Skip navigation

Procedure: Academic programs and courses accreditation

Purpose

To describe the University's requirements regarding the preparation, submission and consideration of requests to establish, modify or disestablish coursework program and course proposals, and the roles of key stakeholders and committees involved in the processing of proposals.

Definitions

Accreditation: A process whereby an academic program or course is assessed against predetermined criteria and a determination made about whether it meets the minimum academic standards set by the University, as articulated in University policy. Some University programs and courses are also professionally accredited, ensuring that graduates from those programs or courses are qualified.

Procedure

Scope

  1. All award programs and courses
  2. All ANU staff with educational responsibilities

Proposal for the introduction of an academic program meeting one or more of the University's priorities for new coursework programs

  1. Proposals for the introduction of academic programs that meet one or more of the University's priorities for new coursework programs are first considered by the relevant ANU College(s).
  2. If endorsed, proposals are submitted for Academic Quality Assurance Committee consideration via policy.regs@anu.edu.au. Proposals are submitted on the University's pro forma in line with scheduled dates.
  3. If endorsed by Academic Quality Assurance Committee by at least a 75% majority, the proposal is submitted for Academic Board Accreditation. Academic Board considers the accreditation of academic programs in line with the educational priorities of the University and academic standards, as articulated in University policy.
  4. Once accredited by Academic Board, the Corporate Governance and Risk Office (CGRO) will make appropriate amendments to the undergraduate or coursework award rules in consultation with the Division of Student Administration.

Proposal for the introduction of an academic program not meeting one or more of the University's priorities for new coursework programs

  1. Expressions of interest for the introduction of new academic programs that do not meet one or more of the University's priorities for new coursework programs are first considered by the relevant ANU College(s).
  2. If endorsed, expressions of interest are submitted for Academic Quality Assurance Committee consideration via programsandcourses@anu.edu.au. Expressions of interest are submitted on the University's proforma in line with scheduled dates.
  3. If endorsed by majority, the relevant ANU College(s) may proceed to consider a full proposal for the new academic program.
  4. If endorsed, full proposals are submitted for Academic Quality Assurance Committee consideration via programsandcourses@anu.edu.au. Full proposals are submitted on the University's proforma in line with scheduled dates.
  5. If endorsed by Academic Quality Assurance Committee by at least a 75 per cent majority, the proposal is submitted for Academic Board Accreditation. Academic Board considers the accreditation of academic programs in line with the educational priorities of the University and academic standards, as articulated in University policy.
  6. Once accredited by Academic Board, the Corporate Governance and Risk Office (CGRO) will make appropriate amendments to the undergraduate or coursework award rules in consultation with the Division of Student Administration.

Reaccreditation of coursework programs

  1. Each of the University's award programs is reviewed at least every five years using the University's proforma. Programs subject to professional accreditation may be reviewed using the proforma of the relevant accreditation body, as long as the requirements of the ANU program reaccreditation proforma are addressed.
  2. If an academic program is not reviewed within the agreed schedule submitted annually to the Academic Quality Assurance Committee, the relevant managing ANU College(s) is to provide a rationale to Academic Quality Assurance Committee as to why the program's current accreditation term should be extended, explaining why the review has not been completed according to the schedule.
  3. To apply for academic program reaccreditation following a review, the relevant ANU College(s) is to submit a copy of the completed academic program review proforma to Academic Quality Assurance Committee for endorsement.
  4. If endorsed by Academic Quality Assurance Committee by at least a 75 per cent majority, the completed proforma is submitted for Academic Board reaccreditation.

Proposal for the disestablishment of an academic program

  1. Proposals for the disestablishment of an academic program are first considered by the relevant ANU College(s).
  2. If endorsed, proposals are submitted for Academic Quality Assurance Committee consideration via programsandcourses@anu.edu.au. Proposals are submitted on the University's proforma in line with scheduled dates.
  3. If endorsed by Education Committee by majority, the proposal is submitted for Academic Board approval.
  4. If approved, teach out is commenced, including processes of notifying affected students.

Student workload and units for coursework courses

  1. The average student workload is 130 hours for a six unit course for each of the two standard semesters. This includes time spent in scheduled classes and self-directed study time. A student enrolled in units totalling 48 units represents one EFTSL. Six ANU units corresponds to 7.5 European Credit Transfer (ECTS) credits.
  2. The maximum time allowed to complete a program is determined by the Coursework Awards Rule.
  3. The standard unit value of courses at ANU is six. Courses worth multiples of three (e.g. 9, 12, 18, 24) may also be permitted to meet professional accreditation or clinical requirements, or to support research training.
  4. Where courses are offered in multiples of three units (e.g. 3, 9, 15), further courses within the discipline must be available to students within the same session (e.g. Summer, Semester One, Autumn) such that their total units of enrolment in that session is divisible by six.
  5. Where courses are offered in multiples of three units (e.g. 3, 9, 15), student progress is monitored to ensure program completion within the full-time duration of the program with the exact unit value set out in the Program Orders and without overloading.
  6. However, where endorsed by the Registrar and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) and approved by Academic Board, courses delivered completely online in a trimester or non-standard session model may be eight units.
  7. Zero unit courses are only permitted where an activity has to be undertaken by a student as a hurdle requirement to undertake future coursework, or to practice in a profession (e.g. Work Experience in Industry (WEI)).

Course topics and repeat enrolment

  1. Where the title of a course does not provide a meaningful description of the content of a course, either:
  1. For courses in which the topic is pre-set and the same content delivered to each student enrolled in each topic (typically, lecture or seminar based courses), a topic must be assigned to that course before students can enrol. The course must not be available for student enrolment without a topic assigned; or
  2. For courses in which the topic is not pre-set and each student negotiates their own topic (for example thesis, readings, project, and internship courses), a topic must be entered through use of a transcript note for each student at the time that the grade is entered for the course (apart from in cases where the is KU – “Continuing Course”).
  1. The topics assigned under “28.” will describe the content of that offering of the course.
  2. To ensure the quality of recurrent offerings at the University, courses described in “28.a.” are not to be used with the same topic in consecutive sessions or years, unless that topic for the course has been reviewed and endorsed by the College’s Education Committee within the last five years.
  3. Where a particular topic for a course described in “28.a.” has not been offered in a prior session nor the previous year, the offering is not required to be approved by College’s Education Committee.
  4. Each intersection of academic organisational unit, discipline alpha code, numeric level (e.g. 1000-level, 2000-level, etc.) , unit value, and learning outcomes may only have one course as described in “28.a.” and one course as described in “28.b.”. This course can then be offered multiple times with multiple topics assigned.
  5. Students who successfully complete a combination of course and topic as described under “28.”, are unable to undertake the same combination of course and topic again towards an award apart from where their result in the course has been classified as “KU – Continuing Course”.
  6. A student enrolled in two honours plans may enrol in the same thesis course twice as described in “28.b.”, but must write on a different topic each time. Any material common to the two theses must be appropriate quoted and cited as common to the two theses in the thesis that is submitted second.
  7. Students may retake a course described in 33 with a different topic assigned.
  8. With the exception of “35.” and courses with a result of “KU – Continuing Course”, students who successfully complete a course are unable to undertake the same course or learning outcomes again towards an Award.

Course codes

  1. New alpha codes require the approval of the Registrar.
  2. A request must be submitted to the Registrar by the relevant College or Colleges by memorandum to the nominated email address, and specify:
  1. the four digit alpha code to be introduced;
  2. the formal discipline description;
  3. a brief explanation for its introduction;
  4. an undertaking that the code does not conflict with alpha codes currently in use across the University; and
  5. that other areas of the University that may have an interest have also been consulted.
  1. The Registrar will consider the request on the basis of the above points and also with regards to whether the new alpha code is:
  1. meaningful to students;
  2. intended to be specific to a particular program, plan, or contractual arrangement, or reflects organisational structures; and
  3. in conflict with existing and historical alpha codes
  1. An outcome will be provided within 14 days of a request being received, unless further information is required.
  2. 4000-level course codes are used only for courses that are components of honours years, with learning outcomes at a minimum AQF Level 8.
  3. The course code “HONS4XXX” is used to record the final honours grade for a student, with the course code assigned to 4XXX representing all College one year honours programs. Additional courses are created for embedded honours programs where justified to Academic Board on academic or professional accreditation reasons.

Honorary degrees

  1. A recipient of an honorary degree is not entitled to call themselves ‘Doctor’ by virtue of receipt of the honorary degree.

Responsibility for implementation

  1. Academic Board has responsibility for approving the introduction, amendment to, or disestablishment of academic programs. It has responsibility for monitoring the University's academic programs accreditation framework to ensure quality assurance for academic standards, and the identification of opportunities for quality enhancement.
  2. Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) has responsibility for monitoring and reporting to Academic Board on the University's academic programs accreditation framework to ensure quality assurance for academic standards and the identification of opportunities for quality enhancement.
  3. Deans have responsibility for ensuring that proposals align with University policy and ANU College resource strategy before they are submitted for Academic Quality Assurance Committee and Academic Board accreditation.
  4. Academic Quality Assurance Committee has responsibility for endorsing for Academic Board the introduction, amendment to, or disestablishment of academic programs. Members of Academic Quality Assurance Committee have responsibility for monitoring the University's academic programs and course accreditation process and recommending and reviewing improvements to that process.
  5. Associate Deans (Education) are responsible for ensuring that proposals are fully completed, in line with University policy and supported by documentation before they are submitted for Academic Quality Assurance Committee and Academic Board consideration. They are also responsible for ensuring that changes approved by Academic Board are implemented, and for communicating opportunities to improve the University's Academic Programs and Courses Accreditation Policy and associated procedures to Academic Quality Assurance Committee.
  6. Academic and Professional Staff completing proposals are responsible for ensuring that proposals are fully completed, in line with University policy and supported by documentation before they are submitted to the Associate Dean (Education). They are also responsible for ensuring that changes approved by Academic Board are implemented.
  7. Division of Student Administration (DSA) has responsibility for ensuring that proposals are fully completed with correct nomenclature, in line with University policy and supported by documentation before they are submitted to Academic Quality Assurance Committee.
  8. Corporate Governance and Risk Office have responsibility for drafting and making changes required to award and degree rules, once programs have been accredited by Academic Board in consultation with the Division of Student Administration.

Information

Printable version (PDF)
Title Academic programs and courses accreditation
Document Type Procedure
Document Number ANUP_000691
Version 24
Purpose To describe the University's requirements regarding the preparation, submission and consideration of requests to establish, modify or disestablish coursework program and course proposals, and the roles of key stakeholders and committees involved in the processing of proposals.
Audience Staff-Academic
Category Academic
Topic/ SubTopic Teaching & Learning
 
Effective Date 28 Jan 2016
Review Date 11 Dec 2018
 
Responsible Officer Registrar, Student Administration
Approved By: Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic)
Contact Area Division of Student Administration
Authority