Learning and Teaching Committee

Subject: Handbook for Validated Provision

Origin: Validation Working Party

The approval of Learning and Teaching Committee is sought for the issue of a ‘Handbook for Validated Provision’ to our partner institutions.

This has been commissioned by the Validation Working Party to bring together relevant operating procedures, codes of practice, notes of guidance and relevant forms and templates in a single reference document. A copy of the contents page is reproduced below.

The validation procedure incorporated as Section 2.1 includes minor amendments from the current version published in the AQPH and it is recommended it replace the current version. The revised version is attached (amendments and additions highlighted).

The handbook is being provided to partner institutions on a floppy disk, so that it can be downloaded on to a shared drive or intranet system and individual copies can be made for those who need it. It is not yet linked to the University web site. Copies of any sections will be provided to members of LTC on request.

1 Introduction

6 Approval of Teaching Staff and Staff Changes

7 Involvement of University Departments in Validated Provision

2.1. Validation Procedure for External Providers

A. OUTLINE PROCEDURE

1. Any proposal to validate programmes in another institution will initially be discussed by the University's Executive Management Group, including the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) and the Dean of the Faculty in which the programmes might be expected to be located. Their consideration will include both the overall standing of the institution seeking validation, and the nature of the particular programmes proposed for validation.

2. If the senior officers feel that a proposal should be pursued, they will report their views to the Learning and Teaching Committee.

3. If it is in agreement, Learning and Teaching Committee will then establish a Validation Panel to give detailed consideration to the proposal and advise whether validation is appropriate. The Panel will call for a wide range of information from the institution seeking validation and visit the institution.

4. The Validation Panel will subsequently report to Learning and Teaching Committee, which in turn will make a recommendation to Senate whether or not validation should proceed.

5. Once Senate has approved a recommendation to proceed with validation, a formal agreement will be drawn up between the University and the partner institution. Validation agreements will normally be subject to review and renewal on a five-year cycle.

6. Senate will delegate academic oversight of each validated programme to a Faculty Board which will be responsible during the period of the agreement for monitoring the programme on a regular basis, normally through the University's standard annual and periodic programme review procedures.

B. CONSIDERATION BY SENIOR OFFICERS

1. The senior officers will give consideration to the nature of the institution, the particular programme or programmes to be validated, the aims and objectives of the proposed validation and its compatibility with the University's institutional plans, and the resources available. Their recommendation to the Learning and Teaching Committee will be whether or not to proceed to a detailed consideration of the proposed validation.

2. The officers may recommend that an initial consultation fee be charged to the institution seeking validation before the University embarks on a detailed consideration of the proposal.

C. VALIDATION PANEL

1. A Validation Panel will be constituted as follows:

Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) (Chair)

Relevant Deans or their nominees

A member of Senate appointed by the Vice-Chancellor

A member of Learning and Teaching Committee appointed by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) or alternatively a second member of Senate appointed by the Vice-Chancellor

Programme Development & Quality Team Manager

2. Initially the Validation Panel will require from the institution seeking validation a detailed submission covering institutional and programme-specific issues. Having received and considered the detailed submission, the Validation Panel will visit the institution seeking validation to give particular consideration to programme-specific issues. The Chair of the Validation Panel will arrange for appropriate subject specialists, either from within or where necessary from outside the University, to advise the Panel and participate as appropriate in its deliberations.

3. Institutional Issues

Information required:

· Information in regard to any previous validation procedures

· The date from which validation will operate

· Title, level and duration of programmes to be validated

· Entry requirements and standards

· Arrangements for credit accumulation and transfer

· Assessment and examination procedures and standards, including sight of any external assessors' reports

· Regulatory framework for HE programmes in the institution

· Quality assurance mechanisms in the institution

· External reports on the quality of provision in the institution

· Financial viability of the institution, including audited accounts for the previous five years

· Funding arrangements and tuition fees for the programmes to be validated

4. Programme specific issues

Information required for each programme proposed for validation:

· Programme specification, including programme aims, intended learning outcomes, structure and requirements

· Full module specifications, including in each case aims, intended learning outcomes, contents, methods of teaching, learning and assessment, timetable~~, indicative reading list~~

· A reading list for each module

· Programme regulations

· Staffing for the programme, including balance between full-time and part-time staff

· Curricula vitae of teaching staff

· A statement nominating one specific member of staff as Programme Director

· Student intake and sources of recruitment

· Competition from other institutions

· Employment prospects of graduates

· Availability of space and equipment including computing support, lecture room and laboratory facilities

· Library facilities

· Availability of administrative, technical and other support staff

· Views of external examiners, assessors, professional/industrial bodies etc.

5. Following the visit, the Validation Panel will report to Learning and Teaching Committee and make a recommendation whether or not validation should proceed.

6. The University will charge a fee to the partner institution for the work of the Validation Panel. The Validation Panel will make a recommendation concerning the fee to be charged in its report to Learning and Teaching Committee in the light of the actual costs of the exercise. If it is making a positive recommendation in regard to validation, the Validation Panel will also recommend the level of the annual validation fee to be charged.

D. LEARNING AND TEACHING COMMITTEE AND SENATE

1. Having received the advice of the Validation Panel, Learning and Teaching Committee will determine whether or not to recommend to Senate that validation proceed.

2. The Committee will also advise Resources and Planning Committee in respect to the fee to be charged for the initial validation exercise, and if the recommendation in regard to validation is positive, in respect to the annual validation fee. It will also report on any other resource implications for the University.

3. Senate will in turn consider a report from Learning and Teaching Committee. Should Senate approve a recommendation to proceed with validation, it will assign ongoing responsibility for each validated programme to a Faculty Board.

E. WRITTEN AGREEMENT

1. Once Senate has approved a recommendation to proceed with validation, a formal agreement will be drawn up, to be signed by the Vice-Chancellor and the Head of the partner institution (or their nominees).

2. The agreement will include a clear and explicit statement of the respective responsibilities of the University and the partner institution, including their responsibilities for the following matters:

· Student entry requirements and the handling of admissions

· Student registration and maintenance of student records

· Determination and collection of student fees

· The delivery of learning and teaching

· The conduct of assessments

· External Examining procedures, including the appointment of an external examiner/programme assessor, communications with and functions of the external examiner/programme assessor and reporting procedure

· The issue of certificates and transcripts

· Resource issues including staffing, teaching accommodation, Library material and computing support

· Staff training and development

· Quality assurance and control, including arrangements for student feedback

· Student support and guidance

· Student concerns, complaints and appeals

· Publicity and marketing

· Any award ceremony.

3. The agreement will include provision for termination and arbitration and cover the residual obligations to students on termination of the agreement.

4. The financial arrangements will be contained in the agreement or in an accompanying Financial Memorandum. These will include the fees to be charged to the partner institution for validation, normally on a per capita basis. These will be reviewed annually in advance of the academic session to which they relate.

5. Copies of the agreement will be lodged with the Secretary to Learning and Teaching Committee.

F. REVIEW PROCEDURES

1. The Faculty Board to which the validated programme is assigned will be responsible for the regular evaluation of the programme and monitoring of the associated quality assurance arrangements. Normally this will be undertaken through the University's standard annual and periodic review procedures as required by the Learning and Teaching Committee.

2. These procedures will require the partner institution itself, through an appropriate internal body, to review the provision being validated, to involve the Associate Dean (Teaching) of the Faculty in a summative meeting of the review body, and to report through the AD(T) to the Faculty Board.

3. The Faculty Board may request that an annual or periodic programme review should encompass specific matters additional to those required by Learning and Teaching Committee.

G. CHANGES IN VALIDATED PROVISION

1. All changes to existing validated programmes, including proposals to change programme regulations or module specifications or to introduce new modules, will be required to be submitted for approval through the appropriate AD(T) in a form analogous to that required at the time for changes to internal University programmes. Proposals will be processed through the University's standard approval mechanisms.

2. The partner institution in a validation agreement may propose further programmes for validation by the University, subject to compliance with the University’s policy on collaborative programmes. New programme proposals will also be required to be submitted for approval through the appropriate AD(T) in a form analogous to that required at the time for new internal University programmes. The AD(T) will initially refer such a proposal to the PVC(T) who as Chair of Learning and Teaching Committee will have discretion to determine whether to allow the proposal to be processed through the University's standard approval mechanisms or to establish a Validation Panel to consider it. Such a Validation Panel will be constituted and proceed in accordance with Section C above, reporting to Learning and Teaching Committee. The Panel will be concerned mainly with issues specific to the new programme but can be expected to seek an update on institutional issues since the last validation visit. A Validation Panel will normally be established if the proposed programme is in a different subject area from programmes previously validated by the University at the partner institution.

3. The validation agreement will be amended to incorporate any additional validated programmes following their acceptance by Senate.

H. RENEWAL OF VALIDATION

1. Validation agreements will normally be subject to review and renewal on a five-year cycle.

2. Before any agreement is renewed, the University will carry out a full institutional and programme review, covering the issues listed under Sections C.3 and C.4 above. This will be undertaken by a Validation Review Panel with the same constitution as the Panel referred to in Section C.1.

3. The Validation Review Panel will also receive reports of annual and periodic programme reviews undertaken during the period of the existing validation agreement and may, in the light of any recent periodic programme review, reduce its requirements in respect of programme specific information.

4. The Validation Review Panel will report to Learning and Teaching Committee, which will in turn report and make recommendations to Senate and also advise the responsible Faculty Board of its conclusions.

5. The University will charge a fee to the partner institution for the validation review. The Validation Review Panel will make a recommendation concerning the fee to be charged in its report to Learning and Teaching Committee in the light of the actual costs of the exercise.

I. VARIATION OF PROCEDURES

The Vice-Chancellor as Chair of Senate shall have the right to vary any of the procedures outlined above should circumstances demand this. Such variations will be reported to the next meeting of Senate.

Learning and Teaching Committee

Contents

1 Introduction

2 Programme Approval

3 Programme Monitoring, Review and Renewal

4 The Life Cycle of Students and Cohorts

5 Complaints and Appeals

6 Approval of Teaching Staff and Staff Changes

7 Involvement of University Departments in Validated Provision

2.1. Validation Procedure for External Providers

A. OUTLINE PROCEDURE