View Current

Curriculum Design and Approvals Procedures - Curriculum Quality

This is the current version of this document. You can provide feedback on this policy to the document author - refer to the Status and Details on the document's navigation bar.

Section 1 - Purpose and Context

(1) These procedures outline the processes involved to

  1. routinely monitor and analyse program and student performance and
  2. undertake comprehensive cyclical renewal of curriculum and academic program delivery at Western Sydney University (University).

(2) These Procedures apply to all academic programs and subjects offered by, or on behalf of, the University in all domestic and offshore locations. It considers academic program quality as experienced by cohorts of students. These procedures support Schools in curriculum quality and should be read in conjunction with the Curriculum Design and Approvals Policy.

(3) This Procedure does not apply to Higher Degrees by Research Award programs.

Top of Page

Section 2 - DEFINITIONS

(4) For the purposes of these procedures, the definitions that apply can be found in the Curriculum Design and Approvals Policy and the Policy DDS Glossary.

Top of Page

Section 3 - POLICY

(5) Refer to the Curriculum Design and Approvals Policy.

Top of Page

Section 4 - PROCEDURES

Part A - Curriculum Quality Summary

(6) The Academic Program Quality and Performance Lifecycle includes:

  1. Part 1: biennial academic program monitoring, and
  2. Part 2: 5-year curriculum renewal cycle.

(7) Biennial academic program monitoring and cyclical curriculum renewal are integral components of the University's requirement to meet the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (HESF) Domain 5.0: Institutional Quality Assurance, Section 5.3 Monitoring, Review and Improvement states that provider’s curriculum undergo regular monitoring, review and improvement and demonstrate how the findings of such reviews are used to bring about improvements.

(8) TEQSA requires a provider to conduct periodic, comprehensive reviews of all academic programs, supported by regular interim monitoring of the day-to-day delivery of academic programs, including regular reviews of subjects and student performance.

(9) Where one or more Schools contributes to the design and delivery of the program, the administering (Owner) School is responsible for the oversight of the quality and performance lifecycle.

(10) Curriculum quality support roles and responsibilities:

Roles Responsibilities
Pro Vice-Chancellor, Quality and Integrity • Owns the Academic Program Quality and Performance
Lifecycle
Curriculum Quality Manager • Facilitates the Lifecycle process
• Provides the central point of monitoring and data analysis
• Maintains the five-year curriculum review schedule
• Liaises and collaborates with Schools and relevant stakeholders in relation to all aspects of the Lifecycle
• Provides annual progress reports to APCAC
Curriculum Quality Team • Prepares customised resources, including review and report templates
• Provides advice to Schools, and project manages the monitoring and review processes
• Contributes to the analysis of performance data; aligning to University policies and strategies
• Reviews the curriculum renewal reports and provides constructive feedback and suggestions for changes and/or inclusions
Education Advisors Provide advice to Schools and other stakeholders on:
• Approaches to evidence-based evaluation of programs
• Embedding Partnership Pedagogy and Graduate Attributes
• Contemporary curriculum design and development
• Transformative and multimodal delivery of curriculum and assessment
• Constructive alignment including Graduate Attributes and Program Learning Outcomes
• Evidence based learning and teaching strategies
• Strategic curriculum initiatives

Part B - Biennial Academic Program Monitoring

(11) Process steps for the biennial academic program monitoring are provided in the Biennial Program Monitoring Flowchart.

(12) Schools will be provided with the nominated indicator data biennially, collected from various sources, to evaluate the performance of each academic program.

(13) A dedicated School Academic Committee (SAC) will be convened, of which all Directors of Academic Program (DAPs) are members, to discuss findings and agree on improvement initiatives. Any actions recorded will be monitored for progress through subsequent SACs.

(14) This collegial and consultative monitoring process will enable all staff associated with each academic program to participate in the critical analysis of its performance.

(15) Academic program data provides evidence of program performance, student performance and experience. This is derived from data sets, including (but not limited to):

Performance Indicator  Applies to
Load commencing and continuing
Progress commencing and continuing
Retention commencing and continuing
Student Feedback on Subjects overall satisfaction
Graduate Outcomes Survey overall satisfaction
Course Experience Questionnaire (SES) overall satisfaction

(16) Utilising all the data provided and obtained, results of the analysis will be presented at the dedicated SAC meeting. This should include comments on any significant observations or anomalous results and where required instigate further investigation.

(17) Actions will be added to the usual SAC meeting action sheet and followed up at consecutive SAC meetings until approved as completed by the Deputy Dean (or SAC Chair).

(18) Any actions resulting from the performance monitoring process should be achievable within a twelve-month period.

Part C - Cyclical Curriculum Renewal

(19) Process steps for the five (5) year curriculum renewal cycle are provided in the Cyclical Curriculum Renewal Flowchart.

(20) This renewal cycle ensures the fundamental, comprehensive renewal of curriculum and academic program delivery to bring about evidence based continuous improvement. This approach to the quality assurance of academic programs is informed in part by the biennial academic program monitoring process.

(21) At least once in every five (5) years, each academic program will undergo a curriculum review and renewal to ensure the program reflects:

  1. The University's strategic priorities
  2. The needs of graduates, industry and community
  3. Best practice in curriculum design
  4. External regulations and accreditation requirements.

(22) The DAP will organise academics and other stakeholders to perform a comprehensive quality review and gather evidence to support their findings, guided by resources provided by the Curriculum Quality Team.

(23) The key areas required for the curriculum renewal process include:

  1. External Advisory Committee
  2. Program performance over the preceding five (5) years
  3. Peer review and benchmarking
  4. Curriculum evaluation and feedback on program content, structure and learning outcomes
  5. Engagement in Partnership Pedagogy
  6. Professional accreditation and/or other requirements (as applicable)
  7. Challenges and opportunities, encompassing:
    1. Emerging Developments in the Field of Education/Discipline
    2. Changing Needs of Students and Modes of Delivery
    3. Identified Risks to the Quality of the Program
    4. Internal Conditions and Challenges
    5. Future Directions for the Program (in the next five (5) Years)
  8. Students input
  9. Third party providers or other educational partners
  10. Marketing intelligence.

(24) Following the completion of the curriculum renewal process any resulting program variation should be progressed through the standard academic governance approval workflow.

(25) Generally, programs will be evaluated and renewed as a single entity. It may be appropriate to group programs and/or locations for similar disciplines, or where there is a significant overlap of program outcomes and/or subjects, i.e., nested postgraduate programs.

(26) The Office of the Pro Vice-Chancellor, Quality and Integrity will maintain the program renewal schedule. Each year, the rolling schedule will be reported to SACs followed by APCAC. At this time Schools may:

  1. Propose changes to the schedule, which will require a rationale and are subject to APCAC approval
  2. Vary the schedule to revise programs in preparation for professional accreditation submissions as required
  3. Consider any prospective academic programs to be added to the schedule
  4. Identify academic programs for retirement or replacement
  5. The progress and outcomes of curriculum renewal will be monitored by the SAC and routinely reported to APCAC.
Top of Page

Section 5 - Guidelines

(27) Nil