• Section 1 - Purpose
• Section 2 - Suspension of New Admissions and Closure of Courses
• Section 3 - MRI Schedule
• Section 4 - Unit Quality
• Unit Outline
• Moderation and Feedback
• UCLearn (Canvas) Teaching Site
• Student Feedback
• Assessment and Grading
• Section 5 - Interim Monitoring Course Reports (IMCR)
• MRI Evidence and Data
• The University's Strategic Objectives
• Section 6 - Comprehensive Review Report (CRR)
• Strategic Case and Course Health Check
• Quality Assurance
• The University's Strategic Objectives, Professional Accreditation and Partnered Offerings
• Reaccreditation for Another Seven-years
• Section 7 - Double Degrees
• Section 8 - Reporting
• Typical Reporting Schedules
• Section 9 - Roles and Responsibilities
• Section 10 - Policies
• Section 11 - Definitions

Section 1 - Purpose

(1) This Procedure supports the Course Policy by stating requirements for the monitoring, review and improvement (MRI) for each course.

(2) This Procedure is designed to be read alongside the Course Policy and has the same scope as that Policy, and the Course Procedure: Courses and Course Components.

(3) MRI is a course-based quality assurance cycle that provides reporting points, called Interim Monitoring Course Reports (IMCR) that feed into the comprehensive review report (CRR) for a course. MRI utilises course-specific data to review and assess course performance, and unit-specific information such as student feedback and grade distribution in individual units. In undergraduate courses the focus for MRI is on the required units in a course of study.

(4) If a course is professionally accredited and the most recent professional accreditation approval is within the last three years, the faculty may choose to use some or all of the evidence gathered for professional accreditation for the IMCR and/or a CRR.

(5) The purposes of this Procedure are to ensure that:

1. course quality is assured throughout the course lifecycle; and
2. the University gathers evidence of course quality, viability, and fitness for purpose, and strategic alignment, to inform decisions on how a course can be improved, whether to continue to offer a course, and to identify high performing courses.

(6) Course quality activities and data reviewed will demonstrate alignment with the requirements of the relevant legislation and standards.

Section 2 - Suspension of New Admissions and Closure of Courses

(7) If a faculty decides to suspend new admissions to a course, then it will follow the relevant procedure.

(8) When new admissions to a course are suspended, the faculty will:

1. continue to provide IMCRs for the course as scheduled, and
2. ensure it remains accredited.

(9) If a faculty decides that a course will be closed on the basis of:

1. an IMCR or CRR;
2. activities undertaken to develop the IMCR or CRR; or
3. course viability or demand;

(10) then the faculty will follow the relevant procedure.

(11) Where a course will be closed the faculty will ensure that:

1. course components unique to the course are also closed, subject to teach out obligations, and
2. the course remains internally accredited during any teach out by:
   1. undertaking and recording regular interim monitoring activities, and
   2. providing IMCRs to Faculty Board, Curriculum Committee, and Academic Board, and
3. a course that is professionally accredited retains its professional accreditation until the last student has graduated from the course.

Section 3 - MRI Schedule

(12) Each faculty will maintain a MRI schedule for each award course it offers.

(13) The MRI schedule must include reporting dates for the IMCRs, the CRR, and (if the course is offered through a partner) Annual Partner Reviews.

(14) The faculty will:

1. retain evidence of MRI activities undertaken for each course, and review the impact and success of improvement activities; and
2. identify any risks to course quality and maintain a risk table to monitor management of those risks.

Section 4 - Unit Quality

(15) The faculty that offers a unit will assure unit quality by monitoring unit-level data.

(16) A unit may be used as a component of a minor, core major, specialisation major, or breadth major, and may be part of course requirements for a course managed by another faculty. Accordingly, the faculty that offers a unit will consider revisions to units in the context of all courses for which the unit is required and will consult the stakeholders before seeking approval for the revisions.

Unit Outline

(17) Before each teaching period:

1. the Unit Convener will develop the unit outline for the unit; and
2. the faculty delegate will review and approve the unit outline in accordance with the Unit Outline Procedure.

Moderation and Feedback

(18) The Unit Convener will develop and document the unit's moderation process in accordance with the Assessment Policy and Assessment Procedures.

(19) The Unit Convener and teaching team will implement the moderation process for each assessment item in a teaching period.

UCLearn (Canvas) Teaching Site

(20) The Unit Convener will develop the UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site in accordance with the UCLearn Teaching Site Publishing Procedures.

(21) The faculty will review and approve the UCLearn(Canvas) teaching site for publishing to students in accordance with the UCLearn Teaching Site Publishing Procedures.

Student Feedback

(22) The Unit Convener will review student performance in learning activities and assessment tasks and adjust their teaching strategies as needed to support student learning and student progress.

(23) During each teaching period the Unit Convener and Program Director (or equivalent) will:

1. review and respond to student feedback provided through the University approved student feedback survey, and any other student feedback; and
2. ensure information about revisions to a unit, made in response to student feedback, is included in the unit outline for subsequent offerings of that unit, following approval of the unit revisions as required by the Delegations of Authority Policy.

Assessment and Grading

(24) At the end of each teaching period the Unit Convener and the Program Director (or equivalent) will review grades, grade distribution, and student performance in the unit.

(25) The Unit Convener will submit a unit review report to GradeLink at the end of each teaching period.

(26) In accordance with the Faculty Assessment Board Charter, Faculty Assessment Boards will:

1. quality assure the assessment for undergraduate and postgraduate coursework courses;
2. review the quality of assessment tasks;
3. ensure assessment, moderation, and grade allocation are undertaken in a timely fashion;
4. prepare annual quality assurance reports on relevant grade distribution summaries including:
   1. student progression and achievement;
   2. reviewing the effectiveness of assessment practice with the faculty;
   3. performance at the unit and course level; and
   4. approval final grades and authorise the release of final grades.

(27) The faculty must review assessment design in units in the following circumstances:

1. where 20% or more of students in a unit are awarded a final grade of fail in a teaching period;
2. where more than 50% of students are awarded a final grade of high distinction in a teaching period;
3. where there is a difference in student performance when the same unit is offered:
   1. at more than one location;
   2. in more than one mode of delivery.
4. where there is a withdrawal rate from a unit prior to census date of 10% or greater.

(28) The faculty will report annually to Academic Quality and Standards Committee and Academic Board on action taken in response to any grade distribution or student satisfaction risks identified in a unit.

Section 5 - Interim Monitoring Course Reports (IMCR)

(29) The purpose of an IMCR is to identify risks to quality of a course through a review of the course and student data and take actions to mitigate those risks.

(30) Risks and the associated actions must be included in the IMCR Risk, Issues and Actions Plan.

(31) The faculty will:

1. retain evidence of the MRI activities undertaken for each course, and review the impact and success of improvement activities; and
2. set dates for IMCRs when the course is approved or reaccredited by Academic Board.

(32) The IMCR schedule for an existing course must enable the review of, and reporting on, at least two years of course data since the preceding IMCR.

(33) The IMCR schedule for a new course must enable the review of, and reporting on, at least two years of data since the course first admitted students.

(34) The faculty may chose to align the IMCR schedule with professional accreditation reporting and/or Annual Partner Review reports.

(35) Faculty Boards must provide IMCRs to Curriculum Committee and Academic Board.

MRI Evidence and Data

(36) The faculty's MRI review of course and student performance data will consider:

1. quality of teaching ;
2. supervision of students undertaking research projects;
3. student progress;
4. overall delivery of units within each course of study;
5. external referencing of the success of student cohorts against comparable courses of study including:
   1. progression rates and completion times broken down by locations of delivery; and
   2. assessment methods and grading of students' for selected units required for the course;
6. student feedback from, and rates of response to, the University approved student feedback survey, the Unit Convener's response to that feedback, and details of revisions made to the unit and their effects;
7. student feedback from the Student Experience Survey and the Graduate Outcomes Survey and the program director's (or equivalent's) response to that feedback, and details of changes made to the course and their effects;
8. course design as described in 3.1 of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021, particularly demonstrating scholarship of teaching and learning informing course improvement, and design that demonstrates the progressive and coherent achievement of expected learning outcomes throughout the course;
9. course viability and student demand for the course;
10. meetings of and feedback from the Course Advisory Group; and
11. professional accreditation or professional reaccreditation of the course.

The University's Strategic Objectives

(37) An IMCR will include analysis and narrative about on the course's contribution towards the University's educational objectives including:

1. Indigenising the Curriculum Framework
2. experiential learning; and
3. graduate attributes.

Section 6 - Comprehensive Review Report (CRR)

(38) A CRR has three purposes:

1. to inform the decision whether to continue to offer the course by reviewing its strategic fit and financial viability (course health check);
2. to verify that the monitoring, review and improvement activities for the course meet the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021, and the University Quality and Standards Framework, so that the course may be offered for a further 7-years, or for the time specified by the faaculty; and
3. to provide evidence to inform decisions whether the course or a course component needs to be revised, or to provide advice on revisions already undertaken or proposed to improve the course.

(39) The CRR will include a Course Risk, Issue and Action Plan to:

1. capture risks or issues identified as impacting on the course quality, course viability or student experience over the past period of accreditation;
2. actions taken to mitigate those risks;
3. a review and evaluation of the impact of the action taken, and any future plans; and
4. any course revisions resulting from the risks and issues identified.

(40) A faculty may choose to seek reaccreditation of related courses, such as a bachelors and masters in the same discipline, or a set of courses in the same program, at the same time. Where that is the case the Faculty will provide separate CRR for each course, or ensure that separate responses and data for each course is provided.

(41) Where a faculty is reviewing a set of nested courses, such as a masters, graduate diploma and graduate certificate, a single CRR can be provided. The faculty will provide data for each course, respond to risks to each course, and report on different course experiences for students in the nested courses.

(42) A faculty may choose to bring forward the comprehensive review and reaccreditation date for a course to align with timelines for professional accreditation, or to manage workload, or address course or unit quality issues.

(43) Gathering evidence for the comprehensive review of a course is an incremental process which includes collating evidence of: unit quality activities, external referencing and benchmarking activities; meetings with the Course Advisory Group; and interim monitoring, review and improvement activities.

(44) The faculty will prepare the CRR for a course using the CRR template and the Course Assurance Summary template.

(45) The CRR will be considered by Faculty Board, the Course Advisory Panel and Curriculum Committee before review by Academic Board.

(46) Where a course is a higher degree by research (HDR) course, an honours course or has embedded honours, the University Research Committee will be requested to review the CRR and provide advice to Curriculum Committee on the research components of the course.

(47) Members of Faculty Board, the Course Advisory Panel, the University Research Committee, where relevant, Curriculum Committee or Academic Board, may request information about a course from a faculty or business unit in addition to that provided in the CRR.

(48) Where a course is professionally accredited, the faculty will provide the most recent approval by the professional accrediting body, and information about any conditions imposed on the professional accreditation and actions taken to address those conditions.

(49) Where a course is offered in more than one location, the faculty will provide information about the performance of the course, student progression and success, and student feedback about the course, from each location, and actions taken in response to any identified issues at the different locations.

Strategic Case and Course Health Check

(50) The faculty will provide:

1. a strategic case for seeking reaccreditation of a course; and
2. evidence of actions taken to improve student outcomes in response to:
   1. enrolment and EFTSL data;
   2. admissions data;
   3. student performance reporting;
   4. grade distributions;
   5. student feedback received from the University approved student feedback survey, the Student Experience Survey, the Graduate Outcomes Survey, or any other student feedback;
   6. stakeholder feedback including that of the Course Advisory Group;
   7. feedback from external professional accrediting bodies;
   8. review of the course or course components by Faculty Board, Curriculum Committee, University Research Committee or Academic Board;
   9. information from activities undertaken to assure academic and research integrity;
   10. Scholarly activities that inform course and unit improvement; and
   11. information about the quality assurance of work integrated learning and of courses offered through a partner.

(51) The faculty may provide the IMCRs and/or any other relevant evidence, such as that from a professional accrediting body, to support the comprehensive review and reaccreditation of a course.

Quality Assurance

(52) A CRR will include evidence and records of monitoring, review and improvement activities to satisfy the relevant standards of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021, in particular:

1. orientation and progression (1.3);
2. learning outcomes and assessment (1.4);
3. learning Environment (2)(all subsections);
4. teaching (3)(all subsections); and
5. deliveries with other parties (5.4).

The University's Strategic Objectives, Professional Accreditation and Partnered Offerings

(53) A CRR for a course will include analysis of and commentary on the course's contribution towards the University's educational objectives including:

1. Indigenising the Curriculum Framework;
2. experiential learning; and
3. graduate attributes.

(54) Where a course is professionally accredited a CRR:

1. will include evidence that the course, including any proposed revision to the course, will continue to be accredited by the relevant professional body; and
2. evidence provided for the most recent professional accreditation submission.

(55) When a course is offered with a third party provider, the CRR will include links to the Annual Partner Review reports.

(56) When external referencing or benchmarking of a course is undertaken the CRR will provide the outcomes of the external referencing and benchmarking activity, and the faculty response to recommendations.

Reaccreditation for Another Seven-years

(57) A CRR is evidence over course quality and improvement to support internal reaccreditation of a course.

(58) The faculty will provide the CRR and Course Assurance Summary to the Course Advisory Panel for review.

(59) Where a faculty decides to close a course then a student transition plan will be included with the CRR.

(60) The Course Advisory Panel may recommend that the CRR be considered by Curriculum Committee, for endorsement to proceed to Academic Board for review to consider reaccreditation of the course.

(61) Academic Board approval triggers a new accreditation start date and the next seven-year period of the course's internal accreditation, and its next monitoring, review and improvement cycle.

Section 7 - Double Degrees

(62) A double degree has its own course code, and its structure comprises two constituent courses, or a course and a program.

(63) To support quality assurance of a double degree the faculty will provide IMCR and/or CRRs, whichever is most recent, for the constituent courses.

(64) If one or more constituent components of a double degree is made up of a program, then it is expected that the most recent IMCR and CRR for each course in the program will be provided. For example, in the Bachelor of Communication and Media, it would be expected that the IMCR and/or CRR for the four courses in the program would be provided.

(65) If a constituent course in a double degree has not had a CRR or IMCR completed in the last two years, then the faculty will provide an IMCR.

(66) The faculty may provide a mix of IMCRs and CRRs if evidence of review of each constituent course is provided, and the reports were undertaken within the last three years.

(67) These reports, along with any associated Course Assurance Summaries, can be provided as links from the double degree IMCR or CRRs.

(68) Where a constituent course in the double degree is professionally accredited then evidence that this professional accreditation is maintained for that course in the double degree will be provided.

(69) The IMCRs and CRRs for double degrees will focus on student experience, specifically:

1. the double degree study pattern for full-time and part-time students demonstrating unit availability, timely progression, and educational coherence and sequencing;
2. student completion data for the double degree;
3. Student Experience Survey and Graduate Outcomes Survey data where it is available for the double degree and where there are sufficient respondents (for example, >10) for it to be meaningful, and equivalent data for the constituent courses/program(s);
4. risks to course quality and how those risks have been mitigated; and
5. any risks specific to the provision and delivery of the double degree.

Section 8 - Reporting

(70) The faculty will provide regular IMCRs to Curriculum Committee and Academic Board. The reports are typically prepared two years and four years after the start of the accreditation period or course commencement date, whichever is later, and will include a full two years of course data.

(71) A faculty will provide Annual Partner Review reports to Academic Quality and Standards Committee and Academic Board for award courses that are delivered with or through a partner.

(72) The CRR and Course Assurance Summary to support reaccreditation of a course will be submitted to the Academic Board in the calendar year before the accreditation expiry date.

(73) A faculty may choose to bring forward their submission of a CRR to support reaccreditation of a course to enable internal and professional accreditation of a course to be aligned, to manage workload, or to enable particular groups of courses to be considered together.

(74) Expected submission dates for CRRs supporting reaccreditation of a course will be added to the workplans of the appropriate governance committees.

(75) Faculties may provide reports on all courses in a program, or courses that are related, together.

(76) If Academic Board has concerns about the quality of a course it may request additional monitoring and reporting or earlier review for reaccreditation.

Typical Reporting Schedules

(77) IMCRs must include two years of data and this requirement may mean that the IMCR dates vary from this typical reporting schedule (below), depending on when the course first admitted students.

(78) Where the accreditation/reaccreditation period starts at the beginning of a calendar year:

1. Approved for seven years accreditation: AB meeting #/0010 
2. First intake: Semester 1, 0011 
3. Accredited for seven years: 1 January 0011 to 31 December 0017 
4. Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0013 
5. Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0015 
6. Comprehensive review report supporting reaccreditation: AB meeting #/17 

(79) Where the accreditation/reaccreditation period starts at the middle of a calendar year:

1. Approved for seven years accreditation: AB meeting #/0010
2. First intake: Semester 2, 0011
3. Accredited for seven years: 1 July 0011 to 30 June 0018
4. Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0013 
5. Interim Monitoring Course Report: AB meeting #/0015
6. Comprehensive review report supporting reaccreditation: AB meeting #/18 Supporting information

Section 9 - Roles and Responsibilities

Section 10 - Policies

(80) Refer to Course Policy.

Section 11 - Definitions