51ÂÒÂ×»»ÆÞ

3.3 Ìý Staff of the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement will normally contact the Programme Leader to discuss the validation process after stage two of the proposal has been approved by the Academic Planning Board.

3.4 Ìý Once the proposal has been reported to Senate through the School Academic Board minutes, the Programme Leader and Staff of the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement must confirm a date for the validation event, including the deadline for all documentation to be received by the Secretary.

3.5 Ìý The Programme Leader must provide the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement with full details of nominations for external Panel members (see paragraph 9 of this Section for the criteria). The Head of Division (or nominee) will make initial contact with the proposed external Panel member to ascertain their availability. The Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement will subsequently confirm approval and liaise directly on the event arrangements.

3.6 Ìý The Programme Leader should meet with the Secretary and relevant School Manager before submission of documentation. This allows the Secretary to brief the Programme Leader on the detail of the validation process. It also allows the Programme Leader to brief the Secretary on any particular requirements or circumstances such as the involvement of PSRBs, collaboration or a change to established procedures. The School Manager can offer advice and guidance on School policy and regulations.

3.7 Ìý Ìý The validation documentation must be forwarded to the Secretary by the date agreed, which must be not less than four weeks prior to the event. This is not flexible. This is the time required to copy and distribute the documents; allow the Panel to scrutinise them in detail; and secure, collate and circulate feedback prior to the event.

3.8 Ìý Ìý Full details on the content and format of the validation documentation to be prepared by the Programme Team are outlined in the Validation and Review Guidance Notes. The documentation for validation must include the following:

• Validation Document;
• Programme Specification;
• Student Handbook;
• Placement Handbook (if appropriate);
• Curriculum vitae of all teaching staff intended for the new programme;

Joint validation events with PSRBs may require additional documents, as determined by the relevant body.

3.9 Ìý Ìý The documentation should be prepared by a Programme Planning Team. The Team should be led by the Programme Leader and should include staff who will be teaching on the programme (including those from other Divisions). It is good practice to include the following additional members:

• Student and graduate representatives (especially for review and revalidation of an existing programme, but also useful when planning a new programme in a linked area);
• Employer representatives;
• Service users (where possible).

Formal minutes of programme planning meetings are not required, but it is good practice to record action points.

3.10 ÌýÌý After the validation documentation has been received by the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement in its entirety, the agenda, list of panellists and copy of the documentation will be forwarded to each member of the Panel. This will normally be no later than three weeks prior to the event. Where event meetings are managed over a number of days, the documentation will be provided no later than three weeks prior to the date of the first event meeting. Panel members will also be directed to the Validation and Review Briefing Notes for Panel Members A copy of the agenda and list of panellists will be sent to the Programme Leader.

3.11 Ìý It is the responsibility of the Programme Leader to invite the following people to the event and circulate the agenda and any other materials they may need (including the validation documentation):

• Programme Team;
• Head of Division;
• Dean of School;
• Student and graduate representatives (for revalidation of an existing programme);
• Representatives of employers or placement supervisors (if appropriate);
• Service users (if appropriate).

3.12 ÌýÌý The Panel will be asked to submit comments on the validation documentation prior to the event, using the University’s checklist for validation of new programmes. Comments received will be forwarded to the Panel and the Programme Leader prior to the event, whenever possible. This process allows for the clarification of questions or concerns prior to the event and for the Team to prepare thoroughly, so that the event itself runs as smoothly and effectively as possible.

3.13 Ìý The primary function of the Panel is to evaluate the rationale and coherence, separately and collectively of:

• Demand, recruitment and admissions;
• Aims and learning outcomes;
• Programme structure and content;
• Learning, teaching and assessment;
• Student support;
• Programme management;
• Quality assurance and enhancement;

3.14 Ìý Within the themes listed in paragraph 3.13, the Panel will consider:

• Overall rationale and demand for the programme, including how it meets the needs of stakeholders and communities;
• Articulation with the ;
• Alignment with and other external reference points;
• Alignment with QMU strategies, Graduate Attributes and other internal reference points;
• Adherence to QMU or PSRB regulations, policies and procedures;
• The accessibility of the award for all students[1];
• Commitment to widening access and retention, including through contextualised admissions;
• The staff experience, including support and development opportunities.

3.15 Ìý Following scrutiny of the documentation, the Panel may agree that certain issues are clear and do not require further discussion. This will be recorded in the report of the event.

3.16 Ìý The Panel should adopt a peer group approach to provide a constructive and collegiate setting, while at the same time conducting a rigorous evaluation of the merits of the submission.

3.17 Ìý Having scrutinised the proposal, the Panel may recommend to the Student Experience Committee and Senate that:

• The programme be validated subject to conditions (all conditions must be satisfied before the programme can be considered validated);
• The programme be validated (with further advisory recommendations, as appropriate);
• The programme be not validated.

3.18 Ìý Conditions of validation relate to issues that, if not satisfactorily addressed, would prevent the programme from running. Panels are therefore expected to maintain a clear distinction between mandatory conditions, and recommendations, which are advisory in nature. Where the Panel imposes a significant number of conditions, this may bring into question the validity of the programme. The maximum number of conditions applied should normally not exceed five. In cases where more than five conditions are set by the Panel, the programme will not normally be validated. Conditions and recommendations should be stated in clear and unambiguous terms. Any bullet points or sub headings attached to conditions must relate directly to the condition.

3.19 Ìý Panels are not permitted to set resource related conditions, as these will have been addressed prior to the event progressing. However, if a Panel has any concerns, these may be discussed with the Team at the event, or on request through a separate meeting with the Dean and/or Head of Division. Where the Panel feels unable to validate the programme on the basis of unresolved resource issues, this should be referred to the School Academic Board for consideration and response.

3.20 Ìý If the programme is validated, or validated, subject to conditions, then the Panel must also set the date for review. This is usually five years, based on the nature of the programme, including discipline, mode of delivery and duration.

3.21 Ìý Normally all proposals must undergo a validation event by May of the preceding academic session at the latest if they are to be offered in the following academic session. Extensions beyond 31 May require the approval of the Assistant Secretary, Governance and Quality Enhancement, who will take advice from the University Secretary, as appropriate.

3.22 Ìý The Panel will identify aspects of the programme worthy of commendation and wider dissemination. Such commendations relating to areas of innovation and exceptional practice will be detailed in report of the event.

Ìý

[1] Teams are expected to pay due regard to relevant legislation and, where appropriate, to promote equality in respect of the . The nine protected characteristics are age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation.

3.23 ÌýÌýÌý A summary report of the validation event will normally be produced within 48 working hours and circulated to all Panel members for comment and to the Programme Leader for accuracy and to Head of Division and Dean of School for information.

3.24ÌýÌýÌýÌý A full report will normally be produced within 20 working days and circulated for comment to all Panel members and for the accuracy to the Programme Leader. The relevant Head of Division and Dean will receive a copy of the report for information. Any responses to the report must be received by the date specified.

3.25ÌýÌýÌýÌý The report and Panel’s overall recommendation will be considered on behalf of Senate by the Student Experience Committee. This should normally happen no later than the final meeting of the Student Experience Committee each session for a programme due to start in the next academic year. Senate has ultimate authority to approve Panel recommendations, acting on advice from the Student Experience Committee. Where necessary, Convener’s Action can be taken to approve Panel recommendations out with the normal committee cycle.

3.26ÌýÌýÌýÌý The Learning and Teaching Panel, which reports to the Student Experience Committee, is responsible for evaluating the consistency of implementation and effectiveness of procedures governing validation (and review) through its annual consideration of all validation and review reports. The Panel can make recommendations to the Student Experience Committee on the development of procedures, based on its review of the full set of reports each academic year.

3.27ÌýÌýÌýÌý The School Academic Board will receive a copy of the validation report for information and to share practice.

3.28ÌýÌýÌýÌý The Team’s response to conditions of validation must be submitted, in writing, to the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement, no later than the date specified at the event. The Secretary to the event will forward the response to conditions to the Panel. Panel members will each be asked to confirm by a specified date that the response is satisfactory. This will be reported to the Student Experience Committee and Senate. If the Panel is not satisfied with the response, this will normally be resolved by negotiation with the Programme Team. The Panel may delegate authority to the Convener to resolve outstanding issues. Exceptionally, the matter may be referred to the School Academic Board for consideration.

3.29ÌýÌýÌýÌý The Programme Leader must produce a Definitive Programme Document and submit it to the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement once the response to conditions has been approved by the Panel and no later than one month prior to the start of the programme.

3.30ÌýÌýÌýÌý The Definitive Programme Document must incorporate any changes required by the Panel. It should be marked as ‘definitive’ and the date amended to distinguish it from previous versions. It should be submitted electronically to the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement. Governance and Quality Enhancement staff will file the institutional archive copy and pass a copy to Student Records and the Academic Administration.

3.31ÌýÌýÌýÌý The Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement will maintain a full set of all Definitive Programme Documents and will be responsible for communicating formally with PSRBs.

4.1ÌýÌýÌýÌýÌýÌý A face-to-face meeting of the Panel may not be required for a major programme change (see below), for example leading to a distance learning outcome, or the addition of a new named strand. In such cases, it may be possible for approval to be given by correspondence. The Assistant Secretary, Governance and Quality Enhancement will determine the most appropriate approval process, taking advice from the University Secretary and Dean, as appropriate.

4.2ÌýÌýÌýÌýÌýÌý If a programme is presented for validation by correspondence, normally the Panel from the most recent validation or review will be re-appointed. Where one or more of the panellists is not available, alternative participants with appropriate prior experience of validation and review will be sought.

4.3ÌýÌýÌýÌýÌýÌý Each member of the Panel must respond in writing with any questions or concerns, normally within two weeks of receiving the documentation. The Programme Team will be asked to respond to the questions and concerns, also in writing, within a timeframe to be determined in consultation with the Division of Governance and Quality Enhancement. The Panel will subsequently review the Programme Team’s comments and provide their opinion on approval. All Panel members must be in agreement. If not, then further comment will be required of the Programme Team.

4.4ÌýÌýÌýÌýÌýÌý A report will be prepared and provided to the Student Experience Committee, Senate and School Academic Board as set out in paragraphs 3.25 to 3.27 above.