Program evaluation
Program evaluation at UniSA is conducted within the framework of Policy A-35A Quality assurance and improvement: Programs, courses and teaching arrangements (PDF 96KB - opens in a new window. Download Adobe Reader). It outlines the conditions for evaluating the quality and viability of programs and courses and occurs in the penultimate year of a 6 year accreditation period. An additional process, the Annual Review of Program Performance, may result in accelerating the evaluation and reaccreditation review of a program not in the accreditation process. These mechanisms ensure the systematic improvement of the University's courses and programs.
Program evaluation and reporting procedure
The requirements for and reporting of program evaluation are administered through the Business Case Review (BCR) Report and the Evaluation and Reaccreditation Review (ERR) report.
Each program under review is provided with a dataset by Planning and Institutional Performance (PIP). The dataset includes aggregated data from the University's electronic course evaluation instrument which constitutes a program view of student feedback. The collection of additional data (from students, and external stakeholders) to complement the program dataset is necessary.
Benchmarking activities such as a comparison of performance outcomes with programs in other universities using publicly available data (GCEQ and GDS) is an important element of the program evaluation process. These benchmarking activities result in the identification of areas for improvement with a view to distinguishing UniSA programs from its competitors.
The evaluation of quality process is managed by Schools and Divisions who report to Academic Policy and Program Review Committee (APPRC) who reports to Academic Board.
Review report proformas
The Policy provides proformas for reporting the two categories of Program evaluation:
- Business case review - All new Programs undergo a business case review (BCR) in the second year they are offered. This review analyses and reports on the progress of the program against the claims made in the original approval documentation and identifies amendments that ensure the ongoing success of the program.
- Evaluation and re-accreditation review - All Programs undergo an evaluation and re-accreditation review (ERR) in the penultimate year of their period of accreditation. The ERR may be brought forward if annual quality and viability monitoring identifies any issues in the program. The ERR forms the basis for deciding whether the program is re-accredited, usually for a further six years of student intakes.
Program data
Data that supports the review includes the:
- provision of standard data-sets for each program undergoing review by Planning and Institutional Performance at A35A Program Review Resources.
- collection of additional data by the review team from the School, Division, University or other sources. The collection processes used for such data need to be described in the respective proforma. For example the period for which the data is valid and the measures used (eg persons or EFTSL).
- analysis of CEI, SET and CEQ data which is central to the review process.
Academic support
Program review teams can take advantage of the academic support available to them. The respective
- Dean: Teaching and Learning and
- Academic Developer at the Learning and Teaching Unit (LTU)
offer guidance and input at the draft stage which could minimise the need for major amendments later.
Further assistance
Useful links
- Quality assurance and improvement: Programs, courses and teaching arrangements policy (PDF 96KB - opens in a new window. Download Adobe Reader)
- Academic Policy and Program Review Committee (APPRC)
- Academic Board
- Business case review proforma (Word doc 44kb - opens in a new window)
- Evaluation and re-accreditation review proforma (Word doc 176kb - opens in a new window)
- A35A Program Review Data
- A35A and Program Review Tip Sheet
Literature
- Robyn Lines Cyclic Course Review at UTAS: Underpinning Ideas (University of Tasmania) (Word doc 76kb - opens in a new window)
- Cyclic Course Reviews: Process overview, tools and examples This site has been developed by Robyn Lines for the ALTC funded project Embedding and Sustaining Leadership Development for Course Coordinators through Tailored Support during Curriculum Review.