Guidelines for Course Review

October 2002

1. Purpose

The purpose of course review is to assist faculties and the university to assure the quality of academic courses and to learn from this essentially developmental process in order to effect improvement.

2. Guiding Principles for Course Review

The guiding principles for course review fit within the values and principles outlined in Quality at Monash: Values and Principles. In that document, seven key areas of values and principle are identified including:

• creating the agenda for quality by recognising quality as concerned with ‘fitness for purpose’ in a unique and innovative university;
•  recognition that quality is the professional responsibility of each individual and work team;
• the best way to effect quality assurance and accountability is through continuous quality improvement based on collaboration and the development of a learning organisation;
• a commitment to develop policy so as to assure comparable treatment in all areas of the university, while leaving room for different areas to develop implementation for their particular contexts;
• the value of an open and thoughtful approach to quality informed by international research and scholarship;
• a planned and systematic approach to quality including ensuring that the results of monitoring and review are fed back in order to effect improvement;
• recognition that both self-reflection and external points of reference provide valuable perspectives for further reflection and action.

In addition, there are a number of important guiding principles relating specifically to course review as follows.

(i) the strategic directions of the university and of faculties are of central importance for all course reviews;

(ii) benchmarking leading to improvement is strongly encouraged, as is input from stakeholders;

(iii) course reviews consider the effectiveness of processes and procedures, particularly as they are demonstrated through learning outcomes for students;

 (iv) the importance and relevance of external professional and accreditation reviews is acknowledged.

3. Scope of Course Review

Course review is an important part of the comprehensive review process by  which the university systematically evaluates its activities and operations. The integrated nature of the student experience means that all aspects of a course are best considered at the same time. Course reviews therefore include an entire academic programme (degree, diploma or certificate) in the context of its regulations, overall structure and management, the units , major and minor sequences and clinical experiences, practicums, projects and work experience that make up the course.

The major focus of a course review is the manner in which the range of units, sequences and other activities offered (often by many schools and departments from more than one faculty and at a variety of locations) contribute to the course. The student experience of the course is central to course review.

4. Relationship between Academic Review and Course Review

Academic review is described in detail in the document Guidelines for Academic Review. Academic Review has the operational unit of the faculty, school or department as its focus. Academic review considers teaching and learning, research, professional and community activities and internal organisation, management, quality assurance and improvement of the operational unit.

Course review is a more limited activity having as its focus a particular course or programme. Course Reviews feed into and inform academic reviews. Depending on organsiational arrangements within particular faculties, some courses may be more appropriate for review at faculty level and some at school or departmental level.

5. Course Review Cycle

At Monash, review cycles are normally five years (e.g. Institutional Review, Academic Review, Support Services Review). Course Reviews also follow a five year cycle unless the faculty decides on a shorter cycle for operational reasons such as a rapidly changing discipline field.

6. Support for Course Review

Quality assurance and improvement are core responsibilities for each faculty and budgeting for course review is therefore part of the normal planning and budgeting process. Assistance in briefing staff who will be involved in course reviews is available from the Centre for Higher Education Quality (CHEQ). Secretarial assistance for course review panels may be negotiated through CHEQ on a cost-recovery basis.

7. Terms of Reference

Terms of reference help to ensure some consistency of course reviews across the university. They ensure that course reviews meet the requirements of, and are aligned with, faculty and university strategic planning and policy documents.  Course reviews may also include other areas or issues not covered in the standard terms of reference. The standard terms of reference of course reviews are contained in Appendix I and cover the quality and adequacy of:

• course structure;
• course management including planning and quality assurance and improvement;
• units and major and minor sequences;
• student profiles;
• teaching, learning and assessment;
• human, physical, IT resources, health and safety issues;
• professional and community relations.

If a course has external professional accreditation, faculties may choose to extend the external accreditation to include all the above terms of reference, or to incorporate results from external accreditation as part of their course review process.

8. Stages in the Overall Course Review Process

Course reviews have three main stages. First an internal self-review is held that produces a self-review report. This is followed by an external course review panel that produces findings and recommendations. The third phase is implementation and monitoring of how findings from the course review are implemented. The stages of course review and responsibility for each stage are outlined in Table One.

Many aspects of data collection and reporting for the Course Review Process can be managed using web-based templates.

9. Self-review

Self-review is the first phase of the course review process. It presents an opportunity for the department/school/ faculty to consider the directions, progress, achievements and strengths of the course, as well as areas for development and improvement and the means of achieving these. A self-review team of 3-5 people including a student is appointed by the dean of the faculty to lead the self-review of the course and produce a self-review report.

The self-review team gathers information about the course following the terms of reference and presents this in a self-review report. The self-review report forms the basis for the panel visit and course review that will follow. The self-review report is normally no more than 10,000 words (plus appendices) and is structured to reflect the terms of reference. The self-review report should be completed two months before the course review panel visit. It is the responsibility of the dean to ensure that the self-review documentation is forwarded to the course review panel.

The self-review report is a collection of factual information that sets out the background of the course, its structure and management and highlights any special characteristics or factors that have influenced course development. The contents of the self-review report are taken from the terms of reference and should include

• Preamble
• Course Structure
• Course Management
• Units and Major and Minor Sequences
• Teaching Learning and Assessment
• Human, Physical and IT Resources and Health and Safety
• Professional and Community Relations

Appendix II outlines information, data and supporting documentation that is normally regarded as useful for the self-review report. Faculties, schools or departments may include areas that reflect their special circumstances e.g. multi campus and international operations, meeting new developments in the marketplace.

10. Course Review Panel

Course review panels are nominated by the head of the school/department in consultation with the course coordinator of the course to be reviewed, and are approved by the dean of the faculty. Selection of panel members is based on their experience and expertise with regard to the terms of reference. Course review panels may consist of 6 or more members, usually configured as follows:

It is recognised that membership of a course review panel may be varied to meet the particular circumstances.

11. Course Review Process

The course review process includes panel members receiving the self-review document, asking for further documentation if necessary and then undertaking the review visit. During the visit the panel will meet with interested parties, tour facilities, receive submissions and requests for interviews, and at the end of the visit, present preliminary findings. A typical calendar of events is presented as Appendix III and assignment of responsibilities in Appendix IV.

Responding to the multi-campus and international nature of Monash is a matter for each course review to consider in developing the course review process. Possible responses include locating the course review on one campus and having people travel from other campuses, short visits by review team members (as a whole or in subgroups) to other campuses, the organisation of different days of the review at different campuses and the use of audio and video conferencing facilities. Course reviews may also pay particular attention to quality and variation in student experience by campus and mode of delivery.

Self-reviews conducted as part of the Monash Off-Shore Quality Assurance Committee (OQAC) process, together with OQAC reviews and reports, normally form the basis for the review of international teaching and learning activities.

12. Course Review Report

The chair of the course review panel working closely with the secretary drafts the course review report and sends this to the dean for comment. The dean receives the final report normally within two months of the course review visit.

The review report is usually about 8,000 words (plus appendices). There is an executive summary of no more than 3 pages. Major headings normally follow the terms of reference and self-review document, with one or two paragraphs for each finding and may consider recommendations made in the self-review. A copy of the review report is also lodged with CHEQ (for training, development and best practice purposes). The usual format for the report is shown in Appendix V.

13. Post Review Implementation

On receiving the course review report, the dean, in consultation with the head of operational unit and the course coordinator, decides priorities, develops an implementation plan and if necessary modifies the Faculty Operational Plan. As well as prioritising actions and implementation, the dean assigns responsibilities, assesses resource implications, approves a time scale for implementation and appoints a review implementation group if necessary. The dean reports major issues or findings to relevant committees. Action is ongoing till the next review.

Appendix I

Standard Terms of Reference for Course Reviews

The course review panel is asked to review and report to the dean of the faculty on the quality and adequacy of the course, taking into account the following key features.

1. Course Rationale and Structure

• course philosophy and overall aims
• alignment of course with faculty and university strategic directions and plans
• course objectives and the appropriateness of teaching and assessment methods to meet objectives
• flexibility including modes of entry, instruction and assessment
• adequacy, relevance and appropriateness of course regulations
• overall coherence of course structure
• alignment of course with market demand

2. Course Management, Planning and Quality Assurance and Improvement

• processes and procedures for ensuring effective course co-ordination and monitoring across contributing faculties, schools and departments
• processes for identifying, reviewing and remedying problems
• appropriateness and effectiveness of course delivery including use of flexible learning methods
• processes and procedures for ensuring a sound business plan and appropriate strategic cost management
• processes and procedures for liaising with library, IT and learning support staff
• processes and procedures for monitoring the continued relevance of the course to students, professional bodies, employers and other interested parties
• mechanisms for incorporating feedback from students, graduates, professional bodies, employers and other interested parties into course structure, design and delivery
• processes and structures for ensuring equitable delivery across campuses
•  equity objectives
• staff training and development as appropriate
• appropriateness and effectiveness of promotional material

3. Units and Major and Minor Sequences

• appropriateness of the range and scope of units offered
• relevance of subjects to industry and professional needs
• the appropriateness and range of major and minor sequences
• processes and procedures for ensuring that major and minor sequences and individual units accurately reflect the objectives of the course
• processes and procedures for introducing, revising, resourcing and rationalising units and sequences which contribute to the course, in order to ensure effective and efficient use of resources
• processes and procedures for ensuring consistency across campuses and across different teaching modes
• processes for ensuring that Monash’s defining themes of innovation, engagement and internationalisation are included in units and sequences offered
• processes and procedures for ensuring that students acquire Monash graduate attributes during their course

4. Student Profiles

• effectiveness of processes for recruiting students to the course
• processes for ensuring a range of students is recruited to the course including local, international and equity group students

5. Teaching Learning and Assessment

• mechanisms for encouraging students to develop intellectual independence and life long learning skills
• mechanisms for monitoring and sustaining excellence in teaching , learning and assessment in the course
• processes and procedures for encouraging and supporting innovative teaching and assessment methods in the course
• appropriate use of different teaching and learning approaches including use of technology integration of the Monash themes of innovation, internationalisation and engagement in teaching learning and assessment
• processes and procedures for ensuring effective monitoring of student progress and achievement
• processes and procedures for providing students with regular and effective feedback
• provision of appropriate learning support for students
• appropriateness and effectiveness of course advising
• processes and procedures for ensuring comparable experiences and resources for students on different campuses and in different delivery modes

6. Human, Physical, IT Resources and Health and Safety Issues

• adequacy of academic, administrative, professional and technical staffing profile in relation to course objectives, teaching methods and desired learning outcomes
• appropriate provision of teaching and laboratory accommodation and equipment
• appropriate provision of library services
• appropriate provision of IT services
• appropriate provision and utilisation of support services
• processes and procedures for addressing health and safety

7. Professional and Community Relations

• appropriate input to the course from professional and community sources
• student participation in appropriate community and professional activities
• Additional Terms of Reference may be added to reflect circumstances and emphases in particular courses.

Appendix II

Information, Data and Support Documentation for Self-review

In developing the course self-review document, the following information and data will normally be required.

• Faculty and school/department mission statement, plan and organisational chart
• Information on units and major and minor sequences
• Information on teaching and assessment methods
• Graduate Destination Survey data
• Course Experience Questionnaire data (graduated students)
• Course level data from present students
• Unit evaluation data 
• Student data including enrolment, progression and achievement
• Space, equipment, information technology and library resources
• Staffing profile
• Staffing ratios (e.g. staff/student; academic/administrative)
• Staff training and development activities
• Examples of promotional material
• Benchmarking information, performance indicators, stakeholder consultation, survey results (as available)
• Professional and community engagement information
• Budget data including income sources and financial viability of course

The course review panel will also require copies of the following support documentation.

• Leading the Way: Monash 2020
• Learning and Teaching Plan
• Faculty Operational Plan
• School, department, or centre Operational Plan (if appropriate)
• Previous course review report
• Off-Shore Quality Assurance Committee reports (if appropriate) 

Appendix III

Typical Calendar of Events for Course Review

Organisational differences mean that review activities may be scheduled differently. In the following example, a hypothetical course review visit has been scheduled for September. Reviews may be scheduled at any time during the year although teaching (but non-examination) times may be preferred in order to ensure student input. The example below outlines a typical calendar of events for a course review. This can be varied depending on needs of review, particularly in multi-campus operations.

Appendix IV

Areas of Responsibility for Course Reviews

Typical areas of responsibility concerning the conduct of course reviews are as follows.

Dean

• determine and publish schedule of course reviews
• consult with head of school/course coordinator on composition of self-review team
• consult with head of school/course coordinator on course review panel membership
• meet with course review panel
• receive course review report
• consult with head of school/course coordinator on an implementation plan
• report major issues or findings to relevant committees
• send copy of report to CHEQ (for training and development)
• consult with head of school/course coordinator on progress of implementation plan

Head of School/Course Coordinator

• consult with dean on membership of self-review team
• consult with dean on membership of course review panel
• meet with course review panel
• consult with dean on implementation plan
• consult with dean on implementation progress

Chair of Review Panel

• consult with dean on augmenting course review panel if necessary
• following receipt of the self-review document, coordinate requests for extra information from panel members
• consult with dean and secretary on course review panel visit program
• facilitate and lead the course review panel visit
• coordinate drafting of the course review report
• ensure receipt of course review report by dean within two months of panel visit

Course Review Panel Members

• participate fully in the course review process.
•  following receipt of the self-review document, request additional information, if necessary.
• assist the chair wherever possible.
• assist in drafting the course review report

Course Review Panel Secretary

• publicise the course review
• call for internal submissions
• take notes during course review panel visit meetings
• organise support for the course review panel
• play a central role in drafting the course review report

Appendix V

Typical Course Review Report Format

The following is the typical format for a course review report.

Appendix VI

Typical Format for Implementation Plan

The following is the typical format for an Implementation Plan.

Download this as (Word document) (PDF document)