The document outlines two processes: the Revalidation process and the Course and Subject Management process.
The Revalidation process follows a five year cycle where units are allocated to a revalidation year. It involves preparation of documentation that is reviewed by a panel.
The Course and Subject Management process establishes a course committee and director once a course is approved. It focuses on effective ongoing management of the course through staff development and student support activities.
The document outlines the student-centered curriculum design and revalidation process at the university. It provides references and resources to guide course teams through preparing for the regular five-year revalidation cycle where each unit or sub-unit is reviewed. The academic office supports the process by establishing panels, scrutinizing documentation, and monitoring approval conditions, while other departments provide input on resources and the staff development unit assists course preparation. The process aims to design curricula aligned with quality standards and student needs.
Revalidations follow a five year cycle with units allocated to a specific revalidation year. The process involves preparation of documentation like a revalidation form and course documents that are submitted to a revalidation panel. The panel then reviews the materials and produces a report with their findings that is shared with stakeholders. The Academic Office supports the process by establishing panels, reviewing documentation, and monitoring outcomes to ensure conditions are met.
This document outlines the student-centered curriculum design and revalidation process at the university. It provides references and resources to support the 5-year revalidation cycle where each academic unit undergoes review. The academic office oversees the process, which includes preparing documentation, establishing review panels, and monitoring approved changes. The process aims to continually improve courses based on external examiner feedback, committee reviews, and input from central support services to ensure programs meet quality standards.
Once a course has been approved, a course committee is established and a Course Director is appointed. The Course Director works with the committee and Module Co-ordinators to manage the course effectively. Support for the course management process is provided by several departments and includes staff development and training, quality reviews, curriculum design guidance, and advisory services. Outputs include documentation, seminars, recognition programs to support academic staff.
The document summarizes updates from the Residency Review Committee for Internal Medicine regarding the Next Accreditation System and program requirements. Key points include:
1) The Next Accreditation System (NAS) emphasizes outcomes over prescriptive requirements and uses annual data reviews and performance indicators to continuously monitor programs.
2) Program requirements were categorized as core, detailed, or outcomes. Performance is monitored based on annual data like attrition, changes, scholarly activity, and board pass rates.
3) Programs will be reviewed annually based on thresholds for various performance indicators, and "human" review may be triggered depending on the results. The goal is to foster innovation while ensuring quality.
The document outlines the process for revising course content, structure, or regulations at a university when the revisions do not have substantial implications for resources or the overall curriculum. A CA3 form is submitted to the Faculty for approval and then forwarded to the Academic Office. Revisions are processed by the Academic Office following Faculty approval. The process ensures revisions are properly scrutinized and approved before being implemented.
The document discusses internal quality assurance at higher education institutions. It outlines key lessons learned, including establishing a quality assurance unit that reports directly to senior leadership and has appropriate authority. It emphasizes the importance of commitment from senior leadership and faculty, involving all stakeholders, conducting assessments regularly, critically analyzing results, taking remedial actions, and closing the feedback loop through continuous improvement. It also stresses the importance of documentation, transparency, communication, simplicity, use of technology, and reviewing the quality assurance system itself on an ongoing basis.
Impact of SA process on Quality Improvement in HEIsMd. Nazrul Islam
After completion of the presentation, the participants will be able to know the :
- Introduction and background of SA
- Purpose of SA Process
- Quality Assurance in Higher Education of Bangladesh
- Self-Assessment Process at the program level
- IQAC at SAU
- Conclusion
The document outlines the student-centered curriculum design and revalidation process at the university. It provides references and resources to guide course teams through preparing for the regular five-year revalidation cycle where each unit or sub-unit is reviewed. The academic office supports the process by establishing panels, scrutinizing documentation, and monitoring approval conditions, while other departments provide input on resources and the staff development unit assists course preparation. The process aims to design curricula aligned with quality standards and student needs.
Revalidations follow a five year cycle with units allocated to a specific revalidation year. The process involves preparation of documentation like a revalidation form and course documents that are submitted to a revalidation panel. The panel then reviews the materials and produces a report with their findings that is shared with stakeholders. The Academic Office supports the process by establishing panels, reviewing documentation, and monitoring outcomes to ensure conditions are met.
This document outlines the student-centered curriculum design and revalidation process at the university. It provides references and resources to support the 5-year revalidation cycle where each academic unit undergoes review. The academic office oversees the process, which includes preparing documentation, establishing review panels, and monitoring approved changes. The process aims to continually improve courses based on external examiner feedback, committee reviews, and input from central support services to ensure programs meet quality standards.
Once a course has been approved, a course committee is established and a Course Director is appointed. The Course Director works with the committee and Module Co-ordinators to manage the course effectively. Support for the course management process is provided by several departments and includes staff development and training, quality reviews, curriculum design guidance, and advisory services. Outputs include documentation, seminars, recognition programs to support academic staff.
The document summarizes updates from the Residency Review Committee for Internal Medicine regarding the Next Accreditation System and program requirements. Key points include:
1) The Next Accreditation System (NAS) emphasizes outcomes over prescriptive requirements and uses annual data reviews and performance indicators to continuously monitor programs.
2) Program requirements were categorized as core, detailed, or outcomes. Performance is monitored based on annual data like attrition, changes, scholarly activity, and board pass rates.
3) Programs will be reviewed annually based on thresholds for various performance indicators, and "human" review may be triggered depending on the results. The goal is to foster innovation while ensuring quality.
The document outlines the process for revising course content, structure, or regulations at a university when the revisions do not have substantial implications for resources or the overall curriculum. A CA3 form is submitted to the Faculty for approval and then forwarded to the Academic Office. Revisions are processed by the Academic Office following Faculty approval. The process ensures revisions are properly scrutinized and approved before being implemented.
The document discusses internal quality assurance at higher education institutions. It outlines key lessons learned, including establishing a quality assurance unit that reports directly to senior leadership and has appropriate authority. It emphasizes the importance of commitment from senior leadership and faculty, involving all stakeholders, conducting assessments regularly, critically analyzing results, taking remedial actions, and closing the feedback loop through continuous improvement. It also stresses the importance of documentation, transparency, communication, simplicity, use of technology, and reviewing the quality assurance system itself on an ongoing basis.
Impact of SA process on Quality Improvement in HEIsMd. Nazrul Islam
After completion of the presentation, the participants will be able to know the :
- Introduction and background of SA
- Purpose of SA Process
- Quality Assurance in Higher Education of Bangladesh
- Self-Assessment Process at the program level
- IQAC at SAU
- Conclusion
The document discusses the University of Kent's process mapping project which aims to create clear and consistent processes across the university's administration using Triaster process mapping software. It provides an overview of the university, introduces the process mapping project and its goals, and discusses challenges faced and lessons learned. Key points include engaging stakeholders, establishing clear governance, and focusing on facilitation and communication to boost staff engagement with process mapping.
The document summarizes a panel discussion on quality assurance programs for online courses. The panelists represented Quality Matters, Texas Woman's University, Park University, and UT TeleCampus. They discussed their respective quality assurance programs and addressed key issues like the impact on faculty participation, study outcomes, the value of the review process, and lessons learned. The document provides details on each program and studies that showed improvements in student learning and satisfaction from applying a quality review process to online course design.
The document discusses the establishment and role of Quality Enhancement Cells (QECs) in public sector colleges in Pakistan. It explains that QECs are responsible for continuously enhancing the quality of academic programs and institutional processes through regular self-assessment. The key responsibilities of QECs include developing standards for curriculum, teaching, research and facilities and reviewing programs to ensure they meet these standards. The document outlines the self-assessment process that each academic program must undergo every two years according to established criteria and standards. QECs play an important role in strengthening quality assurance in higher education institutions.
Role of qe cs in public sector collegesSamina Ashraf
Thank you for the informative presentation on Quality Enhancement Cells. Establishing QECs is an important step to systematically enhance the quality of academic programs in colleges. I appreciate the clear framework and processes outlined to guide QECs in fulfilling their roles and responsibilities.
Wasc revised action plan draft final 8 may 2010Ross
The document summarizes the revised school-wide action plan with 3 goals focused on: [1] Creating and implementing a coherent K-12 curriculum with standards, benchmarks, and assessments; [2] Improving student support services; and [3] Accelerating technology integration to improve learning. Each goal outlines specific action steps, timeline, responsibilities, and steps to measure progress. The plan aims to address recommendations from an external accreditation review to improve student learning.
Presentation Education & Quality (Paul Garré)DirkVanWaelderen
HUB has a quality assurance system that includes internal policies and external regulations. Internally, they follow a total quality management approach with strong stakeholder participation and a documented quality system. Externally, they undergo peer reviews by independent panels and accreditation. Key aspects of their quality assurance include educational development and innovation, quality assurance procedures, and statistical analysis.
The document discusses several models for curriculum development, including the Taba model, Tyler model, and Taba-Tyler model. The Taba model uses an inductive approach where teachers design the curriculum based on student needs. The Tyler model takes a deductive approach where administrators design the curriculum for teachers to implement. The Taba-Tyler model combines elements of both. The document also examines the systems approach model and compares key aspects of different curriculum development models.
Curriculum planning is an important continuous process that involves collaboration between individuals and groups to develop, improve, and maintain the curriculum. It is organized and helps set priorities for resources while anticipating future needs. A good planning process should stimulate improvement, provide guidance for implementation, increase awareness of goals and activities, and allow evaluation of successes and failures to inform future plans. The importance of curriculum planning is that it develops coordinated, quality teaching and learning programs and ensures shared vision, continuity, coverage of student needs, and improved learning outcomes.
The document outlines the curriculum planning process in the Philippines. It discusses defining curriculum planning as arranging learning opportunities for learners. It also covers the need for curriculum planning to address learner needs exactly and develop coordinated programs. Key factors in planning include history, philosophy, psychology, and contemporary issues. Stakeholders like learners, teachers, administrators, and parents shape the curriculum. Effective planning requires being open-minded, listening to feedback, and adapting to change based on research. The lack of planning can result in an unfocused, vague program developed by chance rather than design.
The document discusses four models of curriculum development:
1) Hilda Taba model which involves teacher involvement and 8 steps including identifying student needs and developing objectives.
2) Tyler model which focuses on determining educational purposes, experiences, organization, and evaluation.
3) Saylor, Alexander, and Lewis model which starts with goal-setting and ends with curriculum evaluation.
4) Oliva model which presents curriculum development as a 12 or 17 step comprehensive and systematic process starting with needs assessment and ending with curriculum evaluation.
The document discusses different approaches to curriculum development in the Philippine context. It provides an overview of the history of curriculum development in the Philippines under different ruling powers from pre-Spanish times to the present Philippine Republic. It also outlines key factors to consider in curriculum development such as cultural values, knowledge of learners, teaching/learning theories, and content selection. Different theories and approaches to curriculum development are examined, including technical-scientific, behavioral, and humanistic approaches.
Curriculum Development Lesson 1: Concepts, Nature and Purposes of Curriculum ...Leen Venti
The document discusses various perspectives on curriculum from traditional and progressive views. It also covers theorists like Tyler, Taba, and their models of curriculum development. Additionally, it examines different types of curricula like recommended, written, taught, and learned curricula. The document also explores the philosophical, psychological, and social foundations of curriculum and how they influence curriculum development.
The Academic Office is responsible for overseeing the initial approval and revalidation of the university's degree programs. It provides various forms and documents to facilitate the process, including course approval forms, revalidation documents, and briefing notes. It also supports evaluation panels, scrutinizes documentation, provides reports, and monitors fulfillment of approval conditions. The overall goal is to assure academic standards for programs and courses through this process.
A CA3 form is submitted to the faculty for consideration and approval of minor course revisions that do not have substantial implications for resources or the overall curriculum. The faculty's teaching and learning committee or relevant subcommittee will scrutinize the revisions. Following faculty approval, the form is forwarded to the academic office. More details on the program revision process can be found by clicking the provided link.
1) A course committee is established once a course is approved, with a Course Director appointed to manage the course alongside module coordinators.
2) The Course Director works with the committee and coordinators to oversee the effective running of the course.
3) Various university offices provide resources and training to support curriculum design and course management.
The document discusses validation processes at the University of Northampton and the University of Wolverhampton.
1. The University of Northampton uses a more traditional validation process centered around a validation panel meeting, while the University of Wolverhampton takes a "virtual validation" approach embedded within curriculum development without an endpoint meeting.
2. The document outlines the key elements and roles of each university's process and debates the approaches against principles of accountability, peer review, timeliness, documentation, curriculum design, and quality standards.
3. It concludes that accountability ultimately lies with the panel chair and quality officer, and constructive peer review from internal and external reviewers should be a core part of any process to ensure the
The Quality Management and Audit Unit coordinates standards assurance and quality enhancement to support the university's mission. It oversees processes that produce various outputs including course handbooks, student charters, assessment guidelines, and information for monitoring academic quality. These outputs provide information to audiences like students, faculty, and staff.
1) Competency-based medical education (CBME) is an outcomes-based approach that uses competencies as an organizing framework for designing, implementing, assessing, and evaluating medical education programs.
2) Traditional medical education focuses on knowledge acquisition with a fixed length and variable outcomes, while CBME emphasizes knowledge application with a variable length and defined outcomes.
3) Effective assessment in CBME uses a variety of objective measurement tools aligned with outcomes, incorporates direct observation and authentic tasks, and emphasizes formative assessment to drive future learning.
The Work-based Learning Maturity Toolkit helps institutions assess their current performance in work-based learning, identify a vision for the future, and recommend actions. The toolkit provides criteria and levels of maturity to evaluate performance in areas like institutional readiness, program design, and technology use. Institutions can then identify best practices for organizing work-based learning and enhancing teaching, assessment, and the student experience through continued development.
This document outlines quality assurance processes for online course development at Ashford University and the University of Rockies. It discusses:
- Institution overviews and curriculum team structures
- Curriculum and course development tools/templates/guidance including outcomes mapping, style guides, development checklists
- Assessment development including rubrics, outcomes mapping, and electronic grading rubrics
- Internal quality assurance reviews at both the content and instructional design levels
- External quality assurance including Quality Matters reviews
- Faculty training models including QM certification
- Research on the impact of quality assurance processes such as the effect of a course development template on alignment
Think before you click: steps on the road to independent learning - LILAC 2012Anthony Beal
This document summarizes Anthony Beal's presentation on steps towards independent learning at the LILAC conference in Glasgow. It discusses the context of an academic skills program and assessment plan at West Cheshire College. Beal implemented a database trial with learners and teachers to collect qualitative feedback data using post-it notes. This data was analyzed and showed 91% positive feedback and improved understanding for 60% of students. Reflection found that kickstarting the process with post-it notes worked well but interviews and observation could provide more detailed analysis of improvement and success in the future.
The document discusses the University of Kent's process mapping project which aims to create clear and consistent processes across the university's administration using Triaster process mapping software. It provides an overview of the university, introduces the process mapping project and its goals, and discusses challenges faced and lessons learned. Key points include engaging stakeholders, establishing clear governance, and focusing on facilitation and communication to boost staff engagement with process mapping.
The document summarizes a panel discussion on quality assurance programs for online courses. The panelists represented Quality Matters, Texas Woman's University, Park University, and UT TeleCampus. They discussed their respective quality assurance programs and addressed key issues like the impact on faculty participation, study outcomes, the value of the review process, and lessons learned. The document provides details on each program and studies that showed improvements in student learning and satisfaction from applying a quality review process to online course design.
The document discusses the establishment and role of Quality Enhancement Cells (QECs) in public sector colleges in Pakistan. It explains that QECs are responsible for continuously enhancing the quality of academic programs and institutional processes through regular self-assessment. The key responsibilities of QECs include developing standards for curriculum, teaching, research and facilities and reviewing programs to ensure they meet these standards. The document outlines the self-assessment process that each academic program must undergo every two years according to established criteria and standards. QECs play an important role in strengthening quality assurance in higher education institutions.
Role of qe cs in public sector collegesSamina Ashraf
Thank you for the informative presentation on Quality Enhancement Cells. Establishing QECs is an important step to systematically enhance the quality of academic programs in colleges. I appreciate the clear framework and processes outlined to guide QECs in fulfilling their roles and responsibilities.
Wasc revised action plan draft final 8 may 2010Ross
The document summarizes the revised school-wide action plan with 3 goals focused on: [1] Creating and implementing a coherent K-12 curriculum with standards, benchmarks, and assessments; [2] Improving student support services; and [3] Accelerating technology integration to improve learning. Each goal outlines specific action steps, timeline, responsibilities, and steps to measure progress. The plan aims to address recommendations from an external accreditation review to improve student learning.
Presentation Education & Quality (Paul Garré)DirkVanWaelderen
HUB has a quality assurance system that includes internal policies and external regulations. Internally, they follow a total quality management approach with strong stakeholder participation and a documented quality system. Externally, they undergo peer reviews by independent panels and accreditation. Key aspects of their quality assurance include educational development and innovation, quality assurance procedures, and statistical analysis.
The document discusses several models for curriculum development, including the Taba model, Tyler model, and Taba-Tyler model. The Taba model uses an inductive approach where teachers design the curriculum based on student needs. The Tyler model takes a deductive approach where administrators design the curriculum for teachers to implement. The Taba-Tyler model combines elements of both. The document also examines the systems approach model and compares key aspects of different curriculum development models.
Curriculum planning is an important continuous process that involves collaboration between individuals and groups to develop, improve, and maintain the curriculum. It is organized and helps set priorities for resources while anticipating future needs. A good planning process should stimulate improvement, provide guidance for implementation, increase awareness of goals and activities, and allow evaluation of successes and failures to inform future plans. The importance of curriculum planning is that it develops coordinated, quality teaching and learning programs and ensures shared vision, continuity, coverage of student needs, and improved learning outcomes.
The document outlines the curriculum planning process in the Philippines. It discusses defining curriculum planning as arranging learning opportunities for learners. It also covers the need for curriculum planning to address learner needs exactly and develop coordinated programs. Key factors in planning include history, philosophy, psychology, and contemporary issues. Stakeholders like learners, teachers, administrators, and parents shape the curriculum. Effective planning requires being open-minded, listening to feedback, and adapting to change based on research. The lack of planning can result in an unfocused, vague program developed by chance rather than design.
The document discusses four models of curriculum development:
1) Hilda Taba model which involves teacher involvement and 8 steps including identifying student needs and developing objectives.
2) Tyler model which focuses on determining educational purposes, experiences, organization, and evaluation.
3) Saylor, Alexander, and Lewis model which starts with goal-setting and ends with curriculum evaluation.
4) Oliva model which presents curriculum development as a 12 or 17 step comprehensive and systematic process starting with needs assessment and ending with curriculum evaluation.
The document discusses different approaches to curriculum development in the Philippine context. It provides an overview of the history of curriculum development in the Philippines under different ruling powers from pre-Spanish times to the present Philippine Republic. It also outlines key factors to consider in curriculum development such as cultural values, knowledge of learners, teaching/learning theories, and content selection. Different theories and approaches to curriculum development are examined, including technical-scientific, behavioral, and humanistic approaches.
Curriculum Development Lesson 1: Concepts, Nature and Purposes of Curriculum ...Leen Venti
The document discusses various perspectives on curriculum from traditional and progressive views. It also covers theorists like Tyler, Taba, and their models of curriculum development. Additionally, it examines different types of curricula like recommended, written, taught, and learned curricula. The document also explores the philosophical, psychological, and social foundations of curriculum and how they influence curriculum development.
The Academic Office is responsible for overseeing the initial approval and revalidation of the university's degree programs. It provides various forms and documents to facilitate the process, including course approval forms, revalidation documents, and briefing notes. It also supports evaluation panels, scrutinizes documentation, provides reports, and monitors fulfillment of approval conditions. The overall goal is to assure academic standards for programs and courses through this process.
A CA3 form is submitted to the faculty for consideration and approval of minor course revisions that do not have substantial implications for resources or the overall curriculum. The faculty's teaching and learning committee or relevant subcommittee will scrutinize the revisions. Following faculty approval, the form is forwarded to the academic office. More details on the program revision process can be found by clicking the provided link.
1) A course committee is established once a course is approved, with a Course Director appointed to manage the course alongside module coordinators.
2) The Course Director works with the committee and coordinators to oversee the effective running of the course.
3) Various university offices provide resources and training to support curriculum design and course management.
The document discusses validation processes at the University of Northampton and the University of Wolverhampton.
1. The University of Northampton uses a more traditional validation process centered around a validation panel meeting, while the University of Wolverhampton takes a "virtual validation" approach embedded within curriculum development without an endpoint meeting.
2. The document outlines the key elements and roles of each university's process and debates the approaches against principles of accountability, peer review, timeliness, documentation, curriculum design, and quality standards.
3. It concludes that accountability ultimately lies with the panel chair and quality officer, and constructive peer review from internal and external reviewers should be a core part of any process to ensure the
The Quality Management and Audit Unit coordinates standards assurance and quality enhancement to support the university's mission. It oversees processes that produce various outputs including course handbooks, student charters, assessment guidelines, and information for monitoring academic quality. These outputs provide information to audiences like students, faculty, and staff.
1) Competency-based medical education (CBME) is an outcomes-based approach that uses competencies as an organizing framework for designing, implementing, assessing, and evaluating medical education programs.
2) Traditional medical education focuses on knowledge acquisition with a fixed length and variable outcomes, while CBME emphasizes knowledge application with a variable length and defined outcomes.
3) Effective assessment in CBME uses a variety of objective measurement tools aligned with outcomes, incorporates direct observation and authentic tasks, and emphasizes formative assessment to drive future learning.
The Work-based Learning Maturity Toolkit helps institutions assess their current performance in work-based learning, identify a vision for the future, and recommend actions. The toolkit provides criteria and levels of maturity to evaluate performance in areas like institutional readiness, program design, and technology use. Institutions can then identify best practices for organizing work-based learning and enhancing teaching, assessment, and the student experience through continued development.
This document outlines quality assurance processes for online course development at Ashford University and the University of Rockies. It discusses:
- Institution overviews and curriculum team structures
- Curriculum and course development tools/templates/guidance including outcomes mapping, style guides, development checklists
- Assessment development including rubrics, outcomes mapping, and electronic grading rubrics
- Internal quality assurance reviews at both the content and instructional design levels
- External quality assurance including Quality Matters reviews
- Faculty training models including QM certification
- Research on the impact of quality assurance processes such as the effect of a course development template on alignment
Think before you click: steps on the road to independent learning - LILAC 2012Anthony Beal
This document summarizes Anthony Beal's presentation on steps towards independent learning at the LILAC conference in Glasgow. It discusses the context of an academic skills program and assessment plan at West Cheshire College. Beal implemented a database trial with learners and teachers to collect qualitative feedback data using post-it notes. This data was analyzed and showed 91% positive feedback and improved understanding for 60% of students. Reflection found that kickstarting the process with post-it notes worked well but interviews and observation could provide more detailed analysis of improvement and success in the future.
The Work-force Development Maturity Toolkit is designed to help institutions assess their maturity in lifelong learning and work-force development. It provides criteria and level statements to evaluate performance, along with guidance and resources. Institutions can identify strengths and weaknesses, set a vision for improvement, and develop action plans. A consortium including universities and colleges will develop the toolkit materials based on prior benchmarking initiatives. The toolkit will allow institutions to benchmark themselves and work towards enhancing learning, teaching, and support for staff and students.
The Work-force Development Maturity Toolkit is designed to help higher education institutions assess their maturity in lifelong learning and work-force development. It provides criteria and level statements for institutions to evaluate their performance, identify areas for improvement, and develop strategic plans and actions. The toolkit was developed by several UK universities and colleges in partnership with JISC. It uses a benchmarking methodology involving stakeholders to gather evidence, conduct self-assessments, and produce reports and change management plans tailored to each institution's needs and goals related to lifelong learning and workforce preparation.
Academic assessment plan. under constructionOAAVFAC
The document summarizes an academic assessment plan under development at a college. It outlines accomplishments made so far, including inventorying existing assessment tools and aligning goals and outcomes across levels. A proposed timeline is provided seeking feedback by specific dates. The purpose is to advance the academic plan, connect it to learning goals, and promote assessment to internal and external audiences including accreditors. Input is requested from an assessment task force and college community.
Issues around using attendance data to improve student progressionMelanie King
Presentation given at the CETIS 2012 conference March. This presentation describes some of the interventions undertaken as part of the JISC funded Pedestal for Progression Project (http://progression.lboro.ac.uk) - Mar'11 - Aug'12.
This document provides guidance on improving graduate medical education program management through establishing resident files, program files, and a task management list. It outlines setting up resident files with required information organized into tabs, and program files with documentation for accreditation organized into tabs. It also describes how to create a task management list to better track program activities, with suggestions to include annual education committee topics, key accreditation focus areas, and program/coordinator tasks and reminders. The goal is to optimize evaluation of residents and documentation for quality improvement and accreditation requirements.
The document outlines the project management process for developing curriculum. It discusses the importance of project management for efficiently completing projects and achieving organizational objectives. The process involves planning, documenting, piloting, and implementing the new curriculum. Key steps in the planning phase include identifying stakeholders, creating a project charter, developing a work breakdown structure and schedule. The documenting phase involves drafting lesson plans, materials, and getting approvals. Piloting involves testing the new curriculum with a sample group and evaluating effectiveness. Upon approval, the curriculum is then implemented organization-wide.
The document discusses NASA's independent review process for programs and projects. It aims to ensure the highest probability of mission success. Key points:
1. Independent reviews are conducted by Standing Review Boards at each project life-cycle milestone to objectively assess technical approach, schedule, resources, risk, and management approach.
2. Reviews provide independent validation of projects' readiness to proceed and reassure stakeholders that commitments can be delivered. Preparing for reviews allows holistic project examination.
3. Reviews follow NASA governance involving senior management, technical authorities, and decision authorities. Standing Review Boards comprised of independent experts conduct the actual reviews.
4. The process helps ensure projects receive independent assurance they are on
The document summarizes Catherine O'Donnell's task of mapping out the existing curriculum development process at Ulster University and identifying where a new reflective tool called Viewpoints could fit within that process. It lists many of the policies, documents, committees, and feedback mechanisms that directly influence the curriculum development process. It also requests feedback on any gaps in the mind map being created to illustrate the relationships between these different influences, and ideas for how Viewpoints could enhance the university's approach to curriculum design.
Centre-for-Homeopathic-Education-HER-14Nabeel Zaidi
The document provides details of a review conducted of the Centre for Homeopathic Education in May 2014. The key findings include:
1) The Centre meets UK expectations for academic standards, learning opportunities information, and enhancing learning. However, it requires improvement to meet expectations for quality of learning opportunities.
2) An action plan was published in October 2014 to address recommendations from the review.
3) A partial re-review in February 2015 confirmed that recommendations had been successfully addressed, leading to an amended judgement that the Centre now meets UK expectations for quality of learning opportunities.
The document outlines the planning process for conducting a learner needs analysis and developing a learner profile. It involves performing a SWOT analysis, pre-assessment, and gap analysis to evaluate the needs of the target audience. Subject matter experts then develop and review the content. An instructional designer further develops the program, which undergoes peer review and alpha/beta testing before launch. The process aims to ensure the training content effectively meets the goals and needs identified during the initial analysis.
This document provides guidance on the Edexcel Level 5 BTEC Diploma in Teaching in the Lifelong Learning Sector. It outlines the structure and content of the qualification, which consists of mandatory and optional units. The Diploma is designed to enable teachers to apply for Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills status and a License to Practice. It reflects the new professional standards for post-16 teaching and provides underpinning knowledge as well as developing practical skills. On completion of all units and 150 hours of teaching practice, learners will be eligible to pursue Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills recognition.
Similar to Ulster Curriculum Design Processes (20)
This document summarizes a seminar held at St. Mary's University College Belfast on listening to students and engaging with their feedback. Three case studies were presented that examined how student feedback was obtained and used to enhance courses and programs. The case studies found that engaging with students provided valuable insights and led to improvements in practice and policies. Attendees learned that methods like focus groups are useful for gaining detailed student opinions and feedback. Presenting results back to students shows the value of their input. Disseminating findings to peers allowed for comparing approaches and learning from each other. Engaging student voice can inform work and benefit teaching and learning.
The document evaluates the Viewpoints project at the University of Ulster, which aimed to develop tools to support curriculum design. The project created conceptual "prompt cards" around themes like assessment and feedback. Workshops used these cards and a timeline worksheet to help course teams redesign modules. Over 34 workshops occurred. The evaluation found the workshops effectively supported curriculum discussions and maintained an educational focus. The assessment and feedback principles became adopted as university policy and impacted practices beyond workshops. Overall, the project seeded new thinking around curriculum design that facilitated institutional changes and helped embed sustainability. A model of educational change is extrapolated from the project.
The Viewpoints project created curriculum design workshops and resources to help staff and learners plan effective curriculum. Key achievements include:
1) Enhancing curriculum design and embedding new educational practices by providing a creative environment for staff to collaboratively reflect on curriculum.
2) Effective stakeholder engagement through early involvement of staff, learners, and ensuring resources aligned with academic processes.
3) Embedding and adoption within the host institution and other universities. Resources have been used in curriculum development, assessment initiatives, and academic development programs.
The project addressed needs for refreshed curriculum approaches and better learner engagement in the design process. Workshops stimulated discussion and collaboration among staff and students to build ideas for learner-centered curriculum models
This document provides a template for recording outputs from a workshop session. It includes spaces to record the workshop objective, any principles or example ideas selected during the session, and any additional ideas or recommendations. Participants can use this template to document information discussed on their timeline worksheet and photograph that worksheet after the session.
This facilitator's plan outlines a 1.5 hour workshop to help educational teams design or revise curriculum using the Viewpoints Curriculum Design Toolkit. The workshop consists of 8 activities where participants: 1) Agree on an objective for their curriculum challenge, 2) Choose a curriculum design theme to focus on, 3) Select principles from theme cards that address their objective, 4) Map the principles to a timeline, 5) Review examples on the cards that could support their objective, 6) Discuss how the ideas could be applied, 7) Agree on action points, and 8) Share their plans with the whole group. The facilitator introduces the session and provides an overview before splitting participants into groups to work through the activities.
This workshop uses reflective tools like timelines and theme cards to help staff design effective curriculum. Participants work in small groups to choose a curriculum design objective, select a theme, and map principles from theme cards to a student timeline to address their objective. Examples on the backs of the cards provide ideas to consider. The workshop concludes with groups formulating plans, agreeing on action points, and sharing their work to get feedback.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive function. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms for those who already suffer from conditions like depression and anxiety.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive functioning. Exercise boosts blood flow, releases endorphins, and promotes changes in the brain which help relax the body and lift the mood.
The document describes the Viewpoints project, which aims to create curriculum design tools to promote effective learning. It discusses the project's framework and themes of assessment & feedback, information skills, learner engagement, and creativity & innovation. Each theme includes principles and implementation ideas on cards. The document outlines a typical workshop where a course team discusses objectives, maps selected cards to a learner timeline, and chooses relevant examples to tailor to their course. Benefits included providing focus for discussion, considering new options, and seeing the learner perspective to improve assessment and feedback. Resources from the project aim to enhance curriculum design and the learner experience.
The Viewpoints Project provides tools to support effective assessment and feedback through reflective workshops. [1] The workshops use principles of best practice mapped to a learner timeline to help staff design curriculum. [2] Typical workshops involve sorting assessment and feedback cards, mapping principles to objectives on the timeline, and reflecting on implementation ideas. [3] Evaluations found the approach facilitated discussion, built effective teams, and helped design engaging curriculum.
This document describes an information skills workshop that uses a set of cards and a student timeline to help groups address objectives and consider principles of student learning. The workshop involves 5 tasks: 1) setting objectives, 2) selecting principles cards, 3) mapping cards to a student timeline, 4) implementing ideas and tailoring solutions, and 5) sharing outputs. Feedback indicates the workshop was thought-provoking, facilitated discussion, and provided useful prompts to encourage consideration of creativity and a holistic approach to student learning.
The document outlines a workshop on Viewpoints, a curriculum design project that provides reflective tools to promote effective curriculum design. The workshop includes an introduction to Viewpoints, group tasks using Viewpoints cards on different themes, and a discussion of experiences using the tools. Participants provide positive feedback, noting it was thought-provoking, useful for considering new ideas, and helped facilitate discussion and collaboration within course teams.
This document summarizes a workshop on using the Viewpoints framework to support curriculum design focusing on assessment and feedback. The workshop introduced participants to the Viewpoints project, had them work through tasks exploring assessment and feedback principles and implementation ideas using provided resources, and concluded with sharing experiences and evaluations. The Viewpoints framework and resources were demonstrated to help curriculum teams consider the learner perspective and support effective course and module design focused on key themes like assessment and feedback.
The document summarizes a workshop on integrating digital and information literacy into university curriculums. It introduces the Viewpoints project which provides tools to help curriculum design. The workshop involved breakout groups using information skills theme cards to address scenarios and map principles to a student learning timeline. Participants shared that the resources provided useful prompts for consideration and facilitated discussion on integrating digital capabilities.
Elevate Your Nonprofit's Online Presence_ A Guide to Effective SEO Strategies...TechSoup
Whether you're new to SEO or looking to refine your existing strategies, this webinar will provide you with actionable insights and practical tips to elevate your nonprofit's online presence.
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
إضغ بين إيديكم من أقوى الملازم التي صممتها
ملزمة تشريح الجهاز الهيكلي (نظري 3)
💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀💀
تتميز هذهِ الملزمة بعِدة مُميزات :
1- مُترجمة ترجمة تُناسب جميع المستويات
2- تحتوي على 78 رسم توضيحي لكل كلمة موجودة بالملزمة (لكل كلمة !!!!)
#فهم_ماكو_درخ
3- دقة الكتابة والصور عالية جداً جداً جداً
4- هُنالك بعض المعلومات تم توضيحها بشكل تفصيلي جداً (تُعتبر لدى الطالب أو الطالبة بإنها معلومات مُبهمة ومع ذلك تم توضيح هذهِ المعلومات المُبهمة بشكل تفصيلي جداً
5- الملزمة تشرح نفسها ب نفسها بس تكلك تعال اقراني
6- تحتوي الملزمة في اول سلايد على خارطة تتضمن جميع تفرُعات معلومات الجهاز الهيكلي المذكورة في هذهِ الملزمة
واخيراً هذهِ الملزمة حلالٌ عليكم وإتمنى منكم إن تدعولي بالخير والصحة والعافية فقط
كل التوفيق زملائي وزميلاتي ، زميلكم محمد الذهبي 💊💊
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
THE SACRIFICE HOW PRO-PALESTINE PROTESTS STUDENTS ARE SACRIFICING TO CHANGE T...indexPub
The recent surge in pro-Palestine student activism has prompted significant responses from universities, ranging from negotiations and divestment commitments to increased transparency about investments in companies supporting the war on Gaza. This activism has led to the cessation of student encampments but also highlighted the substantial sacrifices made by students, including academic disruptions and personal risks. The primary drivers of these protests are poor university administration, lack of transparency, and inadequate communication between officials and students. This study examines the profound emotional, psychological, and professional impacts on students engaged in pro-Palestine protests, focusing on Generation Z's (Gen-Z) activism dynamics. This paper explores the significant sacrifices made by these students and even the professors supporting the pro-Palestine movement, with a focus on recent global movements. Through an in-depth analysis of printed and electronic media, the study examines the impacts of these sacrifices on the academic and personal lives of those involved. The paper highlights examples from various universities, demonstrating student activism's long-term and short-term effects, including disciplinary actions, social backlash, and career implications. The researchers also explore the broader implications of student sacrifices. The findings reveal that these sacrifices are driven by a profound commitment to justice and human rights, and are influenced by the increasing availability of information, peer interactions, and personal convictions. The study also discusses the broader implications of this activism, comparing it to historical precedents and assessing its potential to influence policy and public opinion. The emotional and psychological toll on student activists is significant, but their sense of purpose and community support mitigates some of these challenges. However, the researchers call for acknowledging the broader Impact of these sacrifices on the future global movement of FreePalestine.
A Visual Guide to 1 Samuel | A Tale of Two HeartsSteve Thomason
These slides walk through the story of 1 Samuel. Samuel is the last judge of Israel. The people reject God and want a king. Saul is anointed as the first king, but he is not a good king. David, the shepherd boy is anointed and Saul is envious of him. David shows honor while Saul continues to self destruct.
Temple of Asclepius in Thrace. Excavation resultsKrassimira Luka
The temple and the sanctuary around were dedicated to Asklepios Zmidrenus. This name has been known since 1875 when an inscription dedicated to him was discovered in Rome. The inscription is dated in 227 AD and was left by soldiers originating from the city of Philippopolis (modern Plovdiv).
1. Process Framework
Revalidations follow a regular five year
cycle. Each unit or sub-unit is allocated to
a particular revalidation year within a
Outputs Audience
Reference Information quinquennial cycle.
Revalidation Dean, central
Click here for further details about the
• Academic Office information, documents preparation form: services
Revalidation Information process.
and forms including: CA6. departments &
o Programme Approval Management revalidation panel.
and Review Handbook Course Revalidation Revalidation panel.
o Partnership Handbook document.
o Assessment Handbook Academic Office Chair of the panel
o Handbook for Members of University briefing notes. initially, full panel
Revalidation Panels and Faculty on the
o Handbook for Members of Curriculum Design day of the meeting.
Revalidation Panels in External Course Revalidation Reports on resource Revalidation panel.
Institutions matters from central
o Information for students Process service departments.
• Quality Management and Audit External examiners Revalidation panel.
information reports.
o Module review Revalidation panel Panel members,
o Annual subject monitoring report. Dean, subject unit
o Themed audit co-ordinator, Head
o Academic planning etc. of Faculty
• Course Committee meeting minutes Process Support Administration and
• External examiners’ reports forwarded to CASC.
• Existing course documents, module • Academic Office supports processes Revised revalidation Academic Office
descriptions etc. through: document and a brief and chair of
• Staff Development Unit information o establishment and servicing of paper indicating evaluation panel.
• Centre for Higher Education Practice revalidation panels; amendments.
information o scrutiny of documentation; Chair certifies by Course committee.
• Other central departments which may o provision of reports; signature on the title
contribute include: Access and o monitoring of the implementation of page of final
!
Distributed Learning (Lifelong Learning, conditions of approval etc. document.
CETL and Viewpoints), Library, • Staff Development and the Centre for
Information services, Careers, Planning Higher Education Practice provide
and Governance Services, Physical support to course teams preparing for
Resources, Accommodation, Student revalidation.
Marketing etc. • Faculty must consult with relevant
central departments if provision cannot
be met within existing resource.
o Access and Distributed Learning,
Library, Careers and Planning and
Governance Services etc.
2. Process Framework
Once a course has been approved, a
course committee is formally established
and a Course Director is appointed. The
Course Director works with the course
committee and those designated as
Module Co-ordinators to encourage the
effective management of the course.
Click here for further details about the
Course and Subject Management process. Outputs Audience
Reference Information Staff handbooks and Academic staff,
• Academic Office information, documents staff training. course directors and
and forms including: external examiners.
o Programme Approval Management Seminar and Academic staff.
and Review Handbook discussion fora
o Partnership Handbook programme,
o Assessment Handbook
Curriculum Design comprising invited
o External Examiners’ Handbook Course & Subject speakers both
• Quality Management and Audit Unit Management Process external and internal
information to the University.
• Staff Development Unit information CETL Reward and Academic staff.
• Centre for Higher Education Practice Recognition scheme.
information Peer observation Academic staff.
• Access and Distributed Learning schemes.
(Lifelong Learning, CETL and National Teaching Academic staff.
Viewpoints) Fellowship scheme.
Process Support University Handbook, Academic staff and
charters, course students.
• Academic Office has an advisory and handbook and
developmental role in relation to all module handouts.
aspects of academic policy, procedures Work experience Academic staff and
and regulations for taught award-bearing guidance (academic students.
provision. staff, students and
• Quality Management and Audit unit
employers).
has responsibility for:
Library Supporting Academic staff and
o Reviewing the quality of taught
Teaching and students.
provision by external agencies;
Research.
o Internal subject and collaborative
Course Approval Faculty, Faculty
provision annual monitoring;
form: CA3. Teaching and
o Internal themed/process audit;
Learning
o Module monitoring;
Committee,
o Institutional audit;
Academic Office,
o Academic Governance (including
CASC, Physical
servicing of Senate);
Resources,
o Student feedback surveys;
Information
Staff/Student Consultative
Services, the
Committees, Student Charters and
Module Office and
student complaints etc.
Student Marketing.
• Staff Development Unit is responsible
for supporting all staff and provides: Course committee Heads of school and
o Academic Induction, pedagogic minutes. academic staff.
workshops, stand-alone modules Staff/Student Course directors,
which contribute towards a Consultative course committees
!
Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Committee. and students.
Education Practice qualification,
course director training and external
examiner training etc.
• Centre for Higher Education Practice
is responsible for implementing aspects
of the Teaching and Learning Strategy
(2008/09-2012/13) in collaboration with
existing departments. It seeks to
provide opportunities for enhanced
pedagogic practice.
• Other central departments which may
contribute include: Access and
Distributed Learning, Library, Career
Development Centre, Student Support
etc.
3. Process Framework
A CA3 form is submitted to Faculty for
consideration and approval when staff
propose to revise content, structure, or
regulations of a course which do not have
substantial implications for resources or the
overall curriculum. Faculty procedures for
consideration of revisions should include
scrutiny by the Faculty Teaching and
Learning Committee or appropriate sub-
committee. The form is forwarded to the
Academic Office following approval.
Click here for further detail about the
programme revisions process. Outputs Audience
Reference Information Course Approval Faculty, Faculty
form: CA3. Teaching and Learning
• Academic Office information, documents Committee, Academic
and forms including: Office, CASC, Physical
o CA3 form which should be used Resources, Information
when it is proposed to revise Services, the Module
structure, content or regulations, Curriculum Design Office and Student
and where these revisions do not Minor Revisions Marketing.
External examiner Faculty, Faculty
have substantial implications for Process reports indicating Teaching and Learning
resources or the overall curriculum.
o Programme Approval Management where changes to Committee and
and Review Handbook the coursework/ Academic Office.
o Partnership Handbook examination
o Assessment Handbook weighting or to the
content of a
module has been
Process Support recommended by
the external
!
Revisions to programmes of study are examiner.
processed by the Academic Office, following
Faculty approval.
4. Process Framework Outputs Audience
The Academic Office is responsible for Course Faculty board, APSC,
standards assurance arrangements with Approval form: ADEC and CASC.
respect to the initial approval and CA1.
revalidation of the University's award- Course Dean and evaluation
bearing programmes of study. Revalidation panel.
Reference Information document.
Click here for further details about the Academic Office Chair of the panel initially,
• Academic Office information, documents Programme Approval process. briefing notes full panel and faculty on
and forms including: identifying key the day of the meeting.
o Programme Approval Management issues, as well
and Review Handbook as standards
o Partnership Handbook and regulatory
o Assessment Handbook matters.
o Handbook for members of University Preliminary Evaluation panel and
Evaluation Panels Comments course planning
o Handbook for Members of
Curriculum Design form: CA7. committee before
Evaluation Panels in External New Course Approval evaluation meeting.
Institutions Process Inspection of Evaluation panel and
o Information for students Resources course planning
• Other central departments which may Form: CA8. committee before
contribute include: Access and evaluation meeting.
Distributed Learning (Lifelong Learning, Reports on Evaluation panel.
CETL and Viewpoints), Library, resource
Information services, Careers, Planning matters from
and Governance Services, Physical central service
resources, Accommodation, Student Process Support departments.
Marketing etc. Report of Panel, Dean, chair of the
• Academic Office supports processes evaluation course or subject
through: panel. planning committee,
o establishment and servicing of Head of Faculty
evaluation panels; Administration and
o scrutiny of documentation; CASC.
o provision of reports; Revised Academic office and chair
o monitoring of the implementation of evaluation of evaluation panel.
conditions of approval. document with
• Staff Development and the Centre for brief paper
Higher Education Practice offer provide indicating
support to teams preparing for amendments.
evaluation. Chair certifies Course planning
• Access and Distributed Learning, approval by committee.
Library, Information services, Careers, signature on the
Planning and Governance Services, title page of final
!
Physical resources, Accommodation, Document.
Student Marketing etc.
5. Outputs Audience
Process Framework
Course and Academic staff and
The Quality Management and Audit Unit Module Handbook. students.
co-ordinates an integrated system of Student Charter Academic staff and
standards assurance and quality and support students.
management and enhancement to support charters.
the University’s Mission and underpin the Studies advice Academic staff and
academic planning process. code of practice students.
and PDP.
The National Prospective students,
Student Survey. parents and academic
staff.
Reference Information Assessment Academic staff.
Handbook.
• Academic Office information
• Programme Approval Management and Curriculum Design Module monitoring Heads of school and
information. academic staff.
Review Handbook Quality Management & Annual subject Faculty and academic
• Partnership Handbook Audit Process monitoring. staff.
• Assessment Handbook Statistical Faculty and academic
• Quality Management and Audit web
information about staff.
pages student
o Includes guidelines on risk re:
progression and
annual subject monitoring. award data.
• Professional statutory and regulatory
Institutional audit Faculty and academic
bodies (PSRB) criteria
Process Support information. staff.
• Employer feedback
Graduate Heads of school and
• Academic infrastructure
• Quality Management and Audit Unit destination. academic staff.
• Staff Development Unit Staff/Student Course directors,
• Centre for Higher Education Practice Consultative course committees and
• Access and Distributed Learning Committee. students.
(Lifelong Learning, CETL and Course committee Heads of school and
Viewpoints) minutes. academic staff.
Course Approval Faculty, Faculty
form: CA3. Teaching and Learning
Committee, Academic
Office, CASC, Physical
Resources, Information
Services, the Module
Office and Student
!
Marketing.