Policy on Course and Topic Evaluation,
Monitoring and Review

Approving Authority:	Council
Establishment Date:	1991
Date Last Amendment:	11 October 2007
Nature of Amendment:	minor amendments to clause 4.2
Date Last Reviewed:	September 2005
Publication Reference:
Contact Officer:	Academic Senate Secretary

1.	Preamble
	1.1	Processes for reviewing, monitoring and evaluating the University's academic programs form part of its quality assurance framework. They are to be conducted taking account of the policies and strategic directions of the University, with reference, as appropriate, to relevant comparative or evaluative data. Information derived from evaluation, monitoring and review processes will be used to develop and shape the teaching and learning environment.
	1.2	The policy and procedures outlined below provide the framework within which the Academic Senate and faculties, on behalf of the University, will oversee the review, monitoring and evaluation of the University's academic programs.
2	Definitions
	2.1	For the purposes of this policy:
		*	“Review” refers to course reviews, normally undertaken on a five-year cycle, including reviews of significant course components or academic offerings.
		*	“Monitoring” refers to annual monitoring of courses including significant course components or academic offerings.
		*	“Evaluation” refers to student evaluation of topics, and five yearly evaluation of all topics by the relevant Academic Organisational Unit/s (AOU/s).
3	Principles
	3.1	Review, monitoring and evaluation of courses, topics and components of courses are intended to enable the University to:
		*	assess the overall quality of the teaching and learning environment, and judge whether educational aims and learning outcomes have been achieved;
		*	identify areas where performance needs to be improved, and strategies for improving performance in these areas; and monitor improvements over a given period of time.
		*	consider the ongoing value, viability and sustainability of the course or topic, and its relevance and place within the University’s academic program.
	3.2	Review, monitoring and evaluation of academic offerings are to be conducted with reference to:
		*	the policies and strategic directions of the University identified in Education at Flinders, the Flinders Strategic Priorities and Future Directions and other relevant documents;
		*	data derived from quality assurance processes, including the Key Accountability Measures related to teaching and learning; and
		*	the views of academic staff peers, students, graduates, employers and other relevant stakeholders.
4	Course Reviews
	4.1	A review of each course will be conducted by a review committee every five years. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) will initiate five-yearly reviews of the Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree and the Bachelor of Science (BSc) degree. A schedule of course reviews for all other courses will be established by faculties and reported in their annual reports on the Key Accountability Measures.
	4.2	The terms of reference of a course review will be subject to approval by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) on the recommendation of the relevant Executive Dean/s.
		The terms of reference will include the following matters on which the course review will consider and report:
		*	the place of the course within the University's academic offerings and its contribution to strategic objectives;
		*	the overall quality of the course and its ongoing relevance, value, viability and sustainability,
		*	the quality of significant course components or academic offerings (eg majors), where these form part of the course, and their ongoing relevance and viability;
		*	the educational aims and learning outcomes of the course and whether these remain appropriate;
		*	the relationship of the course with other courses;
		*	student demand, progress rates and attrition rates;
		*	the academic content and structure of the course,
		*	teaching and learning methods, including the use of educational technologies, and assessment practices, and their relationship with educational aims and learning outcomes;
		*	the range, level and relevance of topics;
		*	where relevant, the results of external moderation of Honours assessment, in accordance with the Policy on Honours Programs;
		*	any significant resource issues arising from continuing to offer the course or from proposed new developments;
		*	the operation and success of the course taking account of community expectations, and feedback from professional associations, employers, students and graduates, and where appropriate, the Course Advisory Committee;
		*	the organisational location of the course and arrangements for cross discipline and cross AOU linkages, where relevant;
		*	the course management arrangements with respect to implementation of clause 3 of the Policy on Course and Topic Development, Approval and Management;
		*	the comparability of standards and other relevant factors that may affect the teaching and learning environment where a course is delivered offshore or in a flexible mode of delivery (eg using information and communication technologies or distance education).
	4.3	The composition of a course review committee will be subject to approval by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic), using the specified proforma, on the recommendation of the relevant Executive Dean/s, and will comprise:
		*	a chairperson, who will be either a senior member of the academic staff of the University who does not teach in the course and is not a member of staff of any AOU involved in offering the course, or a person external to the University;
		*	current students and recent graduates of the course;
		*	at least one member external to the University from a relevant academic or professional background;
		*	at least one member external to the University representing a relevant employer, employer group, or professional body;
		*	at least one member of the teaching staff from a related area in the University;
		*	at the discretion of the relevant Faculty, one or more staff members who teach in the course;
		*	other persons as appropriate.
	4.4	On completion of the review, a report from the Review Committee will be submitted to the Executive Dean/s who will arrange for the preparation of a response to the recommendations and an implementation plan.
	4.5	The Review Committee report and the implementation plan will be provided to:
		*	the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic);
		*	the Faculty Board/s;
		*	relevant AOUs and faculty committees.
	4.6	Faculties will report on the outcomes of each five-yearly review as part of the annual review of Key Accountability Measures.
	4.7	The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) will report annually to Academic Senate on course review reports and implementation plans, as part of the KAMs quality reporting process.
	4.8	If a course is subject to a review as part of an external accreditation process, a separate internal review process will be undertaken as required, at the discretion of the relevant faculty, to address any matters not covered in the external review process.
	4.9	The Central Administration will provide administrative support for five yearly reviews through the collection of core data in the areas of admissions, enrolments, student progress, graduate satisfaction and employment; and secretarial support for reviews of the BA and BSc. Faculties will provide administrative support for other course reviews.
5	Annual Monitoring of Courses and Significant Course Components
	5.1	Courses and significant course components (eg majors) are monitored annually through the annual review of Key Accountability Measures, in accordance with procedures and requirements identified by Academic Senate.
	5.2	Faculties will ensure that information derived from this process is referred to the committee(s) responsible for management of the course and other relevant Faculty committees.
6	Evaluation of Topics
	6.1	No less than every five years, those AOU/s involved in teaching a topic will conduct an evaluation of it, in accordance with a program established by the faculty. (Note: This is a minimum requirement. It is recognised that for some topics Faculties have adopted a program of more frequent evaluation, and this is encouraged where resources permit.)
		6.1.1	Evaluations will normally be conducted within AOU/s by the topic coordinators and academic staff involved in teaching the topic.
		6.1.2	Evaluations will consider the ongoing relevance, value, viability and sustainability of the topic over the coming five years, taking account of the aims and learning outcomes of the course/s in which it is offered, and any proposed changes or improvements having regard to:
			*	student demand and enrolments;
			*	topic content, mode of delivery, teaching and learning methods, assessment methods, grade distributions and student progress;
			*	the extent to which topics meet their educational aims and learning outcomes;
			*	whether adequate information about the topic is being provided to students;
			*	the place of the topic in the course/s and course components in which it is being offered;
			*	feedback from students from the topic evaluation component of the Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) instrument.
		6.1.3	The Head of AOU will report to the Executive Dean/s each year on the topic evaluations that have been conducted, in a format that enables the report to be made available to future course reviews.
		6.1.4	In establishing the program of topic evaluations, as far as it practicable, consideration should be given to the schedule of reviews of courses in which the topics are taught.
	6.2	Faculties, in consultation with AOUs, will ensure that where a topic is being offered on a regular basis, a minimum of two student evaluations of the topic, using the topic evaluation component of the Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) instrument, are conducted within a five year period.
		6.2.1	The SET evaluation is to be completed according to the procedures outlined in the Student Evaluation of Teaching Manual, or in accordance with other procedures approved by Academic Senate. (Note: The Student Evaluation of Teaching Manual may be found at: http://www.flinders.edu.au/teach/SET.)
		6.2.2	Information derived from student evaluations of individual topics, using the SET instrument, may be used for the following purposes:
				to assist staff members to develop and evaluate the topic by gaining feedback from students about the topic structure, content and resources;
				as a basis for discussion between the topic coordinator, teaching team members and the Head of the AOU in relation to development of the topic;
				to assist the AOU with the 5 yearly evaluation of topics, as required in clause 6.1.;
				in aggregated form by course, to assist in the five-year review of courses; and
				in aggregated form by field of study on the University’s web-site, to be available to students and other relevant stakeholders.
			The topic coordinator will ensure that information derived from the evaluation of topics is presented in a manner that does not adversely impact on an individual staff member.
		6.2.3	The results of the evaluation of individual topics and the reports of aggregated results will be retained for 5 years, or until the completion of the next 5 yearly evaluation of topics, as required in clause 6.1.
7	Feedback to Students
	Faculties will take responsibility for providing information to students about changes made to courses, teaching methods and assessments as a result of the processes of review, monitoring and evaluation.