Code of Practice for Quality Assurance for Taught Programmes of Study


Approved by LTB on 13 June 2001 and including all revisions up to April 2012

Annex O: Quality Assurance Procedures for Programmes of Study at Associate/Partner Colleges Leading to University Awards

1. Introduction

These procedures are to be used in connection with quality assurance of University of Kent programmes of study which are delivered by Associate/Partner Colleges and which lead to the award of a certificate, diploma or degree of the University. The procedures are, as far as practicable, in accordance with the requirements of the University Code of Practice for Quality Assurance.

2. Approval of New Programmes of Study and New Modules

2.1 Initial Development
There should be consultation at an early stage with the relevant University School(s)1 with regard to all aspects of proposed new programmes of study.

2.2 Submission to Executive Group - Outline Planning Approval

The College must submit an outline proposal for approval by the University’s Executive Group and a signed programme cover sheet. The outline proposal will include evidence of an approved business plan and indicate that the College will be responsible for providing resources and facilities sufficient to staging the programme. The outline proposal should first have been approved within the Associate/Partner College.

2.3 Centre-Devised Programmes (e.g. FDs, bespoke HNC/Ds, ‘Top-Up Degrees’)

Submission to the School

2.3.1 Detailed proposals for new centre-devised programmes of study and new modules should be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Annexes B (Approval of New Modules) and C (Approval of New Taught Programmes) of the University’s Code of Practice for Quality Assurance for Taught Programmes. Proposals should first be considered within the College. Where the centre-devised programme leads to the award of a HNC or HND, the College should note the requirements of Edexcel for its approval as set out in 2.4.1 iv-v below.

2.3.2 If it is satisfied that it is appropriate to do so, the Associate/Partner College should submit a proposal for a new programme of study or for a new module to the appropriate cognate School of the University, together with a report on the outcome of internal consideration and CVs of all staff appointed to teach on the programme.

2.3.3 Where there is no cognate University School, the proposal should be routed directly to the relevant Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee.

Faculty Consideration

2.3.4 The Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee will establish a panel to consider the proposal in detail.

2.3.5 The Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee will have discretion to determine the constituency of the Faculty Panel, within the following parameters:

(i) The Faculty Panel should consist normally of either two members of the Faculty or, at the discretion of the Faculty LTC, for example in cases where appropriate subject area expertise is not available within the Faculty, one member of the Faculty and an appropriate External Advisor;

(ii) Where the proposal contains non-cognate provision, it will be the expectation that normally an External Advisor will be appointed to the Panel.

2.3.6 The Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee will determine whether the nature of the programme necessitates a visit to the College by the Faculty Panel to inspect teaching facilities and/or interview teaching staff about the provision. However, where the proposal contains non-cognate provision, and/or provision in a subject area where the College has not previously had provision, it will be the expectation that normally a visit will take place.

2.3.7 The Faculty Panel will be expected to make recommendations to the Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee on the following matters:

(i) on the appropriateness of content and standards of the curriculum with respect to the level and nature of the award; or

(ii) for non-cognate provision, and/or provision in a subject area where the College has not previously had provision, on the adequacy of the teaching and learning facilities;

(iii) that the staff engaged in delivering the programme are appropriately qualified for their role.

2.3.8 If satisfied that it is appropriate to do so, the Faculty LTC should forward a proposal for a new programme of study to the Programme Approval Sub-Committee [PASC] of the University’s Learning and Teaching Board, together with a report on the outcome of its consideration including a recommendation as to whether the proposal should be approved or approved subject to conditions (for example subject to provision of additional resources). The proposal as submitted to PASC need not be accompanied by detailed module proposals since Faculty Boards are authorised to approve new modules.

[top of page]

2.4 Standard ‘QCF’ BTEC HNC/D Programmes

Submission to Faculty

2.4.1 Where the College is seeking approval to run a standard ‘QCF’ BTEC Higher National qualification, it will provide the relevant Faculty with the following documentation:

(i) A copy of the relevant BTEC Higher National qualification specification for the proposed programme of study.

(ii) A programme specification in the University’s standard format. The programme specification will include appropriate programme-level learning outcomes and will reference those elements of the BTEC Higher National qualification specification indicated below:

  • Programme title
  • Programme structure
  • Rationale
  • Aims of the qualification
  • Mandatory curriculum
  • Optional Curriculum
  • Core units
  • Any specialist units, as appropriate
  • Optional Units, as appropriate
  • Higher level skills
  • Generic grading criteria for pass, merit & distinction
  • Guided and notional learning hours


(iii) The CVs of all staff appointed to teach on the programme.

(iv) It should be noted that Edexcel will require for its approval the submission to them of the complete assessment materials for one module (‘unit’), including assessment criteria referencing, assignments and assessment guidance.

(v) Statements with respect to the following areas, as required by Edexcel:

  • Market need
  • Target learners
  • An outline of the process for ensuring the consistency of assessment decisions across all aspects of the assessment process and across all assessors through internal verification
  • Learner support


2.4.2 Standard QCF Programmes – Module Format, Level and Content

For standard QCF submissions, the College will not be required to produce module specifications in the format of the University, but will use the unit descriptions contained within the BTEC Higher National qualification specification. Those units listed in section 13 of the Kent programme specification will be allocated a module code by the University. Units will be designated normally as worth 15 credits, with ‘H1’ units designated as level ‘C’ and ‘H2’ as Level ‘I’. The programme specification must contain a statement indicating how the unit descriptions will be made available to students.

2.4.3 No units, other than those specified in the approved programme specification, may be added to the programme without the prior approval of the University, Edexcel and the Qualifications Curriculum Authority (QCA).

2.4.4 No deviation from the standard QCF programme title will be permitted.

Faculty Consideration

2.4.5 The Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee will establish a panel to consider the proposal in detail.

2.4.6 The Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee will have discretion to determine the constituency of the Faculty Panel, within the following parameters:

(i) The Faculty Panel should consist normally of either two members of the Faculty, one of whom should be a representative of the cognate University School; or, at the discretion of the Faculty LTC, for example in cases where appropriate subject area expertise is not available within the Faculty, one member of the Faculty and an appropriate External Advisor;

(ii) Where the proposal contains non-cognate provision, it will be the expectation that normally an External Advisor will be appointed to the Panel.

2.4.7 The Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee will determine whether the nature of the programme necessitates a visit to the College by the Faculty Panel to inspect teaching facilities and/or interview teaching staff about the provision. However, where the proposal contains non-cognate provision, and/or provision in a subject area where the College has not previously had provision, it will be the expectation that normally a visit will take place.

2.4.8 The Faculty Panel will be expected to make recommendations to the Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee on the following matters:

(i) On the accuracy and completeness of the programme specification as a rendering of the BTEC Higher National qualification specification into the University’s format, with attention to the key points highlighted in bullet-form at 2.4.1(ii) above;

(ii) For non-cognate provision, and/or provision in a subject area where the College has not previously had provision, on the adequacy of the teaching and learning facilities;

(iii) That the staff engaged in delivering the programme are appropriately qualified / prepared for their role.

2.4.9 If satisfied that it is appropriate to do so, the Faculty LTC should submit a proposal for a new programme of study to the Programme Approval Sub-Committee [PASC] of the University’s Learning and Teaching Board, together with a report on the outcome of its consideration including a recommendation as to whether the proposal should be approved or approved subject to conditions (for example subject to provision of additional resources). With the exception of the documentation required by Edexcel with respect to the assessment of a sample module, (see 2.4.1(iv) above) the proposal as submitted to PASC need not be accompanied by detailed module proposals since Faculty Boards are authorised to approve new modules.

2.5 Consideration by PASC

2.5.1 If PASC is satisfied with the recommendation of the Faculty, it will recommend approval of the programme to the Learning and Teaching Board.

2.5.2 Where recommending approval of a HNC/D programme, PASC will authorise the Office for Quality Assurance and Validation to make a submission to Edexcel for permission to stage the programme at the Associate/Partner College.

2.5.3 Upon receipt of approval from Edexcel, the Office for Quality Assurance and Validation will inform the College that students may be recruited to the programme.

2.5.4 The Learning and Teaching Board is authorised to approve new programmes of study on behalf of the Senate of the University.

2.6 Further Guidance
Please refer to the module and programme specification approval risk table, which may be viewed in 'Guidance and Procedures'.

[top of page]

3. Annual Monitoring

3.1 Programmes will be reviewed annually in accordance with the requirements of the University Code of Practice for Quality Assurance and with the involvement of the nominated University School Liaison Officer (see Section 8) or Programme Adviser (see Section 9).

3.2 The College will submit an annual review report on each programme for consideration by the relevant University School. This annual report should be accompanied by the report of the University School Liaison Officer or Programme Adviser plus a response to that report. The School should comment on its consideration of the annual review report within its annual monitoring report to the Faculty.

4. Periodic Review of Programmes

Programmes will be subject to periodic review in accordance with the requirements of the University Code of Practice for Quality Assurance. The relevant Faculty Board will determine the year in which each programme will be subject to periodic review, will receive reports of Review Panels and the response of the College to such reports and will forward such reports, together with its views on them, to the Learning and Teaching Board.

5. Boards of Examiners

5.1 A Board of Examiners will be appointed for each programme of study. The Board will comprise:

  • One or more External Examiner(s), appointed by or on behalf of Senate and Council on the recommendation of the relevant Faculty Board.
  • At least one, and normally two, University of Kent examiners, one of whom shall be appointed as Chair of the Board of Examiners, appointed by the relevant Faculty Board on the recommendation, where applicable, of the relevant University School(s). Where a School Liaison Officer has been appointed, s/he will normally take up the role of Chair of the Board of Examiners. In other cases, for example, as with non-cognate programmes, the relevant Faculty will appoint an academic member of Kent staff of appropriate experience as the Chair of the Board.
  • College examiners, normally comprising those teaching the programme, appointed by the relevant Faculty Board on the recommendation of the College, one of whom shall be appointed as Deputy Chair. When requesting appointment of staff as examiners, the College should provide the Secretary to the Faculty Board with copies of curriculum vitae for the staff concerned.


5.2 Procedures to be followed by Boards of Examiners are set out in the appendix to Annex C.

6. Reports of External Examiners

6.1 External Examiners are required to submit an annual report to the University via the online External Examiners Report Submission System (EERSS)2 within four weeks of the main annual meeting of the Board of Examiners. Reports submitted via EERSS can be accessed by relevant parties (Chair of the Board of Examiners, Head of School, Faculties Officer and Dean of Faculty) on the University website via the following link: https://www.kent.ac.uk/uelt/quality/extexaminers/eerss.html

6.2 Where the Deputy Chair of the Board of Examiners does not have access to the External Examiners’ report via EERSS, a hard copy of the report will be provided by the Office for Quality Assurance and Validation. The Deputy Chair of the Board of Examiners will provide the Chair with a commentary on the report and an account of any actions planned in response to the External Examiners’ recommendations.

6.3 The Chair of the Board of Examiners will submit the official response to the external examiner(s) report(s) via EERSS, first taking into consideration the commentary provided by the Deputy Chair of the Board.

7. Student Feedback

The views of students on the programme of study they have taken should be obtained and considered in accordance with the normal procedures of the College concerned.

8. School Liaison Officers

Where a School within the University has responsibility for a programme, the School will appoint a member of its staff to act as Liaison Officer who will:

  • Act as the Chair of the Board of Examiners for the programme concerned.
  • Be a source of advice on learning and teaching matters (e.g. assessment strategies and programme resource requirements).
  • Assist with curriculum development and receive proposals for new modules and programmes at an early stage in their development.
  • Assist the college in the nomination of external examiners and external periodic review panel members.
  • Ensure that the relevant School Learning and Teaching Committee has effective oversight of quality assurance procedures such as external examining, annual monitoring, and ensure that periodic programme reviews have been completed as required for the programme concerned.
  • Receive agendas and minutes of programme team meetings.
  • Be a suitable candidate to be a member of any review panels established to undertake periodic programme reviews in Schools with similar provision.
  • Facilitate liaison between relevant University staff and staff and students at the College, in particular with regard to progression from the College to the University.
  • • Submit an annual report to the University via the Office for Quality Assurance and Validation on the quality of the programme and the learning experience of the students as per the template provided at: http://www.kent.ac.uk/uelt/quality/code2001/index.html. The report will be copied to the College HE Liaison Officer and to the Faculties Support Officer and will be considered by the Learning and Teaching Committee under annual monitoring procedures.

    Agree a schedule of visits to the college during the academic year for the purpose of meeting the responsibilities set out above (to visit normally no more than on three occasions).
  • To submit the official response to the external examiner(s) report(s) via EERSS3 , first taking into consideration the commentary provided by the Deputy Chair of the Board.


School Liaison Officers should be academic members of staff in a related subject area and they should ideally be familiar with Higher Education in Further Education Colleges (e.g. HNC/D Edexcel qualifications), although, training in this area can be provided.

Relevant University Schools should:

  • Send copies of agendas and minutes of relevant School meetings to College Programme Directors/Co-ordinators.
  • Invite College Programme Directors/Co-ordinators to attend School meetings as appropriate.

9. Programme Advisers

Where the University does not itself have appropriate subject expertise, it will appoint a Programme Adviser who will:

  • Receive agendas and minutes of programme team meetings.
  • Be a non-chairing member of the Board of Examiners.
  • Inspect samples of marked student work. The purpose of such inspection will not be to moderate internal marking but to obtain information about student learning and achievement.
  • Advise on the currency of the curriculum and assist with its development
  • Submit an annual report to the University via the Office for Quality Assurance and Validation on the quality of the programme and the learning experience of the students as per the template provided at: http://www.kent.ac.uk/uelt/quality/code2001/index.html

    The report will cover the following areas:
  • The currency of the curriculum and how the curriculum may be enhanced
  • The quality of the learning opportunities provided by the programme in comparison with those provided by similar programmes at other institutions
  • The standard of student learning and achievement
  • The effectiveness of the strategy and criteria for assessment
  • Whether marking is undertaken rigorously and in accordance with assessment criteria
  • Steps which might be taken to enhance the experience of students


The report will be copied to the relevant Partnership Development Officer, to the designated HE liaison staff within the Colleges and to the Faculties Support Officer. It will be considered by the Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee when considering the Annual Report on the programme submitted by the College.

Following the proposal of candidates by the College, the appointment of Programme Advisers will be undertaken by the Faculties and will require approval by the Pro Vice-Chancellor of the University with responsibility for Learning and Teaching. Programme Advisers will normally be appointed, in the first instance, for a period of four years and are eligible for reappointment at the end of the initial period of appointment if considered appropriate. Programme Advisers are not external examiners and may not concurrently hold appointment as an external examiner for the same programme. The University will be responsible for payment of fees and expenses which will only be payable following receipt of an annual report. Programme Advisers will be paid a fee for each visit to the College which will be equal to the minimum fee payable to University of Kent External Examiners. Programme Advisers will normally be expected to make three visits per annum to the College, including attendance at the Board of Examiners’ meeting. Where more than three visits in one year are deemed necessary, the approval of the University’s Quality Assurance Manager should be obtained and the University will not pay fees and expenses in respect of such additional visits unless approval has been obtained.

______________________________
1 In this and all other instances, for "School" read "Faculty Board" in cases of programmes that will not have a School affiliation.
2 https://www.kent.ac.uk/uelt/quality/extexaminer-local/eerss-admin.html
3. External Examiners Report Submission System; https://www.kent.ac.uk/uelt/quality/extexaminers-local/eerss-admin.html

[top of page]