top of page

Course Development and Review Policy

PURPOSE

The purpose of this policy is to outline the development and review processes for Leaders Institute (LI) courses.


SCOPE

All courses


COURSE DEVELOPMENT

The development and review of courses is overseen by Development Committee. Development of courses (including nested courses) must use the LI course templates and follow the principles of:

  • alignment to the LI Strategic Plan;

  • mapping to AQF levels and LI Graduate Attributes;

  • conformity to the Higher Education Standards (Threshold Standards), particularly 1.4, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3.1, 5.1.3, 5.3;

  • conformity to professional accrediting bodies if relevant.


Course Advisory Committee is an ad-hoc subcommittee of Development Committee that is convened to develop or review courses. The Chair is appointed by Development Committee. In addition to relevant LI academic staff representing the campuses and delivery modes proposed, membership of Course Advisory Committee includes at least two external academic and professional experts in the field.

Development Committee may also appoint ad hoc specialist subcommittees or advisory groups to assist in its role.


COURSE REVIEW

Courses are subject to a regular cycle of review to support ongoing academic quality and continuous improvement of academic processes and outcomes. Any changes to an accredited course must follow the procedures outlined below.


1. Annual Course Report

The relevant Program Directors submit an Annual Course Report to the Vice President Academic to be included in the LI Annual Academic Report. The Annual Course Report includes data for all delivery sites and modes on student enrolments, grade distribution and performance (progression, attrition, completions). The report also includes stakeholder feedback, evidence of improvements and goals for the following year. The Annual Academic Report is tabled by the Vice President Academic to Academic Board to ensure ongoing monitoring of performance, reviews and implementation of improvements.


2. Comprehensive Review

All accredited courses are subject to a four yearly comprehensive review. This is overseen by Development Committee and undertaken by Course Advisory Committee in line with the procedures below.


3. Reaccreditation Application

A reaccreditation review is conducted as part of the reaccreditation application process. This is overseen by Development Committee and undertaken by Course Advisory Committee in line with the procedures below.


4. Minor Review

A minor course review includes minor changes to an accredited course, such as progression rules and revisions to specialisations. A proposal for minor review is tabled to Development Committee for recommendation to Academic Board. The procedures below are not required.


PROCEDURES

COURSE DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE

1. Proposal

A proposal for course development (including nested courses) must be tabled to Development Committee, including:

  • course title(s)

  • commencement date

  • delivery site

  • delivery modes

  • rationale

  • market research

  • academic staff

  • proposed budget for development If the proposal is accepted by Development Committee, it is tabled to Executive Management Team and Academic Board for recommendation to Governing Board.


2. Recommendation of Executive Management Team and Academic Board

If the proposal is accepted by Development Committee, it is tabled to Executive Management Team and Academic Board for recommendation to Governing Board.


3. Approval by Governing Board

If it is recommended by both Academic Board and Executive Management Team, the proposal is tabled to Governing Board for approval.


4. Course Advisory Committee is appointed

If approved by Governing Board, Development Committee will appoint a Course Advisory Committee to oversee the development of the course, including benchmarking and external peer review of unit outlines.


5. External Expert Review

Course Advisory Committee commissions an External Expert Reviewer nationally recognised in the field to ensure rigorous and appropriate content and processes. The External Expert Reviewer submits a report to Course Advisory Committee for review.


6. Course Advisory Committee

Course Advisory Committee commends the course to Development Committee after making the required revisions.


7. Recommendation by Development Committee

Course Advisory Committee tables the Course Accreditation Application to Development Committee for consideration, including the external moderator’s report and Course Advisory Committee’s response to the report. After review by Development Committee, the course revision or reaccreditation is tabled to Academic Board for approval.


8. Approval by Academic Board

Academic Board reviews the course review or course reaccreditation application. Once satisfied, Academic Board tasks Development Committee to submit the application to the relevant accrediting bodies if required.


9. Submission to Accrediting Agencies

The final application for course accreditation is submitted to Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). No advertising or promotion of a new course is permitted until accreditation approval has been granted by TEQSA and relevant professional accrediting agencies if required.


10. Feedback to Stakeholders

Program Directors put in place mechanisms and processes (including websites), to ensure all stakeholders, including students, are informed of the new course or changes to an existing course.


COURSE REVIEW PROCEDURES

1. Appointment of Course Advisory Committee

In line with the course review schedule, Development Committee appoints a Course Advisory Committee which includes the Program Director, other relevant academic staff representing the proposed delivery sites and modes, at least one external expert from a relevant field, and at least one student representative from a relevant field. The chair is nominated by Development Committee.


2. Course Review

Course Advisory Committee will undertake the review, including analysis of the following information as relevant:

  • Annual Course Reports that include comparative student data from all delivery sites and modes;

  • QILT data;

  • benchmarking;

  • admission criteria;

  • course structure;

  • nested courses;

  • course rationale;

  • course learning outcomes;

  • LI graduate attributes;

  • library and information resources;

  • effectiveness of assessment and how assessments contribute to student learning;

  • mapping learning outcomes, graduate attributes and assessments;

  • proposals for improvements.


3. External Expert Review

Course Advisory Committee commissions an External Expert Reviewer nationally recognised in the field to ensure rigorous and appropriate content and processes. The External Expert Reviewer submits a report to Course Advisory Committee for review.


4. Course Advisory Committee

Course Advisory Committee commends the course review or application for reaccreditation to Development Committee.


5. Recommendation by Development Committee

Course Advisory Committee tables the course review or application for reaccreditation to Development Committee for consideration, including recommended improvements to the course. It is reviewed by Development Committee for recommendation to Academic Board. If the recommendations require a substantial change to the course, Course Advisory Committee is tasked with preparing an application for reaccreditation to accrediting bodies.


6. Approval by Academic Board

Academic Board reviews the course revision or application for reaccreditation. Once satisfied, Academic Board tasks Development Committee to submit a Material Change Notification, course accreditation application, or course reaccreditation application to the relevant accrediting bodies.


7. TEQSA Reaccreditation

In the case of reaccreditation of a course, the final reaccreditation application is submitted to TEQSA. No advertising or promotion of a revised course is permitted until reaccreditation approval has been granted by TEQSA and relevant professional accrediting agencies if required.


8. Feedback to Stakeholders

Program Directors put in place mechanisms and processes (including websites), to ensure all stakeholders, including students, are informed of the changes. No advertising or promotion of major course revisions are permitted until approval has been granted by the relevant accrediting agency. 


RELATED POLICIES

Policy Owner

Chair, Development Committee

Approval Date

5 September 2024

Approving Body

Academic Board

Review Date

5 September 2029

Endorsing Body

Development Committee

Version

3.0

bottom of page