1.1 This procedure supports the Course Policy by stating requirements for monitoring, review and improvement (MRI) of courses.   
1.2 This procedure should be read alongside the Course Policy and has the same scope as that policy. 
1.3 The purposes of this procedure are to ensure that: 
a.  course quality is assured throughout the course lifecycle; and
b.  the University gathers evidence of course quality, viability, fitness for purpose, and strategic alignment, to inform decisions on how a course should be improved, whether to continue to offer it, and to identify courses as high performing.

1.4 Course quality activities and data reviewed will be consistent with: 
a.  the relevant standards in the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021; and 
b.  the University’s UC Quality and Standards Framework. 

2. Suspension of new admissions and closure of courses 

2.1 If a faculty decides to suspend new admissions to a course, then it will follow the Course Procedure: Suspension to New Admissions. 

2.2 When new admissions to a course are suspended, the faculty will: 
a.  continue to provide interim monitoring reports on the course; and 
b.  ensure it remains accredited. 

2.3 If a faculty decides that a course will be closed on the basis of: 
a.  an interim monitoring report,
b.  review activities to develop the reaccreditation case,
c.  the reaccreditation case itself, or 
d.  course viability or demand,
then the faculty will follow the Course Procedure: Closure of a course.

2.4 Where a course will be closed the faculty will ensure that: 
a. course components unique to the course are also closed, subject to teach out obligations, and
b. the course remains accredited during any teach out by: 

• undertaking and recording regular interim monitoring activities, and 
• providing interim monitoring reports to faculty board, Curriculum Committee, and Academic Board.  

3.  Monitoring, review and improvement planning

3.1 Each Faculty will maintain a monitoring, review and improvement plan (MRI) for each of the award courses it offers.  
3.2 The MRI plan will include reporting dates for the Interim Monitoring Course Reports, the Reaccreditation Case, and (if the course is offered through a partner) Annual Partner Reviews. 
3.3 The faculty will: 
a.  gather and keep evidence of the monitoring, review and improvement activities undertaken for each course, and review the impact and success of improvement activities, and
b.  identify any risks to course quality and maintain a risk register to monitor the management of those risks.
3.4 For monitoring, review and improvement a faculty should focus on course components that students are required or recommended to complete as part of the course of study.  
 

4. Unit quality  

4.1 The faculty that offers a unit will assure unit quality by monitoring unit-level data.  
4.2 Units may be components of minors, Core Majors, Specialisation Majors, or Breadth Majors, and may be part of course requirements for a course managed by another faculty.  Accordingly, the faculty that offers a unit will consider changes to units in the context of all courses for which the unit is required, and will consult the stakeholders before making the changes.  

 Unit outline

4.3 Before each teaching period: 
a.  the Unit Convener will develop the unit outline for the unit, and 
b.  the Faculty will review and approve the unit outline  
in accordance with the Unit Outline Procedure.
  
Moderation and feedback

4.4 The unit convener will develop and document the unit’s moderation process in accordance with the Assessment Policy and Assessment Procedures. 

4.5 The unit convener and teaching team will follow the moderation process for each assessment item in a teaching period.  

UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site

4.6 The unit convener will develop the UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site in accordance with the UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site publishing procedures. 
4.7 The Faculty will review and approve the UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site for publishing to students in accordance with the UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site publishing procedures.  

InterFace and the InterFace Student Experience Questionnaire

4.8 The unit convener will review InterFace students’ risk profiles and other demographic information and, as needed by students, adjust their teaching strategies to support student learning and student progress.  
4.9 During each teaching period the unit convener and program director (or equivalent) will: 
a.  review and respond to student feedback in the InterFace Student Experience Questionnaire, and  
b.  ensure information about changes to the unit made in response to student feedback is included in the unit outline for subsequent offerings of the unit. 

Assessment and grading
4.10 At the end of each teaching period the unit convener and the program director (or equivalent) will review grades, grade distribution, and student performance in the unit.  
4.11 The unit convener will submit a unit review report to GradeLink at the end of the teaching period.  
4.12 The Faculty Assessment Board will: 
a.  review each unit’s grades and grade distribution and raise any issues with the unit convener and/or program director (or equivalent);  
b.  review and approve the release of grades to student, and 
c.  report to Faculty Board on grade distributions.  
4.13 The faculty executive will report annually to Faculty Board on student satisfaction with units. 
4.14 The faculty will report annually to Curriculum Committee and Academic Board on action taken in response to any grade distributions or student satisfaction issues in units.  
 

5. Interim Monitoring, Review and Improvement Course Reports 

5.1 The faculty will:  
a.  gather and keep evidence of the monitoring, review and improvement activities undertaken for each course, and review the impact and success of improvement activities; and
b.  set dates for interim monitoring course reporting when the course is approved by Academic Board, typically two years and four years after the start of the accreditation period. 

5.2 Faculty Boards will provide interim monitoring course reports to Curriculum Committee and Academic Board.  
5.3 Interim monitoring course reports will be part of the evidence to inform a courses reaccreditation case.  
 
Evidence

5.4 An Interim Monitoring Course Report will include evidence of monitoring, review and improvement of: 
a.  quality of teaching;
b.  supervision of students undertaking research projects;
c.  student progress;
d.  overall delivery of units within each course of study; 
e.  external referencing of the success of student cohorts against comparable courses of study including:  

• progression rates broken down by locations of delivery, and
• assessment methods and grading of students for selected units required for the course; 

f. student feedback from and rates of response to the InterFace Student Experience Questionnaire, the unit convener’s response to that feedback, and details of changes made to the unit and their effects;
g.  student feedback from the Student Experience Survey and the Graduate Outcomes Survey and the program director’s (or equivalent’s) response to that feedback, and details of changes made to the course and their effects;  
h.  course design as described in 3.1 of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021; 
i.  course viability and student demand for the course;
j.  meetings of and feedback from the Course Advisory Group; and
k.  professional accreditation or professional reaccreditation of the course. 
 
The University's strategic objectives

5.5 An Interim Monitoring Course Report will include analysis and commentary on the course’s contribution towards the University's strategic objectives including: 
a.  Indigenisation of the curriculum,
b.  experiential learning, and  
c.  graduate attributes. 
 

6. Reaccreditation case 

6.1 A faculty may choose to seek reaccreditation of related courses, such as a Bachelors and Masters in the same discipline, or a set of courses in the same program, at the same, but the Faculty will provide a separate reaccreditation case for each course. 
6.2 A Reaccreditation Case has three purposes: 
a.  to inform the decision whether to continue to offer the course by reviewing its strategic fit and financial viability (course health check); 
b.  to verify that the monitoring, review and improvement activities for the course meet the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021, and the UC Quality and Standards Framework, so that the course may be offered for a further 7-years, and 
c.  to provide evidence to inform decisions whether the course or a course component should be revised.  
6.3 Gathering evidence for the reaccreditation case is an incremental process collating unit quality activities, and interim monitoring, review and improvement activities, recorded in the monitoring, review and improvement plan. 
6.4 The faculty will prepare the reaccreditation case for a course using the Reaccreditation Case template and the Course Assurance Summary template.  
6.5 The reaccreditation case will be considered by Faculty Board, the Course Advisory Panel and Curriculum Committee before review and approval by Academic Board.  
6.6 Members of Faculty Board, the Course Advisory Panel, Curriculum Committee or Academic Board may request information about a course from a faculty or business unit in addition to that provided in the reaccreditation case.  

Part a – Strategic case and course health check

6.7 The faculty will provide:  
a.  a strategic case if seeking reaccreditation of the course, and 
b.  evidence of actions taken in response to data to improve student outcomes in response to:  

• enrolment and EFTSL data 
• admissions data 
• student performance reporting 
• grade distributions 
• student feedback received from the InterFace Student Experience Questionnaire, Student Experience Questionnaire or the Graduate Outcomes Survey 
• stakeholder feedback including that of the Course Advisory Group
• feedback from external professional accrediting bodies 
• review of the course or course components by Faculty Board, Curriculum Committee or Academic Board 
• information from activities undertaken to assure academic and research integrity, and information from quality assurance of work integrated learning and of courses offered through a partner. 

6.8 The faculty may provide the Interim Monitoring Course Reports and/or any other relevant evidence such as that from an external professional accrediting body to support the Reaccreditation Case.   

Part b - Quality assurance evidence 

6.9 A Reaccreditation Case will include evidence and records of monitoring, review and improvement activities to satisfy the relevant standards of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021, in particular: 
a.  Orientation and progression (1.3) 
b.  Learning outcomes and assessment (1.4) 
c.  Learning environment (2)(all subsections) 
d.  Teaching (3)(all subsections), and 
e.  Deliveries with other parties (5.4). 
 
Part c: The University's strategic objectives, professional accreditation and partnered offerings

6.10 A Reaccreditation Case for a course will include analysis of and commentary on the course’s contribution towards the University's strategic objectives including: 
a.  Indigenisation of the curriculum  
b.  experiential learning  
c.  graduate attributes.

6.11 Where a course is professionally accredited, a Reaccreditation Case: 
a.  will include evidence that the course, including any proposed revision to the course, will continue to be accredited by the relevant professional body, and  
b.  may use evidence provided for the most recent external professional accreditation reaccreditation submission. 
6.12 Where a course is offered with a partner the Reaccreditation Case will provide access to the Annual Partner Review reports. 
 
Part d: Reaccreditation for another seven-years

6.13 The faculty will provide the Reaccreditation Case, and Course Assurance Summary and evidence to the Course Advisory Panel for review.  
6.14 The Course Advisory Panel may recommend that the reaccreditation case will be considered by Curriculum Committee, for endorsement to proceed to Academic Board for approval.  
6.15 Academic Board approval triggers a new accreditation start date and the next seven-year period of the course’s accreditation, and its next monitoring, review and improvement cycle.  
 

7. Reporting 

7.1 Within two years from the start date for a course’s accreditation or reaccreditation period, the faculty will provide an Interim Monitoring Course Report to Curriculum Committee and Academic Board.  
7.2 A faculty will provide Annual Partner Review reports to Curriculum Committee and Academic Board for award courses that are delivered with or through a partner. Annual Partner Review reports will be included in the course’s Monitoring, Review and Improvement plan. 
7.3 The Reaccreditation Case will be submitted to Academic Board in the calendar year before the accreditation expiry date. 
7.4 Expected Reaccreditation Case submission dates will be added to the workplans of the appropriate governance committees.  
7.5 Faculties may provide reports on all courses in a program, or courses that are related, together.  
7.6 If Academic Board has concerns about the quality of a course it may request additional monitoring and reporting, or earlier review or reaccreditation dates.   

Typical reporting schedules
 
Where the accreditation/reaccreditation period starts at the beginning of a calendar year: 

• Approved for seven years accreditation: AB meeting #/0010  
• First intake: Semester 1, 0011  
• Accredited for seven years: 1 January 0011 to 31 December 0017  
• Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0013  
• Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0015  
• Reaccreditation Case: AB meeting #/17  

Where the accreditation/reaccreditation period starts at the middle of a calendar year: 

• Approved for seven years accreditation: AB meeting #/0010 
• First intake: Semester 2, 0011 
• Accredited for seven years: 1 July 0011 to 30 June 0018 

• Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0013  
• Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0015  
• Reaccreditation case: AB meeting #/18 Supporting information 
   

8. Commonwealth and Territory governing framework and legislation

Australian Qualifications Framework, current edition 
Disability Standards for Education 2005 
Education Services for Overseas Student (ESOS) Act 
Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 
Higher Education Support Act 2003 
National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students 2018 
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 
University of Canberra Act 1989 (ACT)  
 

9. University statutes and rules

 
University Admission Statute 1995   
UC Admission Rules 2017   
University of Canberra (Courses and Awards) Statute 2010   
University of Canberra Courses and Awards (Courses of Study) Rules 2013  
 

10. University policy and procedures

 
Course Policy
Course Advisory Groups Policy 
Course Advisory Groups Procedure 
Graduate Attributes Policy 
Indigenisation of the Curriculum Framework 
Unit Outline Procedure 
UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site publishing procedures 
UC Quality and Standards Framework 
 

Terms	Definitions
Breadth major	A major that a student may choose to take, from outside the primary discipline of a course, but is not required to complete, to fulfil the course requirements.
Core major	A major in a all courses in a program that a student must complete to meet the course requirements for the award.
GradeLink	An application that enables review, approval, and transfer of marks and grades from the Canvas gradebook to Callista.
Interim monitoring	Regular interim monitoring is a term used in the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (see 5.3). It describes a range of activities a university is expected to undertake to inform and support comprehensive review of a course. The requirements for interim monitoring, for the purposes of this procedure, incorporates UC-specific activities and data.
Experiential learning	Learning activities that simulate or include work experience or professional practice.
ISEQ	ISEQ is the acronym for InterFace Student Experience Questionnaire. It is three sets of statements in S1 and S2 and two sets of statements in Winter Term, seeking feedback from students on their unit experience.
Course Assurance Pack	The Course Assurance Summary assembles administrative data and educational information about a course for entry into course-related systems and to inform governance committees overseeing course quality.
Course component	A single unit, a major or a minor.
InterFace	InterFace is a web dashboard for unit conveners and students. For unit conveners it displays student demographic and engagement information. For students it provides information about their progress in their units and towards completion of their course.
InterFace Student Experience Questionnaire (ISEQ)	The University’s mechanism for feedback from students on their unit experience.
Major	An approved set of sequential or related units totalling 18 to 24 credit points.
Minor	An approved set of units totaling 12 credit points.
Specialisation major	An approved set of sequential or related units typically 24 credit points or more that must be completed for a student to meet course requirements.
UCLearn(Canvas)	The university’s virtual learning environment.