For 2008 a new amalgamated Curriculum and Teaching Quality Appraisal (CTQA) process will be introduced. The new process is streamlined, and focuses on the strengths and weaknesses of a school’s teaching programs and its plans for enhancement.

The yearly process is to be completed by the end of September. This will ensure the previous year’s data are available and the outcomes of the school-based CTQAs can contribute to faculty operational planning. The revised processes should be conducted by School Teaching and Learning Committees, and overseen by Associate Deans (Teaching & Learning), through the Faculty Teaching and Learning Committee.

Specifically, it is recommended that the CTQA process consider the following core teaching and learning indicators:

• student load (total EFTSL; breakdown by international vs. domestic; U/G, P/G coursework and HDR; and major programs offered by the school);
• student demand (admission levels/trends for undergraduate programs);
• student retention (attrition rates after first year of study for U/G programs);
• student success (pass rates, completions and grade distributions);
• current student satisfaction (aggregated iCEVALs across all courses surveyed in the previous two semesters and most recent UQSES scales for first-year students);
• graduate satisfaction and destinations (GDS outcomes, CEQ scales: good teaching, generic skills, overall satisfaction benchmarked against GO8 & the most recent UQSES scales for graduating students).

To facilitate this process, a CTQA dashboard has been developed.

It is further proposed that every undergraduate program, every major or field of study in a large, generalist degree, and every suite of postgraduate coursework programs be reviewed at least once every 5 years, with major generalist degrees being reviewed every 7 years (in line with the current policy). The purpose of these reviews should be to examine overall trends for each program/sequence of study, drawing on the annual CTQA reports, and complemented by the analysis of some additional indicators. In the case of programs that are subject to reviews by external accrediting bodies, it is proposed that the internal and external processes be aligned, so that they occur simultaneously and so that the internal process is restricted to those additional aspects required by the internal process but not by the external process.

The Associate Deans (Teaching & Learning) will be responsible for scheduling the Academic Program Reviews to ensure that all of the faculty’s undergraduate programs and suites of postgraduate coursework programs are reviewed at least once every 5 years and, where appropriate, to ensure alignment with external accreditation processes. In the case of cross-faculty programs, the Associate Dean (Teaching & Learning) of the co-ordinating faculty will be responsible for the timing and oversight of the APR for the program, and for ensuring appropriate cross-faculty input into the review.

An initial 5-year schedule will be requested from Associate Deans in late 2008 by the Office of the DVC (Teaching & Learning). In the event of significant concerns over a program’s viability and/or quality, Executive Deans may request that an Academic Program Review be conducted earlier than required.