation of the program
13.		Report on the strategies implemented for inclusion of Students with a disability
		Where possible, the following information should be given:
		A. Alumni input random survey
		B. Summary comment on similar offerings at other institutions - program/contents

*Procedures for Undertaking a Program Review

Approved: Academic Senate 14 August 2002

Amended: 26 November 2003, 28 April 2004, 18 August 2004, 13 October 2004, 16 February 2005

Suggested Timeline	*Official Procedures and Documentation**	Assistance
Begin March/April (1-2 months) Check Dates: Principal Dates	1. Program Reviews are initiated by the Pro Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty responsible for the program and should take place at least every five years on a schedule approved by Academic Senate.	Establishing mechanisms for informing stakeholders.
1-2 months Check Dates: Principal Dates	2. Wherever possible for externally accredited programs the accreditation process and the Program Review should be undertaken at the same time. Program Reviews should occur at least every five years regardless of the accreditation period, and include a review of recent Business Plans and all Courses within Programs. Documentation from the accreditation process should be used to inform the Review. Where Programs are offered off-shore it must be demonstrated, through comparison with the domestic Program, that standards and compatibility have been maintained.	Accredited Programs by Faculty
	3. If accreditation and the Review are to take place concurrently or are integrated, or will be undertaken by the same Team at different times, any variations in the procedures, Team membership and the Terms of Reference from those set out below must be signed off by the PVC.	See the Generic Terms of Reference for Program Reviews
	4. Terms of Reference must include a requirement to review prescribed and directed courses as part of 5 yearly Program review cycle, and ask the following questions of the course under review: i. Does the course objective meet program requirements? ii. Does course content satisfy course objectives? iii. Does assessment test course objectives? and iv. Does learning support materials or facilities need to be upgraded?
1-2 months Check Dates: Principal Dates	5. The Program Convenor, assisted by appropriate Faculty administrative staff, is responsible for the development of the documentation necessary for the Review.
1-2 months Check Dates: Principal Dates	6. The Program Review will be undertaken by a Review Team consisting of: (a) no less than four Reviewers external to the University, including at least: one employer from a related industry/service, one senior academic teaching in a related field, one graduate of the Program; (b) no less than one senior member of the Academic Staff of the University who is not teaching into the Program; and (c) one member of the University Services Division, nominated by the Vice President (University Services) (d)the chair shall be appointed by the Pro Vice-Chancellor from amongst the senior academic members of the Team
1-2 months Check Dates: Principal Dates	7. The Program Convenor, in conjunction with the Assistant Dean (Teaching and Learning) of the Faculty, will provide for the consideration of the Pro Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty: (a) draft Terms of Reference, based on a set of generic Terms of Reference approved by the Academic Senate to which additional items may be added; and (b) the names of at least ten possible Review Team members.
1-2 months Check Dates: Principal Dates	8. The Pro Vice-Chancellor of the Faculty in consultation with the Heads of Schools considers the draft Terms of Reference and the membership of the Review Team.
	9. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the President of the Academic Senate and members of the Faculty are requested to comment on the draft Terms of Reference, and the proposed Review Team membership.
April/May/June 1-2 months May-CTLPC meeting June- AcS meeting Check Dates: Principal Dates	10. After considering comments provided by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, President of Academic Senate and members of the Faculty the Pro Vice-Chancellor determines the membership of the Review Team.
	11. After considering comments provided by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the President of Academic Senate, members of the Faculty and the Review Team, the Terms of Reference are finalised and approved by the Pro Vice-Chancellor.
	12. Notice of the Review, including the membership of the Review Team and the Terms of Reference, is forwarded to the Academic Senate for noting.
July/August Check Dates: Principal Dates	13. The Review Team will visit the University, and conduct interviews with the Program Convenor, students, members of staff involved in teaching in the Program and any other person or people relevant to the Review Team's deliberations.
	14.The Chair of the Review Team, in consultation with the members of the Team, will provide the Pro Vice-Chancellor with a Report reflecting its examination of the documentation provided prior to the Review, and any further information obtained during its visit to the University; and
	15. The Pro Vice-Chancellor will request the Program Convenor in conjunction with the Assistant Dean (Teaching and Learning) to provide responses to the Report and the Recommendations and an Action Sheet outlining: (a) their support or otherwise for each of the recommendations; (b) the actions to be undertaken; (c) who is responsible for the action; and (d) a timeline for implementation. The Heads of Schools who have a major role in the Program will need to be consulted in preparing this documentation.
Sept -Faculty Board Oct -CTLPC Nov -AcS Check Dates: Principal Dates	16. The Review Report, response and action sheet are forwarded by the Pro Vice-Chancellor to: (a) the Review Team; (b) the Faculty Board; and (c) the Academic Senate through the Academic Quality Assurance Committee. who will consider the material at their respective meetings.
Dec/Jan Check Dates: Principal Dates	17. After considering feedback from the above bodies, together with the responses and action sheet, a list of actions to be undertaken as a result of the Review is prepared by the Pro Vice-Chancellor and reported to the Academic Senate.
Jan/Feb Check Dates: Principal Dates	18. The Program Convenor is responsible for implementation of the actions arising from the Program Review, in accordance with the timeline indicated in the approved action sheet in consultation with the Heads of School involved in the Program.
Jan/Feb Check Dates: Principal Dates	19. The Program Convenor and the Assistant Dean (Teaching and Learning) must report annually to the Faculty Board on the implementation of the approved actions no later than the June/July meeting of the Faculty Board. The report should occur as part of the standard annual report on the Program's performance.
No later than June/July of the following year. Check Dates: Principal Dates	20. When all actions have been completed, the Faculty Board and the Academic Senate will be informed.
Check Dates: Principal Dates	21. The outcomes of the Review and the actions resulting from the recommendations will inform the next Program Review.	Review of programs informs Course Development If outcomes include revision of program, see approved documentation.