Program Reviews

The review process is an integral part of the University's Quality Assurance process. All coursework programs offered by the University are subject to review as part of a five year cycle. Oversight of these reviews is the responsibility of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice President (Academic).

Reviews are designed to provide program teams, schools and faculties with:

  • Opportunity for formative self-evaluation and constructive dialogue with key stakeholders including students, employers, alumni and the wider community;
  • 聽Independent feedback, advice and recommendations in response to self-evaluation and planning, within a benchmarked context and with reference to national and international exemplars, standards and quality assurance frameworks, and relevant institutional data;
  • An evidence-base for strategic and outcomes-focused identification of future prospects and enhancement priorities;
  • Transparent implementation plans for strategic and enhancement initiatives.

resources for reviews

  • Aim

    The broad aims for Academic Programs reviews are to:

    • evaluate the quality of the curriculum and its delivery in undergraduate and postgraduate coursework programs in relation to the expectations set out in relevant University strategies and the University鈥檚 Graduate Attributes, national and international trends in the discipline(s) and, where relevant, accreditation by professional statutory and regulatory bodies;
    • evaluate the quality of program governance, management and enhancement processes, including approaches to working with students as partners and to external engagement;
    • assess the program鈥檚 progress since the previous review, with reference to the outcomes of the implementation plan in response to the recommendations of that review;
    • identify and give recognition to best practice and successful outcomes;
    • identify opportunities and priorities for development and enhancement, including for curriculum renewal and enhancement of delivery, and with a focus on student recruitment, experience, engagement, satisfaction, retention, academic performance, graduate destinations and employer satisfaction;
    • identify areas where resources and support might be needed to enable enhancement priorities to be addressed;
    • ensure that a high standard of academic program awards is maintained.

  • Process

    A five-year Academic Program Review Schedule is developed by Education Quality in consultation with Executive Deans, and approved by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice President (Academic) (DVCA&VP(A)). The schedule is updated on an annual basis. The updated schedule for a given calendar year is reported to University Education Committee at the end of the preceding calendar year.

    To avoid unnecessary duplication, cognate programs are often grouped for the purpose of review, and the schedule is developed with due consideration to the timing of external accreditation processes for programs with professional accreditation requirements.

    The Academic Program Reviews Process map provides a high level overview of the complete process.

    Details of the current Academic Program Reviews scheduled.

  • Terms of reference

    The use of聽standard Terms of Reference is recommended.

  • Review panel

    Reviews involve a 5-member panel聽which is established with the aim of facilitating independent peer review, and must include an external reviewer. The panel would typically comprise:

    Member Selection
    Senior Academic (Convenor) - internal聽staff member Professor - independent to the School/Discipline area of the program(s) under review
    Academic -聽external听补辫辫辞颈苍迟别别 Professor - from the same or similar area to the program(s) under review
    Education Specialist 亚洲色吧 Education Academy member -聽 independent to the School/Discipline area of the program(s) under review
    Two students聽 Ordinarily an UG or PGCW student in the program under review

    In specified circumstances, approval may be given by the Pro Vice-Chancellor Student Learning for a modified program review process, called a Consolidated Review. In this case, an independent reviewer is appointed in place of the Panel. The Fact Sheet: Consolidated Program Review (pdf) provides an overview of the modified process.

    International聽reviewers can only be included if travel and accommodation costs are met by the Faculty. Executive Deans will nominate prospective reviewers for consideration and approval by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Learning).

    In 2024 a modified consolidated review process will be used for Reviews. See Education Quality for further information

  • Review preparation

    Standard reviews of programs focus on the quality of the curriculum and its delivery, its governance and progress since the last review, best practice, and opportunities for development and enhancement with a focus on student participation, and are guided by the Terms of Reference.

    An internal team appointed by the Executive Dean after consultation with the academic unit, undertakes a self-evaluation process commencing no less than seven months prior to the Review Panel convening. The outcome of the process is the preparation of a Self Evaluation Report (SER) for submission* to the Review Panel.

    Invitations to provide submissions to the Review Panel are made to internal and external stakeholders. The faculty, in consultation with Education Quality, develops a list of relevant stakeholders inclusive of students and representatives from both industry and professional groups. Education Quality engages stakeholders for invitation of written submissions, and may also invite some of the stakeholders to an interview with the Review Panel.

    *Where a 5-member panel is formed, the SER is submitted 6 weeks prior to the panel convening. Where an external appointee only conducts the review, the SER submission deadline is provided by Education Quality.聽聽

  • Reporting