Higher Education Subject Development, Delivery and Review Policy
The purpose of this policy is to describe the guidelines for developing, delivering and reviewing Higher Education (HE) subjects at Alphacrucis University College (AC).
This policy defines procedures to regulate the development, delivery and review of HE subjects to ensure quality learning and teaching.
DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECTS
Development of all subjects should adhere to the AC Guidelines for Developing or Review Higher Education Subject Outlines, including following criteria:
Appropriate level – subjects are systematised via levels and adhere to the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF);
Appropriate assessment – AC Assessment Workload Calculators should be consulted. These calculations are indicative. Calculations may shift according to the implicit formulae in order to retain proportionality across all subjects, and provide suitable flexibility in assessment tasks;
AC coding – according to the level of study and the discipline area;
Appropriate learning outcomes – adhere to the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF);
AC Graduate Attributes – all subjects should seek to develop in students the AC Graduate Attributes.
DELIVERY OF SUBJECTS
Delivery of subjects must adhere to the following requirements:
- comply with the Higher Education Faculty Register Policy;
- the lecturer of a subject must deliver the learning outcomes and assessment according to the accredited subject outline;
- the lecturer must consider student access to the necessary resources to meet subject requirements;
- in order for a subject to be co-delivered with another subject that is not of the same AQF level, Learning and Teaching Committee can approve the co-delivery of a subject across AQF levels. In this case, the lecturer must hold a qualification one AQF higher than the highest course of study and the learning outcomes and assessment must reflect the appropriate AQF level.
Provisions Related to Languages Other Than English (LOTE)
The development of new subjects in LOTE is permitted at AC if the following conditions are met:
- the relevant course has been approved for LOTE delivery by Academic Board; and
- the specific subjects being delivered have been translated, the translation has been verified, and evidence of that verification has been submitted to the Learning and Teaching Committee
- where a subject is delivered in LOTE and there is an equivalent English subject available at AC, the LOTE subject shall be based on and dynamically equivalent to the existing English subject in: pre-requisites; assessment; grading; learning outcomes; resources; internal monitoring; and external moderation.
The role of the Program Director is to oversee their assigned course of study as a whole.
The role of the Subject Coordinator is to oversee the delivery of the subject allocated to them and facilitate the successful delivery of the subject on the various campuses of AC. While the subject may be delivered by other lecturers or managed by other tutors, the Subject Coordinator is usually the AC faculty member with the greatest expertise in the subject area and therefore has an oversight role. Ideally, the Subject Coordinator is also research active in the area being taught. Any lecturer or tutor delivering or managing the delivery of a subject should consult with the Subject Coordinator before making any changes to the subject.
The lecturer is responsible to deliver the subject to a specific class of students at a specific campus. In general, the lecturer delivers, grades and co-ordinates the class, as well as being the main contact person for students in that class.
The tutor assists in the facilitation of a subject. Generally, their role is facilitating the delivery of an online subject or grading student assessments.
REVIEW OF SUBJECTS
Learning and Teaching Committee is responsible to oversee the development and regular review of subject outlines and delivery of each course of study. This is ensured through the following mechanisms:
1. Internal Subject Review
At the conclusion of each semester, a review of the subjects taught that semester is conducted. This is a collaborative and peer-review exercise that involves reviewing the subject feedback from students, reflecting on the semester experience, and proposing improvements to the delivery of the subject. The Internal Subject Review process involves key stakeholders (for example, lecturers, subject coordinators, heads of departments, program directors and/or Heads of Schools). If changes are required to subject learning outcomes or overall structure of assessment as a result of this process, these must be approved in line with the Subject Outline Amendment Procedure.
2. Peer Review of Teaching
In addition to this, Heads of Schools are also encouraged to facilitate review of their teaching of staff. This may involve inviting a peer to attend a class being taught and observe the class and student engagement. This activity is aimed to encourage staff in their work, help provide individual feedback and guidance, and address any issues specific to the individual. If available, feedback from students is also taken into consideration. Peer review of teaching should usually result in a written report which is to be submitted to Learning and Teaching Committee.
3. Other Review Mechanisms
At various times the Learning and Teaching Committee may arrange a review of subject outlines to ensure that subject outlines align to the values of AC as described in the Strategic Plan.
Responsible for implementation
Chair, Learning and Teaching Committee
All faculty and HE students
HE Subject Development, Delivery and Review Procedure
DEVELOPING A NEW SUBJECT OUTLINE
The Learning and Teaching Committee oversees the development of new subject outlines, including subjects developed for delivery in LOTE. To do this the following steps are undertaken:
1. Initial Draft of Subject Outline
The Subject Coordinator drafts the subject outline following the AC Guidelines for Developing or Review Higher Education Subject Outlines.
2. Peer Review of Subject Outline
The draft subject outline is to be reviewed by an external academic peer in the field of study. Feedback may also be received from a range of other internal and external experts. An AC Peer Review Form is completed and returned to the Subject Coordinator.
3. Revise Subject Outline
The Subject Coordinator then revises the subject outline in response to any accepted suggestions from the external peer (and others if required) and completes the AC Response to Peer Review Form.
4. Approval of Subject Outline
The Subject Coordinator submits to Learning and Teaching Committee an updated Subject Outline along with the completed AC Peer Review Form and AC Response to Peer Review Form and any other relevant documents as per the AC Guidelines for Developing or Review Higher Education Subject Outlines. The Academic Board has delegated the authority to approve new subjects to the Learning & Teaching Committee. If approved by the Learning & Teaching Committee, the Chair of the Learning & Teaching Committee (or Delegate) will notify the Subject Coordinator of the outcome of the Learning & Teaching Committee’s decision, as well as the Accreditation and Standards Officer, who will centrally store the Subject Outline and update Library. The Learning & Teaching Committee Chair must table a copy of the final accredited subject outline at the next available Academic Board meeting for noting.
REVIEWING A SUBJECT OUTLIINE
The Internal Subject Review process includes the following steps:
1. End of Semester Review
At the conclusion of each semester, a review of the subjects taught that semester is conducted. Each lecturer who delivered a subject should reflect on feedback from students and the semester experience. The lecturer should propose improvements to the delivery of the subject as a result of this activity.
2. Subject Reports
Following the above reflection:
- Each lecturer (or tutor if appropriate) should prepare a Summative Subject Report which is submitted to the Subject Coordinator.
- The Subject Coordinator consolidates all Summative Subject Reports from each delivery site/mode into a single Summative Subject Report, which is submitted to the Head of School (or designated representative, such as Head of Department or Program Director), with clear commendations and recommendations for the improvement of the next delivery of the subjects.
- The Head of School (or designated representative) will review these Reports. If there are items of particular significance or that involve wider implications, the Chair of Learning and Teaching will bring these to the Learning and Teaching Committee. Otherwise, the Head of School (or representative) responds to the reports and initiates the closing of the feedback loop (Head of School to Subject Coordinator to Lecturer) back to students in the next delivery of the subject.
- The Chair of Learning and Teaching, with the assistance of Faculty Administrators and Academic Quality Administrator will ensure all Summative Subject Reports are received and stored.
3. Distribution of information
Students will be informed in writing of previous improvements to the subject based on feedback from their predecessors.
AMENDING A SUBJECT OUTLINE
The procedure to amend an accredited subject outline will depend on which element of the subject outline is being amended. Lecturer(s) must follow the appropriate procedures below:
- To change the timing of assessments (what week the assessment is due), lecturers do not need permission.
- For changes to assessment tasks (including the type of task or assessment weighting), or broad content, lecturers must receive the permission of the Subject Coordinator. This will usually take a few days. While the type of task (aligned to the Assessment Workload Calculator) may differ across delivery sites/modes, the weighting of the tasks must remain the same.
- To change a textbook or make major changes to the reference list, lecturers must submit the current and updated lists to the Subject Coordinator. The Subject Coordinator will approve or reject the change and, if approved, ensure that the AC Librarian, Accreditation and Standards Officer and Academic Quality Administrator is informed. The approval process will usually take a few days, however lecturers should allow 1-2 months for items on the list not yet held in the library to be purchased and processed. The updated textbook or reference list should only be included in the delivery of a subject after this process of purchasing and processing has been completed.
- To contextualise an element of a subject for a specific context, lecturers must submit an updated subject outline to the Subject Coordinator (or designated representative). This process will usually take 1-2 weeks. Importantly, any contextualisation of content or assessments must not alter the learning outcomes or subject objectives. If learning outcomes or subject objectives require contextualisation the subject should be revised or a new subject should be developed.
- To change a prerequisite or corequisite of a subject, lecturers must submit an updated subject outline to the Subject Coordinator (or designated representative) and then to Learning and Teaching Committee, along with a rationale for the change. Learning and Teaching Committee will approve or reject the change and inform the lecturer and Subject Coordinator. This process will usually take 1-2 months. Such changes to subjects with professional accreditation may be required to follow additional professional accreditation review processes.
- To change the subject code or name of a subject, the Subject Coordinator (or designated representative) must submit an updated subject outline to Learning and Teaching Committee, along with a rationale for the change. The Learning and Teaching Committee will approve or reject the change and inform Subject Coordinator. This process will usually take 1-2 months.
- To change subject objectives, learning outcomes, lecturers must submit a proposal to the Subject Coordinator (or designated representative) and then to Learning and Teaching Committee. Learning and Teaching Committee may require an external peer review of the suggested changes. The Learning and Teaching Committee will approve or reject the change and inform the Subject Coordinator. This process will usually take 1-2 months. Such changes to subjects with professional accreditation may be required to follow additional professional accreditation review processes.
The Submitter is responsible to inform any stakeholders (e.g. Registry, Accounts, Subject Coordinator, Library, Head of School, Head of Department, Program Director) of the approved changes to a subject outline. Learning and Teaching Committee ensures that the master record of approved subject outlines is updated.
APPROVAL FOR CO-DELIVERY OF A SUBJECT
The process to apply to co-deliver a subject with another subject that is not of the same AQF level is as follows:
1. Apply to the Learning and Teaching Committee
The Head of School, Head of Department or Program Director must apply to the Learning and Teaching Committee. The criteria for consideration is:
- the subject content of both subjects is related and suitable for co-delivery;
- the different learning outcomes (as per the accredited subject outline) of both subjects will be met;
- assessment reading requirements and course resources (as per the accredited subject outline) reflect the appropriate AQF level;
- the Subject Coordinator holds a qualification one AQF level higher than the highest course of study, or has met the requirements of the Professional Equivalence Policy.
If this criteria is met, the Learning and Teaching Committee will approve the co-delivery of the subject
s. If approved the Head of School and Head of Department will be notified along with the relevant Program Directors and Subject Coordinators. The subjects can then be timetabled accordingly.
AMENDING THE ASSESSMENT WORKLOAD CALCULATOR
The development and implementation of the AC Assessment Workload Calculator and AC Education Assessment Workload Calculator is overseen by the Learning and Teaching Committee. Amendments must be benchmarked and externally reviewed. Feedback may also be received from a range of other internal stakeholders. The final workload calculator will be recommended by Learning and Teaching Committee and approved by Academic Board.