Major review process

The purpose of the Major Review planning meeting is to carefully consider the programme’s performance and to identify any issues of concern and opportunities for enhancement highlighted by the Programme Analysis. The meeting is also used to clarify and agree practical issues such as roles and responsibilities of those involved in the redevelopment and the reapproval process. A timeline that ensures all aspects of the review can be completed by the University’s deadlines for programme approval should be agreed.

The Development Lead needs to review the performance of the programme, complete the Programme Analysis template and submit it to the clerk at least one week before the Major Review planning meeting. They should analyse data trends over the last three academic years and identify areas of good practice and where there are concerns and risks. The data to populate the Programme Analysis template can be accessed from the CEP Tableau tab or go to Herts Hub and search for Student Data Dashboards. NSS or PTES actions plans will also be needed. The Programme Analysis will include consideration of the following:

• Admissions - the entry requirements and trend in numbers of student demand
• Awards – the trends in numbers of students who attained good degrees and any attainment gaps
• Continuation - the trends in numbers of students who drop out of the programme
• Module Grade Profiles – the identification of any modules with repeated high failure rates
• Graduate outcomes – data indicators of graduate progression
• NSS or PTES – trends in student experience identified by National surveys and relevant action plans
• External influences – the identification of relevant QAA Subject benchmarks, PSRB requirements, opportunities for accreditation, placement learning or links to employers
• Course structure – the identification of changes requiring permission from the Academic Development Committee (ADC) such as changes or additions to the mode of delivery (part time, full time, online, blended), award title (s), or additions to entry points.

When completing the Programme Analysis, the Development Leader should identify areas for improvement and where good practice exists they should try to be clear and concise. The use of bullet points is encouraged. At the end of the template a rationale statement stating the reason for the review and a summary identifying priorities for development is required. The rationale statement and summary should be short and help focus the discussion during the Major Review planning meeting. The Programme analysis is required to be submitted two weeks prior to the Major Review planning meeting.

The Major Review planning meeting is arranged by the clerk and is usually online. The Programme Analysis will drive the discussion and the programme rationale and summary of the priorities for development confirmed. The Chair will use the Major Review planning meeting template to structure the meeting and ensure that the arrangements for the development and approval process are agreed.

The following people are required:

• Associate Dean of School (Education and Student Success) or their nominee - Chair
• Development Lead
• Associate Director for Academic Quality
• Education Team member from the Centre for Education and Student Success
• Academic Services Officer (Academic Quality) – Clerk
• Member(s) nominated by the school (Optional)

The Chair leads the meeting to address specific items on the Major Review planning meeting template to agree decisions about any key requirements for approval under the following categories:

• Key requirements related to potential structural changes to the programme; for example, changes to the programme title or award, Programme Specification, DMDs, PSRB or Apprenticeship requirements, UPR exemptions, entry requirements
• The development process; including the development team membership, the date and facilitator of the Curriculum Development Workshop, development meeting requirements, student consultation, partner consultation, arrangements for a Course Structure Development meeting, and External Consultation requirements.
• Arrangements for the Major Review Approval Meeting; including the date, date for submission of documentation, any PSRB involvement, and management of the Major Review Approval meeting including responsibilities for organising the Major Review Approval Chair and panel.
• Documents required for the Major Review Approval meeting; the final part of the Major Review Planning Meeting will confirm the documents required at approval.
• A timeline including, the deadline for submitting documents for checking and final sign off by the Associate Dean for Education and Student Success (or their nominee), the deadline for submitting signed off documents to the clerk, the data of the Major Review approval meeting, the provisional date for the conditions meeting.

The Curriculum Development Workshop is central to the success of a Major Review. It provides an opportunity for the development team to reflect together on the findings from the Programme Analysis and explore creatively how to respond to identified issues. It is facilitated by someone from the Education Team in the Centre for Education and Student Success (CEdSS) who will work with the programme leader to decide the focus for the session. It offers space to clarify ideas and voice reservations, where colleagues are encouraged to be realistic, ambitious and imaginative in connecting with UH principles of effective and inclusive curriculum design. The facilitator will be able to articulate strategic university goals and help teams navigate the practical challenge of implementing these.

Following the Major Review planning meeting and the Curriculum Development Workshop, the development team should work together to enhance and develop aspects of the programme. Each development team will make changes according to the specific requirements and drivers impacting the programme. The Development Lead is responsible for ensuring all those involved understand their roles and responsibilities and that the issues identified in the planning meeting and in the Curriculum Development Workshop are explored and addressed. They are responsible for the production of the submission document and programme documents and preparing for the approval process. The programme development should take into consideration external drivers such as employment trends, PSRB requirements and QAA Subject Benchmarks

The team should refer to the Education and Student Success strand of the University’s Strategy-2025-2030 to ensure that the programme:

• creates an employer focussed curriculum that concentrates on enterprise, entrepreneurship and career development
• expands lifelong learning opportunities
• incorporates frameworks for access and induction, Personal Tutoring, Herts Academic Skills, Career Development, and Wellbeing and Mental Health
• delivers innovative, inclusive and authentic approaches to teaching, learning and assessment
• uses research informed teaching and blended learning, adopting a flexible and personalised approach to students’ learning and assessment
• uses resources effectively to enable students to maximise their learning and manage their studies
• instils a culture of reflection and innovation, delivering inclusive and authentic experiences for our diverse community of students

The team should seek appropriate advice and support from relevant experts such as the central apprenticeship team and Learning Resource Centre staff. They may consult external subject specialists and key stakeholders such as employers. Student feedback and consultation should be part of the development process. Academic services staff, Associate Dean for Education and Student Success, Associate Director of Academic Quality and the Education Team from the Centre for Education and Student Success are available for support and advice throughout the process.

The documents required for the approval meeting are listed below:

• A submission document
• Programme Analysis with Rationale statement and summary
• Programme Specification(s)
• List of example modules to view and programme information on Canvas ; Reading Lists for new modules, software packages and any special physical resources for all modules. The planning meeting may specify further information to be included. Link to generic LCS video: Getting Started Guide for 2020 - YouTube
• Definitive Module Descriptors
• Assessment Landscape(s)
• Completed PSRB and apprenticeship mapping tools (if required)
• Minutes of the Planning Meeting
• Feedback from all stakeholders consulted during the programme development, together with feedback from the interim consultant and the Programme Development Team’s response.
• Resources Statement
• html of the ‘live’ CEP Action Plan and External Examiners' reports (two years only)
• Full ADC submission and minute (where there are additions or changes to awards) but only for the Chair of the Major Review Approval Panel and the Associate Director for Academic Quality. (Clerk will provide this)
• Where appropriate evidence of applicant, offer holder and student consultation and consent demonstrating CMA compliance.

The documents should be submitted to the nominated academic services officer four weeks prior to the approval event who will clerk the Major Review meeting. Before final submission the documents should be signed off by the Associate Dean for Education and Student Success (or their nominee). Usually there is checking process where the final draft of the documents is checked before final sign off and submission to the clerk.

After the documents are submitted the Major Review panel will review them and provide written feedback to the development team in the week before the approval event.

The Major Review approval panel will have an independent Chair and will include a student, School Panel Member, an external subject expert, the Associate Director of Academic Quality for the relevant School and any other relevant representative such as a PSRB representative.

An approval event consists of a series of meetings. There may be some variation but normally there will be meetings with resource managers, the development team and relevant stakeholders such as students and employers. At each meeting the team will be asked questions related to the panel’s written feedback previously provided and the team should respond give concise and specific answers to satisfy the query. It is the Major Review approval panel’s job to consider the institutional context in which the programme is to be delivered and whether the programme sufficiently reflects the priorities of the University’s Strategy-2025-2030. The panel will the university requirements set out in UPR AS17 and will consider:

• the currency, educational challenge, and the coherence of the programme
• the appropriateness of standards of award including for professional practice
• whether the aims and learning outcomes are appropriate for the level of study
• whether the learning, teaching and assessment strategies are designed to meet the aims and learning outcomes of the programme
• whether there are adequate staff and physical resources to support the programme

The Major Review approval panel will highlight areas of good practice and ensure that the Programme Specification and DMDs are accurate, fair and represent a workable contract with students. By the end of the meetings the panel will recommend:

• the continuing approval or non-approval of the programme
• the term for which approval is fixed
• any conditions of approval, which must be fulfilled before the programme can begin to operate and the mechanism by which the Panel will confirm that this has been achieved
• any specific recommendations which the panel wish to make to the team.

The clerk will produce a summary of the Major Review approval panel’s decisions and any further requirements. There will be standard requirements such as changing External Examiner contracts to align with the newly approved programme, completing forms to close any programmes or awards no longer needed and actions to ensure the key documentation is accurate and at an appropriate standard for publication. The panel may also stipulate conditions of approval which must be acted upon before the programme can be operationalised. A date is agreed when the conditions must be met and what the team should submit for review by the panel for their approval. There is a final conditions meeting Chaired by the Associate Director of Academic Quality and attended by the Associate Dean for Education and Student Success (or their nominee), the clerk and the Programme Leader. When all the conditions have been met the final approval is recommended and the appropriate forms completed.