Intent:

Christian Heritage College (CHC) is committed to providing students with a quality, transformational learning experience through their engagement with their studies which develops critical and independent thought and the capacity for life-long learning. As part of that commitment, CHC has developed a policy to outline the development and accreditation processes of courses.

Context:

Higher education institutions have a responsibility and accountability aspect to the society within which they operate. Those societies have particular expectations of institutions, not the least of which is to produce graduates who are able to contribute in meaningful ways to a global market. Students are expected to master a rapidly growing body of specialised knowledge, develop generic, transferable skills for a global workplace and benefit from the foundation of a general education. Within this landscape, CHC must be mindful of the need to respond to the market place, to commercial imperatives and to societal change, but also to discern what is merely fashionable and withstand the temptation to develop courses which simply bow to the latest fad. Curriculum decision-making, therefore, must be informed by academic standards and excellence and the objectives of CHC’s mission and strategic plan.

CHC is registered as a higher education provider under the Higher Education Support Act (Cth 2003) and is listed on the national register of higher education providers by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). The processes for registration and course accreditation are established by legislation.

This policy therefore responds to the relevant Commonwealth legislation, ensuring that CHC remains aware of legislative developments, and provides the framework for internal processes that align with and enhance these external processes and ensure that CHC is faithful to its vision, mission and values.

The emphasis of the processes for development of CHC courses is on providing evidence in relation to quality assurance mechanisms and strategic planning.

Scope:

Restricted to:    All CHC courses

Excludes:          Nil (See footnote associated with Policy Provision 2.10)

Objectives:

1.   To facilitate the outworking of CHC’s vision, mission, values and strategic goals.

2.   To specify the internal processes through which CHC approves the proposed offering of new courses and the continued offering of existing courses.

3.   To ensure these processes comply with legislation.

4.   To provide the framework such that the outcomes of the internal processes align with external requirements.

5.   To ensure these processes form a part of CHC quality assurance processes.

Policy Provisions:

1.   General

1.1        This policy sets out the processes for the development and renewal of courses and the subsequent initial accreditation, renewal of accreditation or changes to courses within an accreditation period as part of CHC’s Quality Assurance and Enhancement Framework.

1.2        These processes are based on the Approach-Deployment-Results-Improvement (ADRI) model of quality assurance and include:

1.2.1       the planning and development of new courses;

1.2.2       the internal approval of new courses for submission to TEQSA for initial accreditation;

1.2.3       the monitoring of existing courses to assess their ongoing performance and to initiate improvements;

1.2.4       the review of courses for specific purposes such as changes in curriculum, course structure and organisation, and subsequent changes to courses within an accreditation period; and

1.2.5       the review of existing courses for submission to TEQSA for renewal of accreditation.

1.3        These processes are designed to assure CHC’s stakeholders, including employers of CHC graduates and professional bodies, that its courses:

1.3.1       advance CHC’s mission and strategic goals;

1.3.2       are supported by resources which facilitate quality learning experiences and outcomes;

1.3.3       are likely to produce graduates who are equipped with knowledge and skills which will specifically contribute to the wider Christian community and society in general and which promote life-long learning; and

1.3.4       are planned with advice from internal and external experts, are consistent with CHC policy, draw on the curriculum resources already available within CHC where applicable, take account of current best practice and are aligned to the needs of industry and professions.

1.4        Any proposals to vary these procedures must be considered by the President and Academic Board.

1.5        The task of developing new courses and renewing existing courses is a major academic undertaking and should be viewed as a project which requires planning and management to achieve a successful outcome.

1.6        The Dean of each School is responsible for course development and renewal projects within that School and has a quality assurance oversight role.

1.7        The Dean may appoint a School-based project leader, who may be the existing or proposed Course Coordinator for the course(s) or another member of the School’s academic staff.

1.9        The project leader will liaise with the Academic Registrar who will act as the case manager to provide support and guidance to the project leader.

1.10     The preparation of the final documentation, and the submission of the application via the TEQSA portal, is the responsibility of the Registry Office.

2.   Course Design Principles

2.1.      Course design must meet Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) requirements for the relevant AQF level, including:

2.1.1.     qualification type descriptor and specification;

2.1.2.     volume of learning; and

2.1.3.     AQF policies.

2.2.      Course design must demonstrate alignment with course learning outcomes, unit learning outcomes and assessment tasks.

2.3.      The standard annual workload for award courses is eight standard units or 1200 hours.

2.4.      A standard semester workload, except Semester 3, is four standard units or 600 hours.

2.5.      A standard unit workload is 10 credit points or 150 hours. Each credit point represents an expected student involvement of one hour per week for one semester (16 weeks) in both formal contact hours and individual study and/or sitting of examinations.

2.6.      The minimum units required and the minimum full time equivalent duration for undergraduate awards are as follows:

1.

2.

2.1.

2.2.

2.3.

2.4.

2.5.

2.6.

2.7.

2.8.

2.9.      The minimum units required and the minimum full time equivalent duration for postgraduate coursework awards are as follows:

2.10.   Courses at CHC that comprise more than 40 credit points must include a minimum number of core Christian Studies (CS-coded) units as follows [1]:

2.12.   Combined Courses are specifically designed and accredited courses which lead to a single named award and the issuing of a single testamur.

2.13.   Dual Degrees are those in which the requirements of two courses are integrated and completed concurrently and which, upon completion, lead to two named awards and the issuing of two testamurs.

3.   Course Code

3.1.      The course code of an award course is a unique four-character alpha-numeric code.

3.2.      Course codes must have the approval of the Academic Registrar.

3.3.      The guiding principles for allocating course codes are as follows:

3.3.1.     The first two characters are the alpha characters that indicate the field of education in which the course is offered –

3.3.1.1.     Business – BS;

3.3.1.2.     Education and Humanities – ED;

3.3.1.3.     Ministries – MS;

3.3.1.4.     Millis Institute – MI;

3.3.1.5.     Social Sciences – SS.

3.3.2.     In the case of accredited Combined Courses, the alpha code is ‘CC’;

3.3.3.     In the case of non-award miscellaneous courses, the alpha code is the field of education, as above;

3.3.4.     In the case of non-award cross-institutional courses, the alpha code is ‘XX’ and the courses are sequentially numbered from ‘01’.

3.4.      The last two characters of course codes are numeric and generally use:

00 – 09     =     Sub-Bachelors award;

10           =     Undergraduate Non-award course;

11 – 29     =     Bachelors degree;

30 – 39     and

41 – 49     =     Graduate Certificate/Graduate Diploma;

40           =     Postgraduate Non-award course;

50 – 59     and

60 – 69     =     Masters;

70 – 79     =     Doctorate;

80 – 89     =     Higher Doctorate.

4.   Planning Cycle – Initial Accreditation of Courses

4.1.      A course[2] that is to be developed for initial accreditation is to be the subject of a formal Proposal for Initial Accreditation that is to be prepared at least three years prior to the first proposed offering of the course and will outline the following:

4.1.1.     the contribution of the course to the goals of the CHC Strategic Plan;

4.1.2.     an analysis of market demand for the course, including intended graduate destinations;

4.1.3.     benchmarking against comparable courses at other Australian higher education providers, including rationale, outcomes, structure, content and entry requirements;

4.1.5.     marketing strategy;

4.1.6.     staffing requirements, including continuing and new, and academic and support; and

4.1.7.     facilities and resources required, including specialist teaching facilities, Library and electronic resources.

4.2.      The Proposal is to be tabled at a meeting of Executive[3] by the Dean of the relevant School[4] for consideration of the strategic importance of the course and the financial and resource investment required. Executive may approve, reject, or require changes to the Proposal, and may require that it be tabled again at a subsequent meeting of Executive or may endorse it, with or without amendments, for tabling at Academic Board.

4.3.      In the event that a Proposal is endorsed by Executive, the Dean of the relevant School will table the proposal, with or without amendments, at a meeting of Academic Board for consideration of the academic importance of the course. Academic Board may approve, reject, or require changes to the Proposal, and may require that it be tabled again at a subsequent meeting of Academic Board or may endorse it, with or without amendments, for proceeding to course development and the internal course approval process (see Policy Provision 8).

4.4.      Upon approval from Academic Board, the timeline for course development and initial accreditation will become effective (see Supporting Procedures and Guidelines).

4.5.      For a Proposal to proceed to course development and the internal course approval process, it must receive approval from Executive and Academic Board.

4.6.      Should a Proposal not be successful, the relevant School may resubmit the proposal with any such alterations which may satisfy the requirements of either Executive or Academic Board. The School must ensure the timeline can still be met and, if necessary, to demonstrate how this can be achieved.

5.   Planning Cycle – Renewal of Accreditation of Courses

5.1.      Existing courses are reviewed with regard to renewal of accreditation according to the period of accreditation as granted by TEQSA.

5.2.      Two years prior to the expiry of the accreditation period of an existing course, the relevant School will undertake an assessment of the course to determine if it is to be recommended for renewal of accreditation. This assessment is to be based upon a review of the course performance data and student satisfaction data as contained in the School’s Annual Reports for the accreditation period, and any sector or industry changes (as applicable).

5.3.      The outcome of this assessment is to be the basis of a formal Proposal for Renewal of Accreditation that proposes whether:

5.3.1.     the course is to be recommended for renewal of accreditation; or

5.3.2.     the course is not to be recommended for renewal of accreditation.

5.4.      Where the course is to be recommended for renewal of accreditation, the Proposal will include:

5.4.1.     the contribution of the course to the goals of the CHC Strategic Plan;

5.4.2.     changes to the market demand for the course, including intended graduate destinations;

5.4.3.     benchmarking against comparable courses at other Australian higher education providers, including rationale, outcomes, structure, content and entry requirements;

5.4.4.     a description of any changes to course rationale, outcomes, structure, content and entry requirements proceeding from the benchmarking activity;

5.4.6.     enrolment history, and enrolment and fee projections to demonstrate continued financial viability;

5.4.7.     marketing strategy;

5.4.8.     changes to staffing requirements, including continuing and new, and academic and support; and

5.4.9.     changes to facilities and resources required, including specialist teaching facilities, Library and electronic resources.

5.5.      Where the course is not to be recommended for renewal of accreditation, the Proposal will include:

5.5.1.     transition arrangements for students who are enrolled in the course to allow their transfer to an equivalent course (equivalent courses are to have the same or similar outcomes and provide the same professional outcomes and registration, as applicable); and

5.5.2.     teach-out or grandfathering arrangements for students who are enrolled in the course, where there is no available or proposed equivalent course, to allow their completion of the course (teach-out or grandfathering arrangements may be subject to a restricted timeframe, limited unit offerings and pathways and students maintaining satisfactory academic progress in all units).

5.6.      The Proposal is to be tabled at a meeting of Executive by the Dean of the relevant School for consideration of the strategic importance of the course and the financial and resource investment required. Executive may approve, reject, or require changes to the Proposal, and may require that it be tabled again at a subsequent meeting of Executive or may endorse it, with or without amendments, for tabling at Academic Board.

5.7.      In the event that a Proposal is endorsed by Executive, the Dean of the relevant School will table the proposal, with or without amendments, at a meeting of Academic Board for consideration of the academic importance of the course. Academic Board may approve, reject, or require changes to the Proposal, and may require that it be tabled again at a subsequent meeting of Academic Board or may endorse it, with or without amendments, for proceeding to course development and the internal course approval process (see Policy Provision 8).

5.8.      Upon approval from Academic Board, the timeline for course development and renewal of accreditation will become effective (see Supporting Procedures and Guidelines).

5.9.      For a Proposal to proceed to course development and the internal course approval process, it must receive approval from Executive and Academic Board.

5.10.   Should a Proposal not be successful, the relevant School may resubmit the proposal with any such alterations which may satisfy the requirements of either Executive or Academic Board. The School must ensure the timeline can still be met and, if necessary, to demonstrate how this can be achieved.

5.11.   Christian Studies units will be reviewed as a suite on a five-yearly cycle, and as appropriate within the development and/or review of courses for the purpose of accreditation.

6.   Principles of Initial Accreditation and Renewal of Accreditation of Courses

6.1.      The initial accreditation of a course or the renewal of accreditation of an existing course is a major process and should be approached and managed as a project.

6.2.      The relevant Dean is responsible, in consultation with the School-based project leader (where applicable), for developing a project structure and methodology that:

6.2.2.     provides for input from students and graduates, where relevant;

6.2.3.     provides for input from external stakeholders;

6.2.4.     addresses external accreditation requirements, including those of relevant professional and/or registration bodies;

6.2.5.     provides for key support service and administrative areas to facilitate the project;

6.2.6.     ensures that CHC strategic priorities are given due consideration in areas such as work integrated learning, research-based learning, graduate attributes and the first year experience;

6.2.7.     ensures that resource implications are addressed in parallel with academic developments;

6.2.8.     provides for the review of the course by an independent external reviewer; and

6.2.9.     includes a project timetable that

i)        indicates specified milestones and deliverables,

ii)       includes an itemised list of documents required for the approval process, including policies and/or formal agreements, and

iii)     outlines the arrangements for implementing the course, or changes to the course, such as transition arrangements, unit equivalencies and acquisition of resources, which ensure that the course can be implemented according to the project timetable (see Supporting Procedures and Guidelines).

6.3.      The Course Accreditation Management Tool is to be used with regard to the development of all applications for accreditation and renewal of accreditation. The Tool makes explicit the allocation of responsibilities with regard to the various elements of applications and includes provision for indicating due dates and completion dates for actions in relation to the project timetable (see Supporting Procedures and Guidelines).

6.4.      The main committees for providing advice to the School regarding course development and review are:

6.4.1.     the School Advisory Committee (SAC), a standing committee of the School Board of Studies; and

6.4.2.     the Course Development Committee (CDC).

The role of the SAC and CDC is to provide external input into the development of the course, either for accreditation and renewal of accreditation. This external input is to be used to ensure that the course reflects best practice in the particular discipline and takes account of external requirements regarding any industry and/or professional bodies and contexts.

2.5

3.5

4.5

5.5

6.5        The role of the School Advisory Committee is to:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

6.1.

6.2.

6.3.

6.4.

6.5.

6.5.1.     provide expert advice to Schools on curriculum design and delivery;

6.5.2.     monitor courses with respect to their stated outcomes;

6.5.3.     monitor course performance, including student and staff feedback on the student learning experience; ensure that courses fulfil professional norms and registration requirements;

6.5.4.     ensure that approaches to academic standards and assessment requirements are rigorous; ensure that changes in social contexts and knowledge in the field are taken into account;

6.5.5.     provide external advice concerning trends and developments and professional and fields of study; and

6.5.6.     make recommendations for refining, augmenting and updating the nature, scope and operations of the relevant School and its courses.

6.6.1.     provide expert advice to Schools on changes in social and knowledge in the applicable field and ensure that any changes and/or developments are taken into account in course review and development

6.6.2.     provide expert advice concerning trends and developments in the profession and fields of study as they relate to course development and renewal; provide advice on professional norms, and where applicable, registration requirements; provide advice on course design, including course structure, content and rules;

6.6.3.     provide advice on course delivery, including pedagogies and modes;

6.6.4.     provide advice on integration of Christian worldview in the curriculum;

6.6.5.     provide advice on good practice in learning and teaching and ensure that these are rigorous;

6.6.6.     provide advice on the inclusion of specific majors, minors and units and assessment tasks within individual units;

6.6.7.     review quality performance indicators as they relate to course development and renewal; and

6.6.8.     review course performance, including student and staff feedback on the student learning experience, as it relates to course development and renewal.

6.7.      The relevant School Board of Studies will convene a Course Development Committee each time a course is developed or an existing course is reviewed.

7.   Principles for Changes to Courses within an Accreditation Period

7.1.      Schools may propose changes to a course within a period of accreditation. This may be in response to changes in market demands and trends, professional bodies and/or registration requirements, advice from stakeholders such as the SAC or students, or through the annual review process.

7.2.      When changes of this nature are considered, a proposal for the change must be brought to the Learning and Teaching Committee which will determine if the change is of a nature which requires that a Material Change Notification be sent to TEQSA and/or the appropriate professional registration body, and make a recommendation to Academic Board whether the change should be approved or held until the next scheduled review process.

7.3.      Where the Academic Board approves changes within a period of accreditation, the approval processes outlined in Provision 8 will be followed.

8.   Internal Course Approval Process

8.1.      When a course has been developed or reviewed, the relevant School Board of Studies will recommend the course to the Learning and Teaching Committee for approval.

8.2.      The course will be presented in the required template and will include all appendices as appropriate.

8.3.      The Learning and Teaching Committee will undertake a rigorous review process which examines all aspects of the course, including detailed unit outlines, and will either:

8.3.1.     approve the application;

8.3.2.     request amendments to the application; or

8.3.3.     not approve the application.

8.4.      In the case of 8.3.2, all required amendments must be met by the School within the timeframe set by the Learning and Teaching Committee, and the application re-presented for the Committee to determine if the required amendments have been made to the satisfaction of the Committee.

8.6.      Following receipt of the report from the external reviewer, the School is to consider and implement the amendments proposed by the external reviewer, and to re-present the application to the Learning and Teaching Committee with an accompanying report detailing its responses to the report of the external reviewer. The Learning and Teaching Committee will consider the application and accompanying reports with regard to recommending the application to Academic Board for approval.

8.7.      Upon the approval of an application, the Secretary of the Learning and Teaching Committee will request of the Secretary of Academic Board that an item be placed on the Academic Board agenda. The Chair of the Learning and Teaching Committee will present a report to Academic Board outlining the process of course development, and bring a recommendation containing the motion from the Learning and Teaching Committee to approve the course.

8.8.      Academic Board will consider the report of the Learning and Teaching Committee, the report of the external reviewer, and the application in making a decision regarding whether or not to approve the application for submission to TEQSA for the external approval process.

8.9.      Upon approval from Academic Board, CHC Council will be informed of the progress of the course to the external approval process.

8.10.   Upon approval from Academic Board, the final documentation for the course will be prepared by the Registry Office for lodgement with TEQSA for the external approval process.

8.11.   Any course that is not approved may be resubmitted at a later date. If there is a deadline for the lodgement of a submission with TEQSA, Academic Board may inform the School when the course can be re-presented and a proposed timeline for the offering of the course.

9.   External Review Process

9.1.      A course that is developed for accreditation or renewal of accreditation will be subject to an independent review by a discipline expert.

9.2.      The external reviewer is to be provided with the penultimate version of the application for accreditation or renewal of accreditation, following consideration of the application by the Learning and Teaching Committee (see Policy Provisions 8.1-8.5).

9.3.      The external reviewer is to assess the course against the core scope of assessment and minimum evidence requirements, as indicated in the Application Guide for Registered Higher Education Providers (Version 3.5).

9.4.      The external reviewer will have up to 20 working days in which to assess the course and provide a report that indicates whether the course meets the minimum evidence requirements and/or provides advice as to elements of the application that may need improvement.

9.5.      The report of the external reviewer will be provided to the School for its action and response, which may include reference to the Course Development Committee, and will be tabled at the Learning and Teaching Committee to guide its consideration of the application for recommendation to Academic Board (see Policy Provision 8.6).

9.6.      The report of the external reviewer will be included in the application as it is tabled at Academic Board in its consideration regarding approval of the application for submission to TEQSA for the external approval process.

10.1.   Courses for initial accreditation must be lodged with TEQSA no less than 18 months prior to the commencement of the year in which the course is to be introduced. Exceptions may be applied for with reasons given for the shorted lodgement time, such as the lesser time required for marketing the course to the identified applicant pool.

10.2.   Courses for renewal of accreditation must be lodged with TEQSA no less than 9 months prior to the expiration of the current period of accreditation.

10.3.   Upon the approval of a course by TEQSA, Academic Board will inform CHC Council.

10.4.   Upon approval of a course by TEQSA, the School will provide the Registry Office with:

10.4.1.   information on entry requirements and notional cut-off ranks for QTAC publications;

10.4.2.   statements for the CHC Course Guide, course pages, Student Handbooks and other publications as required.

10.5.   The Registry Office will prepare documents, as applicable, for:

10.5.1.   CHC publications;

10.5.2.   QTAC (as applicable);

10.5.3.   Course Assurance Arrangements with partner institutions;

10.5.4.   Centrelink approval;

10.5.5.   Commonwealth HELP approval; and

10.5.6.   CRICOS approval.

10.6.   The relevant School will prepare documents, in parallel with TEQSA processes, for any professional bodies or registering bodies as appropriate.

11.    Marketing of Courses

11.1.   Courses for initial accreditation may not be marketed prior to final approval by TEQSA.

11.2.   Courses for renewal of accreditation may be marketed while an application is being assessed by TEQSA.

11.3.   The relevant School will liaise with the Marketing Coordinator to achieve the required enrolment targets and implement the marketing strategies outlined in the Proposal for Initial Accreditation or Proposal for Renewal of Accreditation, as applicable.