Higher Education Subject Development, Delivery and Review Policy

Fact box

Policy owner: Chair, Learning and Teaching Committee
Policy category: Academic: Learning and Teaching
Policy status: Approved
Approval body: Academic Board
Endorsement body: Learning & Teaching Committee
Related policies:
Last amended: 7th Nov. 2023
Relevant HESF: 3.1.1, 3.1.2, 5.3.2, 5.3.3

Purpose

The purpose of this policy is to describe the guidelines for developing, delivering and reviewing Higher Education (HE) subjects at Alphacrucis University College (AC).

Scope

This policy applies to HE subjects only.

Policy

PRINCIPLES

Courses of study are normally designed so that students progress through subjects, from foundational knowledge and skills to more advanced. These subjects are aligned to the appropriate Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) level(s). Learning outcomes in successive subjects reflect this progression.

Subjects must:

meet regulatory, and where appropriate, relevant professional accrediting authority, Standards and requirements,
align to the appropriate AQF level(s) learning outcomes, and AC graduate attributes,
be informed by the scholarship of learning and teaching, including assessment quality and integrity,
be designed to maintain an engaging student experience.

POLICY

This policy is designed to ensure that ongoing quality assurance processes are applied to monitor the development, delivery and review of HE subjects to ensure quality learning and teaching, consistent with AC’s strategic goals, values, and academic standards.

DEFINITIONS

Subject – refers to a unit of learning that articulates the Course Learning Outcomes and fulfils the integrated standards and commitments of a course.

Special Elective Subject – refers to a generic subject shell that can be adapted to meet a specific need on a one-off basis (e.g., a subject delivered as a one-off over the course of one semester (e.g., guest lecturer), or to trial a new subject for one semester before seeking formal accreditation). Special Elective Subjects have an ‘XXX’ subject code (e.g., XXX000) which is a placeholder that can be filled with a relevant discipline area such as ‘THE’ or ‘CRS’ to address a specific temporary need (e.g., THE000 Special Elective in Theology, or CRS000 Special Elective in Curriculum Studies).

Development – refers to the introduction of a new subject.

Review – refers to the formal evaluation and assessment of an existing subject.

Archive – refers to the change of subject status from ‘active’ to ‘inactive’.

Superseded – refers to a subject replacing another subject.

Assessment – refers to the process of attributing value to the outcome of any assessment task that a student undertakes. Refer to the Assessment Policy for more information.

DEVELOPMENT OF SUBJECTS

Development of all subjects should adhere to the AC Guidelines for writing Higher Education Subject Outlines, including following criteria:

Appropriate level – subjects are systematised via levels and adhere to the AQF;
Appropriate assessment – AC Assessment Workload Calculators should be consulted. These calculations are indicative. Calculations may shift according to the implicit formulae 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 AQF;
AC Graduate Attributes – all subjects should seek to cultivate relevant 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;
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
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.

ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Learning and Teaching Committee

The Learning and Teaching Committee is responsible to oversee the development and regular review of subjects, including subject outlines, and delivery of each course of study.

Head of School

Relevant Heads of Schools oversee the delivery of course of study within their school as a whole. They are also responsible for overseeing any new subject developments or major revisions prior to submission to the Learning and Teaching Committee for approval.

Program Director

The role of the Program Director is to oversee their assigned course of study as a whole.

Subject Coordinator

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 Subject Coordinator is responsible for determining whether a change is minor or major and seek necessary approval for major changes as per this policy. In the case of minor changes that can be approved by the Subject Coordinator, the Subject Coordinator is required to approve and record any minor changes and inform the Quality & Standards Coordinator of the changes in writing.

Lecturer

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.

Tutor

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

The regular review of subjects 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

Key stakeholders

All faculty and HE students

Procedures

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 and Special Elective Subjects. To do this the following steps are undertaken in accordance with the AC Guidelines for writing Higher Education Subject Outlines:

1. Initial Draft of Subject Outline

The Subject Coordinator drafts the subject outline following the AC Guidelines for writing 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 the updated Subject Outline along with the relevant documents as per the AC Guidelines for writing Higher Education Subject Outlines to the Head of School. The Head of School will then take the proposal to the Learning & Teaching Committee for approval. Academic Board has delegated the authority to approve new subjects to the Learning & Teaching Committee. If approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee, the Chair of the Committee (or Delegate) will notify the Head of School and Subject Coordinator regarding the outcome of the Committee’s decision.

The Chair (or Delegate) will also notify the Quality & Standards Coordinator (or Delegate), who will centrally store the Subject Outline and inform the Director of Library Services and update the Subject Revisions and Development Register. The Chair must table a copy of the final accredited subject outline at the next available Academic Board meeting for noting.

Superseded Subjects

If a new subject outline supersedes an existing accredited subject outline, the new subject outline, via the Subject Review Report Cover Sheet, must clearly identify the subject that it is replacing. Once the new subject has been approved by the Learning & Teaching Committee, the Learning & Teaching Committee informs the Subject Coordinator as well as the Quality & Standards Coordinator accordingly. The Quality & Standards Coordinator will then:

Update the Accredited Subject Outline repository to mark the superseded subject as ‘Superseded by [subject code]’.
Update the website to remove the subject that has been superseded, and replace it with the new subject (any course structures that reference a superseded subject, including Course of Study Handbooks, must be updated accordingly to reflect the new subject).
Update the Subject Revisions and Development Register and inform relevant stakeholders.

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

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:

Minor Amendments include:

Changes to the timing of assessments

To change the timing of assessments (what week the assessment is due), lecturers do not need permission.

Changes to assessment tasks

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. Assessment tasks and weightings must be in alignment with the AC Assessment Workload Calculator. While the type of task (aligned to the Assessment Workload Calculator) may differ across delivery sites/modes, it must meet the learning outcomes and the weighting of the tasks must remain the same.

Changes to textbook or major changes to reference lists

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 Director of Library Services and Quality & Standards Coordinator 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.

Changes to the context of a subject

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.

Any amendments to Subject Outlines, including Minor Amendments, must be communicated by the Subject Coordinator, to the Quality & Standards Coordinator, to be recorded in the Subject Revisions and Development Register.

All Major Amendments must be approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee. Major Amendments include:

Changes to prerequisite or corequisite requirements

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.

Changes to the subject code or name

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.

Changes to subject learning outcomes

To change subject 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.

Special Elective subjects

Special Elective subjects require their Learning Outcomes, Assessments and References to be approved by the Head of School and Learning and Teaching Committee before delivery. This should occur 2-3 months in advance.

The Learning & Teaching Committee communicates approved amendments to Subject Outlines to the Quality & Standards Coordinator, to process the revisions and update the Subject Revisions and Development Register.

The Subject Coordinator is responsible to inform any stakeholders (e.g., Registry, Accounts, Subject Coordinator, Library, Head of School, Head of Department, Program Director, Director of Quality Assurance) of the approved changes to a subject outline.

ARCHIVING A SUBJECT

If a subject is deemed no longer current or needed, the subject must be made inactive to ensure ongoing student progression and articulation. Such amendments to the Course structure may require approval from the Accreditation Committee. The Head of School must consult with the Quality & Standards Coordinator to determine the most appropriate way forward.

Requesting a subject to be archived

Following approval from the Head of School, the Subject Coordinator (or Head of School), must inform the Quality & Standards Coordinator to process the archive request.

The Quality & Standards Coordinator will remove the subject from displaying on the AC website and mark the Subject Outline as ‘Archived’ on the Accredited Subject Outlines.

Any subject archive requests will be recorded in the Subject Revisions and Development Register.

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.

2. Approval

If this criterion is met, the Learning and Teaching Committee will approve the co-delivery of the subjects. 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.