• Section 1 - Introduction and Scope
• Section 2 - Teacher Approval
• Section 3 - Quality Assurance Process - Level of QA to be applied
• Section 4 - Levels of Quality Assurance
• Level 1
• Level 2
• Level 3
• Section 5 - Quality Assurance of Subjects Not Delivered at UOW
• Section 6 - Quality Assurance of Subjects Delivered using Mixed Delivery
• Section 7 - Roles and Responsibilities
• UOW:
• Partner:
• Section 8 - Schedule 1: A summary of steps required for each level of Subject QA
• Section 9 - Schedule 2: Subject QA: Process for Assessment of Levels of Quality Assurance
• Section 10 - Definitions

Section 1 - Introduction and Scope

(1) The University of Wollongong (UOW) is required to assure the quality of all its subjects, irrespective of where these are delivered or who provides them. The Quality Assurance process will ensure equivalence between the subject delivered by the partner institution and the subject delivered at UOW, as outlined in the UOW Principles of Equivalence.

(2) These Procedures form part of the Collaborative Delivery of a UOW Course Policy suite and set out the steps to be taken in the quality assurance of subjects delivered in collaboration with a partner institution.

(3) These Procedures set minimum standards and maximum timeframes in which the quality assurance activities will occur. These standards may be made more stringent, and timeframes may be shortened, by mutual consent of both UOW and the partner institution.

(4) Academic staff members at both UOW and the partner institution are encouraged to raise any issues they may have with the subject design or delivery with the Academic Program Director or Associate Dean International (ADI) when they arise, to facilitate timely resolution.

(5) These procedures apply to all subjects that are delivered as part of a collaborative arrangement with the following exemptions:

1. Subjects that form part of the Freshman year at UOW Dubai.
2. Subjects delivered entirely by UOW staff (whether under a fly-in, fly-out (FIFO) arrangement or via remote technology).

(6) These procedures will be modified for use in relation to Transnational Education Twinning Programs, to ensure that subjects delivered by a partner institution (which are not UOW subjects but involve UOW input into the curriculum) are taught and assessed to the same standards as those that apply at UOW. This may involve periodic sampling of subject outlines, grading of assessments and reviewing student feedback, as agreed under the terms of the twinning agreement.

Section 2 - Teacher Approval

(7) In order to ensure that staff employed by a partner institution to teach into a UOW course meet the same qualifications and professional equivalency standards that apply to UOW teaching staff, (ref.  UOW Code of Practice - Learning and Teaching), an assessment and approval process is required as set out below.

(8) This process does not apply to UOW Dubai which has its own assessment and approval process to ensure it meets both UOW standards and those required by their national Commission for Academic Accreditation (CAA).

(9) Professional accreditation bodies may set additional standards that will need to be met for certain subjects, for example, subjects within courses accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). 

(10) Six months prior to the subject being taught, or as soon as practical, the partner institution will provide Transnational Education (TNE for subjects delivered offshore) or Educational Quality and Policy Unit (EQP) for subjects delivered onshore) with nominations for new or reappointed teaching staff. These nominations should include:

1. The relevant teacher nomination form;
2. The name, resume and evidence of qualifications of the nominee.

(11) TNE or EQP will contact the relevant course-owning Faculty, and provide the Faculty with all documentation, in line with Faculty practice.

(12) The authorisation of the Associate Dean International (ADI) of the course owning Faculty will be taken as approval of the nominee to teach the subject at the delivery location.

(13) Authorisation by the Faculty to teach a subject will remain current for a period of between one and three years, as indicated by the Faculty. At the end of this period, should the partner institution wish to nominate the same member of staff to teach the subject, the partner institution will re-nominate the staff member, as per sections 2.1 to 2.4 above.

(14) Where the course owning Faculty does not approve the partner institutions nominee to teach the UOW subject, TNE or EQP will liaise with the partner institution and the course owning Faculty to reach a mutually acceptable solution.

Section 3 - Quality Assurance Process - Level of QA to be applied

(15) The frequency of subject level quality assurance will be based on risk and will be determined by the relevant UOW Associate Dean International (ADI) in collaboration with relevant UOW and partner staff.  

(16) The University has three levels of quality assurance for subjects delivered at partner institutions, as outlined below. (A summary of the steps involved at each level are set in Schedule 1).

(17) The level at which a subject is quality assured may vary from year to year. The process for determining this movement between levels is outlined below and is summarised for easy reference in the flowchart at Schedule 2.

(18) Timelines and appropriate staff with responsibility for the finalisation of each step outlined in Schedule 1 will be mutually agreed by the UOW Faculty, Partner Institution and TNE (or EQP for partner institutions in Australia). Any variation to the timelines or staff members will be mutually agreed by all parties.

Section 4 - Levels of Quality Assurance

Level 1

(19) Level 1 sets the minimum level of quality assurance required and involves the UOW Quality Assurer reviewing previous QA reports, making themselves available for consultation, checking tasks marks and final grades and attending the Assessment Committee meeting.

(20) Level 1 does not require approval of the subject outline, exam paper or review of assessment standards unless required by an accreditation body.

(21) A subject may be quality assured at Level 1 where:

1. the subject has been delivered at the partner location on at least one previous occasion.
2. the subject is delivered by a partner staff member who has previously delivered the subject.
3. no changes have been made to the subject outline since the last delivery instance at UOW or at the partner location.
4. no issues with the subject have been raised at the (Collaborative) Faculty Assessment Committee for the previous delivery instance, through the previous quality assurance cycle, at the Annual Review for the partner institution, or through student feedback or the academic misconduct process as requiring action.
5. the Faculty ADI is satisfied that the risk of the subject not complying with the University’s principles of equivalence is minimal.

Level 2

(22) Level 2 is the default setting for quality assurance of subjects and involves all the step as set out in Schedule 1.

(23) Subjects will be quality assured at Level 2 where one or more of the following circumstances exist:

1. it is the first time that the subject has been delivered at the partner location; or
2. the subject is delivered by a staff member who has not previously delivered the subject, or is a newly approved staff member; or
3. the subject outline has been amended at UOW or the partner location or customised since the last delivery instance; or
4. issues with the subject have been raised through the previous quality assurance cycle, at the (Collaborative) Faculty Assessment Committee, Annual Review or through student feedback or the Academic Misconduct Process; or
5. the subject was previously quality assured at Level 1, but issues with the subject delivery were identified through the quality assurance process, or the subject was previously quality assured at Level 3 but significant issues with the subject have been resolved.

(24) Where the subject is quality assured at Level 2 because of issues identified under clauses 21 a and 21b, all quality assessments should focus on consistency of delivery, a shared understanding of issues, and calibration of assessment marking.

(25) Where the subject is quality assured at Level 2 because of issues identified under clause 21 c , all quality assessments should address the impact of amendment or customisation, and minimise risks associated with such changes.

(26) Where a subject is quality assured at Level 2 because of issues identified under clause 21 d (above), all quality assessments should address the extent to which issues identified have been addressed or should be addressed in future delivery instances.

Level 3

(27) A subject may be escalated to level 3 quality assurance where serious and/or systemic issues arising from the delivery and assessment of the subject have been identified (refer flowchart at Schedule 2).

(28) Issues requiring the elevation of a subject to Level 3 of quality assurance may include, but are not limited to:

1. persistent and unresolved issues relating to grade distribution variations between cohorts and locations;
2. persistent and unresolved issues relating to adherence to the approved subject outlines;
3. persistent and unresolved issues relating to completion of the relevant Quality Assurance documentation and adherence to other QA processes.
4. Consistent feedback on issues at the subject level that remain unaddressed.
5. The decision to elevate a subject to Level 3 is the responsibility of the relevant UOW Associate Dean International (ADI) after discussion with the partner institution and UOW Quality Assuror.

(29) The Dean (or equivalent) at the partner institution will be notified, in writing, immediately after a UOW ADI has nominated a subject for Level 3 quality assurance.

(30) Should the Dean (or equivalent) at the partner institution not agree with the request to elevate a subject to Level 3, then the matter will be forwarded by the UOW ADI to the Faculty Executive Dean for final resolution.

(31) In addition to undertaking the quality assurance responsibilities outlined in Schedule 1, the quality assuror will complete a written report on quality assurance undertaken and issues encountered, recommend changes required to the subject outline or delivery, and recommend the level at which the subject should be quality assured at the next delivery instance.

Section 5 - Quality Assurance of Subjects Not Delivered at UOW

(32) Where a course delivered at a partner institution contains a subject or subjects not delivered at UOW, the following shall apply:

1. The subject will be quality assured at Level 2 (as outlined in clauses 21 to 25) at a minimum, unless issues significant enough to warrant quality assurance at Level 3 (as outlined in clauses 26 to 31 (Above)) exist.
2. The subject will not be assessed for equivalence with a UOW subject as outlined in clause 1. It will be assessed for appropriateness in light of the content and structure of the program, relative to the appropriate AQF level.
3. Where it is determined that UOW staff do not have the expertise to quality assure the subject, the UOW Faculty will be asked to nominate a relevant expert from another Australian higher education institution to undertake the quality assurance. The remuneration for the quality assurance undertaken will be agreed by the Faculty and partner institution and paid for by the partner institution.

Section 6 - Quality Assurance of Subjects Delivered using Mixed Delivery

(33) Subjects delivered using mixed delivery (for example Fly-In-Fly-Out) require quality assurance of the elements of the subject that are not delivered by a UOW staff member. Quality assurance of these elements of the subject will be undertaken in line with the level of quality assurance nominated by the Faculty ADI.

Section 7 - Roles and Responsibilities

UOW:

Transnational Education Unit

(34) Oversight of subject quality assurance for all offshore locations.

(35) Liaison between partners and faculties on all issues relating to the management of quality assurance through the QA system.

(36) Ensure that the system for subject quality assurance is maintained and is fit for purpose in light of the University’s policy framework, partner agreements, local accreditation requirements and Higher Education Standards Framework obligations.

(37) Maintain within that system a record of all subject quality assurance activity required and undertaken (including quality improvement recommendations when opened and when resolved).

(38) Train and provide support for staff on the use of the system that supports quality assurance.

(39) Ensure the system makes available all subject quality assurance outputs (including recommendations for quality improvements made by quality assurors as part of subject design or delivery reflections as well as tracking and closure of these) to the Faculty Assessment Committee, faculty users, partners and other parties for monitoring, review and quality assurance purposes. Users need to be able to access these independently. The outputs need to be accessible to users in an automated way, in a format that does not require manual manipulation and to be available at individual subject level and also in a collated report.

(40) Provide evidence of subject quality assurance activities, including outstanding issues and instances where activities have not been completed as required, to the Annual Quality Assurance Reviews.

Academic Quality and Standards Division

(41) Ensure that the overall subject quality assurance policy framework is consistent with the University’s Higher Education Standards Framework obligations.

(42) Monitor the process of resolving subject quality assurance outputs (including recommendations for quality improvement arising from subject design or delivery reflections) through quality improvement activities.

(43) Ensure that the relevant outcomes of Annual Quality Assurance Reviews are available to the Faculty Assessment Committee, including the identification of issues at a subject level that require attention where required.

(44) Provide data reports relating to subjects and courses at the partner institution to the Faculty Assessment Committee

UOW Quality Assuror

(45) Assess all evidence to assure academic quality and equivalence with cognate subjects at UOW, including issues based on design (subject outline, learning outcomes, assessment design) delivery (including student performance, moderation or calibration of marking, student survey results) and declaration of results (including Assessment Committee Reports).

(46) Undertake quality assurance activities in line with the required level, based on risk.

(47) Determine the assessment tasks that will be moderated or quality assured, in collaboration with the Academic staff member at the partner institution, and in line with Faculty and University requirements.

(48) Collaborate with the relevant Academic Staff member at the partner institution on issues of subject design, moderation, calibration and subject delivery as required.

(49) Provide records of the quality assurance undertaken, results and action taken in relation to issues identified or quality improvements to TNE.

(50) Where recommendations for quality improvements are made but are not addressed to the satisfaction of all parties resulting in open quality loops, ensure that the relevant Academic Program Director, Associate Dean and the collaborative partner are informed of all issues.

(51) Where required under the University’s policy, take responsibility for investigating issues of academic misconduct at the partner institution.

(52) Where required, recommend the level and instance of the next quality assurance review of the subject.

Academic Director or Head of School

(53) Oversee the quality of delivery for the courses and subjects for which they are responsible at the collaborative partner institution, including monitoring equivalence of delivery.

(54) Monitor quality assurance issues associated with the courses and subjects for which they are responsible.

(55) Where required under the University’s policy, take responsibility for investigating issues of academic misconduct at the partner institution.

(56) In collaboration with UOW Quality Assurors, Associate Deans and responsible staff at the collaborative partner institution, monitor quality assurance issues and ensure that quality assurance related loops are closed.

Faculty Assessment Committee (or equivalent)

(57) Confirm the schedule for subjects to be quality assured at the partner location, including making recommendations for any changes to the schedule based on risk.

(58) Assess available evidence and determine the level of quality assurance that will be required for each subject to be assured in the following session/academic year (including the approach to be taken for any subjects delivered by Fly-In-Fly-Out).

(59) Receive and consider feedback from the QA process for all subjects that were quality assured in the previous session, raising issues with the partner institution where appropriate.

Faculty Associate Dean (International) or (Education)

(60) Approve teaching staff at the partner location (other than a UOWGE managed location).

(61) Following negotiations with the partner, ensure that staff are allocated to undertake quality assurance activities, in collaboration with Heads of School, as required.

(62) Ensure that staff with relevant subject knowledge are allocated to undertake quality assurance activities as per the approved schedule of subjects, in collaboration with Heads of School, as required.

(63) Approve the schedule of subjects to be quality assured, as recommended by the Faculty Assessment Committee

(64) Ensure that action is taken against issues raised through the Subject Quality Assurance Process and resolve any disputes that arise.

(65) Finalise Subject Quality Assurance reports.

Partner:

Partner Institution Academic Staff Member Responsible for subject

(66) Provide the information required to complete the subject quality assurance in a timely manner.

(67) Collaborate with the UOW Quality Assuror on issues of subject design, moderation, calibration and subject delivery as required

(68) Ensure that recommendations for quality improvements raised by quality assurors are addressed to the satisfaction of all parties.

(69) Negotiate the assessment tasks that will be moderated, in collaboration with the UOW Quality Assuror

Partner Institution (Dean, APD or Equivalent)

(70) Provide the list of subjects being offered in the following session prior to the Faculty Assessment Committee meeting.

(71) Provide names and resumes of academic staff for approval by the Faculty within the required timeframes.

(72) Provide the details of the subjects to be offered and the names of academic staff delivering them to the relevant UOW contacts.

(73) Ensure that issues raised through quality assurance activities are addressed in a timely manner, and to the satisfaction of the UOW quality assuror.

(74) Provide via the Assessment Committee reflections on the delivery of the subject including on the performance of the cohort, including possible recommended quality improvements.

Section 8 - Schedule 1: A summary of steps required for each level of Subject QA

(75) Schedule 1: A summary of steps required for each level of Subject QA

(76) National or professional accreditation requirements may result in more frequent review of assessment standards being undertaken.

Section 9 - Schedule 2: Subject QA: Process for Assessment of Levels of Quality Assurance

(77) Schedule 2: Subject QA: Process for Assessment of Levels of Quality Assurance

Section 10 - Definitions

(78) The definitions applicable to this Procedure are contained within the Collaborative Delivery of a UOW Course Policy.