PRESENTATION BY PROFESSOR DUGALD SCOTT

1
PRESENTATIONBYPROFESSOR DUGALD SCOTTDR JAN
CAMERONCOMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC
PROGRAMMES
2
COMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC
PROGRAMMES (CUAP)

• CUAP is a standing committee of the New Zealand
  Vice-Chancellors Committee and consists of
• A chairperson appointed by the NZVCC, usually a
  Vice-Chancellor (1)
• A deputy chairperson appointed by the NZVCC (1)
• One senior academic administrator from each
  university (generally at Assistant
  Vice-Chancellor level) (8)
• A student representative (1)
• A total of 11 people.

3
QUALITY ASSURANCEIN NEW ZEALAND UNIVERSITIES

• The Education Act 1989 provides for delegation to
  the New Zealand Vice-Chancellors Committee
  (NZVCC)
• The NZVCC gives effect to the delegation through
• - Committee on University Academic Programmes
• - New Zealand Universities Academic Audit Unit
• - The requirements of the New Zealand Register
  of Quality-Assured
• Qualifications
• Additionally the NZVCC recognises international
  education issues through its International Policy
  Committee.

4
COMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC PROGRAMMES (CUAP)
CUAPs major role is to carry out quality
assurance procedures in the New Zealand
university sector. A qualification which has been
quality assured demonstrates to the local and
international communities that it meets the
criteria for approval and accreditation. Every
qualification for which Government funding is
sought must be quality assured.
5
Any university which wishes to offer a new
qualification (e.g. a degree, diploma or
certificate) must apply to CUAP for approval to
do so. Similarly, a university which wishes to
add a new subject to an existing qualification or
make other major changes must also ask CUAP for
approval to do so.
6
OVERARCHING REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALIFICATION
APPROVAL AND ACCREDITATION

• The Gazetted criteria
• The Register of Quality-Assured Qualifications in
  New Zealand

7
THE GAZETTED CRITERIA
1. Title, aims, learning outcomes and
coherence The adequacy and appropriateness of
the title, aims, stated learning outcomes and
coherence of the whole course. (Note
Qualification developers are also required to
meet the criteria for registration on the New
Zealand Register of Quality Assured
Qualifications.) 2. Delivery and learning
methods The adequacy and appropriateness of
delivery and learning methods, for all modes of
delivery, given the stated learning outcomes. 3.
Assessment The adequacy of the means of ensuring
that assessment procedures are fair, valid,
consistent and appropriate, given the stated
learning outcomes.
more ?
8
The Gazetted Criteria (continued)
4. Acceptability of the course The acceptability
of the proposed course to the relevant academic,
industrial, professional and other communities in
terms of its stated aims and learning outcomes,
nomenclature, content and structure. 5.
Regulations The adequacy and appropriateness of
the regulations that specify requirements for
admission, credit for previous study, recognition
of prior learning, course length and structure,
integration of practical/ work-based components,
assessment procedures, and normal progression
within a programme. 6. Resources The capacity of
the organisation to support sustained delivery of
the course, in all delivery modes, with regard to
appropriate academic staffing, teaching
facilities, physical resources and support
services.
more ?
9
The Gazetted Criteria (continued)
7. Evaluation and review The adequacy and
effectiveness of the provision for evaluation and
review of courses for monitoring the on-going
relevance of learning outcomes, course delivery
and course standards for reviewing course
regulations and content for monitoring
improvement following evaluation and review and
for determining whether the course shall continue
to be offered. 8. Degrees and related
qualifications The adequacy of provision of
research facilities and support of staff involved
in research, the levels of research activity of
staff involved in the course and of ways by which
the research-teaching links are made in the
curriculum.
10
THE NEW ZEALAND REGISTER OF QUALITY-ASSURED
QUALIFICATIONS(www. kiwiquals.govt.nz)
The Register is a comprehensive list of all
quality-assured qualifications in New Zealand,
being those approved by either of the two
statutory quality assurance bodies, the NZVCC and
NZQA, and their delegations.
11
CUAPs procedures are set out in detail in the
handbook, Functions and Procedures 2007
2008. Universities have 2 opportunities every
year to apply for CUAP approval. The applications
must reach CUAP by either 1 May or 1 September.
12
Universities send proposals to CUAP
University of Auckland
Auckland University of Technology
University of Otago
University of Waikato
Lincoln University
CUAP
Massey University
University of Canterbury
Victoria University of Wellington
13
When CUAP has received all the proposals it sends
them electronically to all the universities. Each
university receives the proposals of the other 7
universities.
14
CUAP sends proposals to universities
University of Auckland
Auckland University of Technology
University of Otago
University of Waikato
Lincoln University
CUAP
Massey University
University of Canterbury
Victoria University of Wellington
15
THE PEER REVIEW PROCESS
Each university receives and prints the
proposals. It selects reviewers from its own
academic staff to read proposals within their
area of expertise. The reviewers are invited to
comment on the proposals. If they have questions
or comments of substance on any proposal these
questions and comments are sent to the university
where the proposal originated. This
correspondence proceeds by email and a copy of
every message is sent to CUAP.
16
Emails flow between universities
University of Auckland
Auckland University of Technology
University of Otago
University of Waikato
Lincoln University
Massey University
University of Canterbury
Victoria University of Wellington
17
POSTAL RESOLUTION
The time allowed for correspondence is
approximately 10 weeks. At the end of that time
each university must forward a postal resolution
to CUAP showing which proposals it approves and
which require discussion at the meeting. In the
time remaining before the meeting the
universities work hard to resolve any problems
with proposals that have not been approved.
18
MEETINGS
CUAP meets for 2 days in July and November to
complete the approval process. Those proposals
which have been approved by all universities are
approved formally by the committee. Those which
at least one university has been unable to
approve are discussed individually. Information
provided at the meeting is sometimes enough to
resolve the issue. Otherwise CUAP might require
some specified change to the proposal, or ask the
university to modify it and submit it for a
further postal resolution, or simply decline the
proposal.
19

• Approval by CUAP means
• The university may offer the qualification or
  new subject or implement the major change
  described.
• The qualification or new subject is eligible
  for funding from the Tertiary Education
  Commission, although this is not automatic.
• The qualification may be included on the New
  Zealand Register of Quality-Assured
  Qualifications (KiwiQuals - www.kiwiquals.govt.nz)

20
MODERATION
CUAPs moderation procedure is known as
Graduating Year Review (GYR). Every new
qualification or new subject approved by CUAP
must go through this process, which consists of a
self-review document prepared by the university
concerned. A GYR must be sent to CUAP within 3
years of the graduation of the first cohort of
students. The report briefly describes the
programme, provides an account of other review
processes applied to it, gives information about
its acceptability to employers, assessment
procedures, student numbers and performance and
whether the university will continue to offer
it. Before reaching CUAP GYRs must pass through
the Academic Boards of the universities.
21
REVIEW ASSESSMENT

• Where new qualifications are being introduced
  CUAP may require universities to report on
  implementation and progress at the end of the
  first and second years.
• CUAP will compare the reports with the original
  proposals to satisfy itself that their
  development has been consonant with the stated
  aims.

22
ACADEMIC AUDIT
An academic audit is a systematic and thorough
evaluation of the performance of a university
against its own stated objectives, using a
variety of performance indicators.  It is an
audit of the universitys own systems and
processes used to ensure and enhance the quality
of the management and relevance of its academic
programmes, the manner of conducting the
programmes, teaching quality, quality of the
academic staff and the quality of its outputs
(graduates, research, publications, consultancy
and service delivery).  For the New Zealand
universities this activity is carried out by the
New Zealand Universities Academic Audit
Unit. www.aau.ac.nz The unit is preparing for the
fourth cycle of audits since its establishment in
1993.
23
NZUAAU Academic Audit Process

• Specification of audit timetable and audit
  themes and questions by AAU
• Appointment of Audit panel by AAU
• Preparation of self-review assessment and
  portfolio by university
• Submission of self-review portfolio and
  supporting documentation to AAU Scrutiny by
  audit panel.
• Site visit to university by panel interviews
  with staff, students, other stakeholders.
• Panel prepares Audit report
• Draft report submitted to university for check on
  factual accuracy.
• Final report to AAU Board and then to university
  now a public document (on AAU website)
• University prepares action plan and submits to
  AAU
• University submits 12 month report against action
  plan to AAU. Some items might be followed up in
  the next audit.

24
AUDIT OF CUAP

• CUAP has been audited 3 times
• In 1996 by the Academic Audit Unit (this was a
  full audit)
• In 1999 by the Academic Audit Unit (this was a
  paper- based audit)
• In 2005 by an expert external panel appointed
  by the NZVCC (this was a full audit)
• In each case the report attested to the
  robustness of CUAPs procedures.