Guidance for Colleges on Course Approval Audit
Although Schools have the authority to approve course proposals, Colleges should undertake an annual audit to ensure that the standard of proposals and related documentation remains high and adheres to the published procedure.
+++
Principles
The purpose of the audit is for each College to scrutinise the process of course approvals (new/amend/withdrawals) by the School Boards of Studies[1] within the College, via the scrutiny of a sample of the paperwork for proposals approved by those Boards.
- The audit should be undertaken annually, at the end of the academic session, covering the approved proposals from that session.
- Some output from each active School Board of Studies should be scrutinised in any session.
- All three types of proposal should be scrutinised by the audit (new/amend/withdrawn).
- The maximum workload for the audit should be capped at College level and therefore equitable across the Colleges.
- The minimum workload for the audit should be set for each College and therefore equitable across the Colleges.
- Proposals should be selected randomly for scrutiny.
- The outcome of the audits should be shared across the School Boards of Studies within the College to aid enhancement of local practice.
- School Boards of Studies should annually table and discuss the previous session’s audit, minuting their account of how any non-compliance arose, and recording any preventative actions for the future.
A monthly summary report, which is emailed to all College approvers, indicates which course proposals have been approved[2] in the month. College approvers should gather the approved course proposals from the previous academic session (September-August), and follow the below principles when choosing a random sample of proposals to be checked annually:
------------------------
[1] In some instances, course approval may take place at the School Learning & Teaching Committee, or a School Course & Programme Approval Group, rather than a dedicated Board of Studies.
[2] Only approved proposals should be spot-checked, as those at the proposal stage may change prior to approval. This also prevents a proposal being spot-checked twice (at the ‘proposal’ and ‘approved’ stages).
---
+++
Sample size and range
- Representative sample of 10% of all approved new course proposals across the College up to a maximum of 10, but with at least one from each School Board of Studies that has approved a proposal in that session.
- Representative sample of 10% of all approved amended course proposals across the College up to a maximum of 15, but with at least one from each School Board of Studies that has approved a proposal in that session.
- Representative sample of 10% of all approved course withdrawal across the College up to a maximum of 10, but with at least one from each School Board of Studies that has approved a proposal in that session.
College approvers should check the following aspects of the proposal in particular:
- That all necessary consultations have been carried out, considered and, if appropriate, responded to, prior to the proposal’s approval.
- That all additional resources have been agreed.
- That the aims and ILOs are appropriate to the level of the course and give the reader sufficient detail.
- That learning and teaching and assessment information is clear, and that the contact and study hours are appropriate for the credit rating.
- That the course specification as a whole gives a clear description of what the course is about.
---
+++
Reporting
An annual report should be produced by the College for submission to the first Academic Standards Committee (ASC) of the session (usually October), indicating which proposals have been spot-checked as part of the audit. It should either state that the proposals were found to be in order or, where this was not the case, detail what the deficiencies were found to be. If any proposal is found to be deficient or missing any supporting documentation, the relevant proposer should be invited to provide comment on why the non-compliance has occurred. The additional context from the proposer should be recorded in the report.
Following consideration by ASC, the completed report, together with any additional comment from ASC, should be shared with the relevant School Quality & Enhancement Officers for dissemination to the Board of Studies, to enable reflection on local practice and identification of any necessary improvements resulting from the audit report. School Boards of Studies should annually table and discuss the previous session’s audit, minuting their account of how any non-compliance arose, and recording any preventative actions for the future.
If colleagues have any questions about the process, please contact apg-academic-regulations@glasgow.ac.uk (Academic Policy & Governance) in the first instance.
---