Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision This Framework was developed by LeTS/International Relations Office following a request from the QSC Sub-Group for Collaborative Provision for a set of QA guidelines to: i) meet the needs of the Faculty structure ii) provide a reference guide on collaborative provision iii) demonstrate how the University is addressing the QAA Quality Code Chapter B10 on Management of Collaborative Arrangements.. The Framework pulls together recently-approved and existing policy as well as procedural guidance, some of which has been developed or revised over the last year on the advice of the Sub-Group for Collaborative Provision. The intention is to review and publish the Framework in 2015/16 in a user-friendly format in sections on the LeTS website alongside other QA -related guidance. The content will also be revised to reflect the latest QAA guidance (we are awaiting the outcome of the QAA consultation on “Qualifications Awarded by Two or More Degree-Awarding Bodies Characteristics”) as well as developments in support for collaborative provision. .
70
Embed
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision/file/Framework... · Framework for the Approval and Management of. Taught Collaborative Provision. ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Framework for the Approval and Management of
Taught Collaborative Provision
This Framework was developed by LeTS/International Relations Office following a request from the
QSC Sub-Group for Collaborative Provision for a set of QA guidelines to:
i) meet the needs of the Faculty structure
ii) provide a reference guide on collaborative provision
iii) demonstrate how the University is addressing the QAA Quality Code Chapter B10 on
Management of Collaborative Arrangements..
The Framework pulls together recently-approved and existing policy as well as procedural
guidance, some of which has been developed or revised over the last year on the advice of the
Sub-Group for Collaborative Provision. The intention is to review and publish the Framework in
2015/16 in a user-friendly format in sections on the LeTS website alongside other QA -related
guidance. The content will also be revised to reflect the latest QAA guidance (we are awaiting the
outcome of the QAA consultation on “Qualifications Awarded by Two or More Degree-Awarding
Bodies Characteristics”) as well as developments in support for collaborative provision. .
CONTENTS
Section
Title
Page
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
Introduction
What is collaborative provision
Why engage in collaborative provision
Issues to consider
Support available
Key contacts
3
3
3
3
4
6
2
Types of Collaborative Arrangement
7
3
External Reference Points
9
4
Strategic Direction and Principles
11
5
The University’s Register of Taught Collaborative Programmes
16
6
How to Set Up a Collaborative Programme: An overview for Departments
17
7
Summary and Diagrammatic Representation of the Process for the Approval of New Collaborative Programmes
22
8
8.1
8.2
8.3
Guidance on the Development of PGT Collaborative Programmes:
Jointly-Delivered or Jointly-Awarded Programmes (PGT)
Dual (Double) Award Programmes (PGT)
A comparison of the features of different types of PGT collaboration
25
25
39
50
9
Guidance on the Development of Articulation Arrangements
54
10
Collaborative Agreements
60
11
Renewal of an Existing Collaborative Agreement
62
12
Faculty and Institutional Responsibilities for the Oversight and Management of the University’s Collaborative Provision
63
13
Role of Collaborative Programme Director/Academic Lead
64
14
Review and Monitoring of Collaborative Provision
66
15
Student Registration Status and Support, Student Representation & Feedback
67
16
Student Handbooks
68
17
Staffing and Staff Development for Collaborative Programmes
70
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision 2 September 2015
Section 1. Introduction To Collaborative Provision
1. INTRODUCTION TO TAUGHT COLLABORATIVE PROVISION 1.1 WHAT IS COLLABORATIVE PROVISION?
Taught provision which is delivered and/or supported and/or assessed through an
arrangement with a partner organisation” and which leads to a University award and/or an
award of the partner organisation is regarded as collaborative provision Section 2 sets out
the main types of collaborative provision, which include jointly-delivered programmes,
programmes delivered off-campus and programmes leading to joint awards. It should be
noted that exchange arrangements, study abroad, study placements and joint PhDs do not
fall within the above definition and are dealt with elsewhere.
The Quality Assurance Agency sets out in Chapter B10 of the Quality Code sets out what is
expected of UK universities in managing the delivery of learning with other organisations,
ensuring effective oversight by the awarding body to ensure the quality of learning
opportunities. This Framework sets out the University’s processes for managing
collaborative provision, taking into account these requirements.
The University is currently engaged with a growing number of collaborative programmes
across a wide spectrum of models, many of which involve international partner institutions. A
list of current collaborative programmes can be found here. 1.2 WHY ENGAGE IN COLLABORATIVE PROVISION?
Collaborative programmes may offer greater opportunities to students in terms of enhanced
curricula, developing language competence and cultural awareness, and improved
employability. Academic staff and departments may also benefit in a number of ways from
relationships with other universities and institutions including research and networking
opportunities and increased student numbers. In each case, consideration needs to be
given to the rationale for collaboration and the most suitable form of co-operation. 1.3 ISSUES TO CONSIDER
In developing links with other institutions, the University needs to carefully consider a
number of key issues including the compatibility of the proposed link with University
strategies including the Internationalisation Strategy
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
18
Section 6. How To Set Up A Collaborative Programme: An Overview For Academic
Departments
o Planning and Governance ServicesMarketing and Recruitment
o Faculty Finance Officer/Business Operations Manager
o Registry Services
o other services, as appropriate
• Early consideration will need to be given to the model of collaboration and the
bearing this will have on student registration, student status, support and access to
facilities/services.
• An initial assessment will be needed of potential risks involved in the collaboration
and how to mitigate against these.
• Negotiations on financial arrangements with the partner organisation may need to be
initiated at this point, with input from Faculty and relevant professional services.
• With support from LeTS, complete Part A of the “New Programme Proposal” form at
http://www.shef.ac.uk/lets/pp/qa/prog-app LeTS will submit this to Faculty and will
inform you as to whether this is approved in principle.
• Once approval in principle is received, you can proceed to more detailed work on the
collaborative partnership and programme. 6.3 CONSIDERING THE PROPOSED PARTNER ORGANISATION AND FORM OF COLLABORATION
• In order to ensure that the choice of partner organisation and proposed model of
collaboration are appropriate, a range of issues will need to be considered which will
require detailed discussions with the proposed partner organisation and consultation
with relevant TUOS professional services. The International Relations
Office/Learning and Teaching Services will be able to provide support and co-
ordination, drawing on experience of existing collaborations.
o Due diligence checks/information on suitability of proposed partner
organisation, including legal status, ability to enter into the proposed collaborative relationship, academic and public standing, mission, governance and structure (contact LeTS or the IRO for details of the checks required)
o Type of collaboration (eg jointly-awarded programme, jointly-delivered programme, distance learning programme)
o Programme structure, delivery arrangements and input of partner organisation
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
20
Section 6. How To Set Up A Collaborative Programme: An Overview For Academic
Departments
• LeTS will arrange for subsequent approval by the Learning and Teaching Committee
and then final approval by Senate. 6.5 WORK ON THE COLLABORATIVE ARRANGEMENTS
• A number of arrangements need to be put into place before the start of a collaborative
programme to ensure its effective operation. This will involve working with a number
of professional services and overall co-ordination will be provided by the International
Relations Office (or LeTS where appropriate) and Registry Services. It may be useful
to meet representatives of the key professional services to draw up an action plan of
arrangements that need to be put in place including the following:
o Marketing and recruitment information and arrangements
o Admissions work, including entry requirements, arrangements for student visas and admissions procedures
o Registration arrangements, collection of fees
o Assessment and examining arrangements, including external examiners
o Arrangements for programme management and annual monitoring, including the appointment of a departmental Programme Director for the collaboration
o Ensuring that the programme has been set up appropriately by LeTS and CiCs
o Arrangements for statistical returns to HESA/HESES
o Access to library/MUSE for staff and students
o Programme handbook for students outlining relevant programme information,
regulatory and student support arrangements between the collaborative partners.
o Operations manual for staff at both/all partner organisations
• The Committee for Collaborative Provision will wish to assure itself that all
relevant the regulatory, management and student support arrangements are in
place and may therefore ask for details of the above.
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
21
Section 6. How To Set Up A Collaborative Programme: An Overview For Academic
Departments
6.6 DRAWING UP THE COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENT
• LeTS will draft the collaborative agreement between the collaborative partners using an appropriate agreement template.
The process will involve discussions and input from the Department, Faculty and
relevant professional services as well as negotiations with the partner organisation(s).
Approval by Faculty and the Committee for Collaborative Provision will be required
prior to signature by the parties. See also Section 10 COLLABORATIVE
AGREEMENTS. 6.7 ONGOING PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT
The Programme Director/Academic Lead in the Department will be responsible for the
ongoing management of the collaborative programme including:
• Programme Management Committees
• Annual visits, as required
• Completion of annual monitoring reports and input into departmental annual
reflection
• Ensuring that the risks associated with the collaborative development are
included in the departmental risk register
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
22
7. SUMMARY AND DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE PROCESS FOR THE APPROVAL OF NEW COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES
This section outlines the approval process for all academic programmes, but also shows (in
italics) the additional stages in the approval process for collaborative programmes. 7.1 STAGE 1 – GETTING AGREEMENT FROM FACULTY TO PROCEED WITH THE PROPOSAL
• Department signals intention to develop new programme
• Relevant professional services informed automatically through Uspace group; initial advice and support provided on issues including viabLeTS to provide advice and support on proposed collaborative programmes.
Initial check on suitability of partner organisation with reference to the principles
contained in the “Strategic Development of Collaborative Provision”.
• Part A of the “New Programme Proposal” form completed (initial info about proposal,
additional questions on initial business plan for collaborative programmes)
• Approval in principle of proposal by Faculty (eg FPVC or designated person)
• Relevant professional services informed automatically
7.2 STAGE 2 – DEVELOPING THE PROPOSAL FOR APPROVAL OF NEW PARTNER
ORGANISATION/MODEL OF COLLABORATION
• Discussions with partner organisation
• Work on form of collaboration and collaborative arrangements
• Assessment of level of risk involved and due diligence enquries on prospective partner organisation
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
23
Section 7. Overview Of The Process For The Approval Of New Collaborative Programmes
7.3 STAGE 3 – APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE FOR COLLABORATIVE PROVISION
• Approval by Committee for Collaborative Provision of collaborative model and
partner institution (via Sub-Group for Collaborative Developments), due diligence
and risk assessment. The Committee reports to the Quality and Scrutiny Sub-
Committee which then reports to the Learning and Teaching Committee.. 7.4 STAGE 4 – APPROVAL BY FACULTY
• Detailed development of academic programme and completion of Part B of “New
Programme Proposal” form with details of academic programme, programme
regulations, specification etc.
• Approval by Faculty approval of academic programme (usually by FLTC) 7.5 STAGE 5 – MAKING SURE ALL ARRANGEMENTS ARE IN PLACE
• Relevant professional services informed automatically of approval of new programme
• Information on collaborative arrangements (regulatory provisions, responsibilities of
partners, working arrangements) provided by the Department and signed off on
behalf of the Committee for Collaborative Provision.
• Details of above provided to relevant professional services (eg Admissions, Registry
• Drafting of collaborative agreement; approval of agreement by the Committee for Collaborative Provision and Faculty prior to signature by the authorised signatories.
7.6 STAGE 6 – FINAL APPROVAL
• Approval by LTC and Senate
7.7 STAGE 7 – SIGNING AGREEMENT
• Agreement signed by University and partner organization • Agreements for collaborative taught programmes must be signed by the following:
1) Director of Finance or Chief Financial Officer AND 2) Pro-Vice Chancellor for Learning and Teaching and/or the relevant Faculty Pro-Vice Chancellor. The Vice-Chancellor may be asked to sign particularly significant agreements
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
24
Section 7. Overview Of The Process For The Approval Of New Collaborative Programmes
A graphic representation of the process is provided below (with additional elements for
collaborative programmes in shaded boxes on the right)
STAGE 1 Department signals intention to develop new programme
Relevant professional services notified automatically and consultation/support provided by: - • Recruitment Support and PGS to ascertain viability of programme. • LeTS and other professional services on issues relating to collaborative programmes
Faculty approval in principle of proposal (Part A of the “New Programme Proposal” form and questions on collaborative programmes)
STAGE 2
Discussions with partner organisation on form of collaboration,
programme and arrangements
STAGE 3 Committee for Collaborative Provision approval of collaborative model and partner institution, risk assessment and due diligence checks
STAGE 4
Detailed development of academic programme
Faculty approval of academic programme (FLTC) (Part B of “New Programme Proposal” form)
STAGE 5
Admissions, CiCS, LeTS, PGS, Student Recruitment, Library notified of approval.
Information on collaborative arrangements provided by Dept and signed off on behalf of QSC Sub-Group. Approval of collaborative agreement.
STAGE 6 Final University approval from Learning and Teaching Committee
and Senate
STAGE 7 Signing of collaborative agreement by the University and partner institution
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
25
Section 8. Guidance On The Development Of Collaborative PGT Programmes
8. GUIDANCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF COLLABORATIVE TAUGHT PROGRAMMES
Information is provided here on the development of jointly-delivered programmes, including
joint award programmes and dual awards programmes. For all proposed forms of
collaboration, including hybrid arrangements, please discuss with Learning and Teaching
Services. Details of key professional services contacts
who can provide support in the areas below are provided in Section 1. 8.1 JOINTLY-DELIVERED AND JOINTLY AWARDED PROGRAMMES
8.1.1 What is a jointly-delivered programme? What is a joint award?
Jointly-delivered programme describes a programme delivered or provided jointly
by two or more institutions, irrespective of the award (ie single, joint, dual/double or
multiple). It refers to the education provided rather than the nature of the award.
(Definition taken from the QAA Quality Code, Chapter B10:
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
48
Section 8. Guidance On The Development Of Collaborative PGT Programmes
8.2.19 Degree certificate and transcript/diploma supplement
Each institution will be responsible for making its own separate award and issuing a
student transcript and/or Diploma Supplement.
8.2.20 Conferment of award
Each institution is responsible for conferment of its award and presentation of the
degree certificate, although it would be advisable for institutions to discuss and
agree on arrangements.
8.2.21 Academic appeals and complaints
A clear statement needs to be made available to students on the channels for
academic appeals and for complaints. Local issues would normally be channelled
through the relevant partner institution, including appeals against the marks
awarded for a particular unit, but for academic appeals or complaints relating to the
programme as a whole, students should apply to the awarding institution.
8.2.22 Termination of agreement
The formal agreement should include a clause to cover the possibility of a partner
institution withdrawing from the agreement and to indicate how the obligations to the
remaining students will be managed. It would normally be expected that the
institution involved would notify the partner(s) of its intention to withdraw well in
advance of further recruitment activity and would see out existing students. The
home institution, in consultations with the partner institutions involved, has a
responsibility to ensure that the student has access to an appropriate programme of
study.
8.2.23 Respective responsibilities
This might cover subjects such as who the co-ordinating institution is and what they
are responsible for and what the other partner institutions must oversee as covered
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
49
Section 8. Guidance On The Development Of Collaborative PGT Programmes
in previous sections. The respective responsibilities should be recorded in the
formal agreement.
8.2.24 Administrative and financial issues
Many arrangements have administrative and financial implications which must be
thoroughly considered. Departments should be mindful that many administrative
procedures within the University have associated timescales and deadlines, that
may need to be taken into account when deciding how the design and delivery of a
dual awards programme will work. Departments are encouraged to seek input from
relevant Professional Services (especially Admissions Service, Registry Services,
Taught Programmes Office and the Events Team) early on in the design and
discussion phase to ensure that the "student experience" is not compromised
downstream.
8.2.25 Intellectual Property Rights
A statement on the use and ownership of teaching and learning material and
student work will be included in the agreement.
8.2.26 Legal jurisdiction for disputes
A statement on the legal jurisdiction for disputes will be included in the agreement.
Section 8. Guidance On The Development Of Collaborative PGT Programmes
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
50
8.3 A COMPARISON OF THE FEATURES OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF PGT COLLABORATIVE PROVISION
“TUoS” means “The University of Sheffield”
JOINT AWARD SINGLE AWARD (JOINT DELIVERY) DUAL AWARD
DEFINITION “Joint award describes a collaborative arrangement under which two or more awarding institutions together provide a programme leading to a single award made jointly by both, or all, participants. A single certificate or document (signed by the competent authorities) attests successful completion of this jointly-delivered programme, replacing the separate institutional or national qualifications” (Definition from QAA Quality Code Chapter B10)
A programme of study which is developed and approved in conjunction with a partner institution(s) and is delivered by more than one institution, but leads to a single award from one of the partner institutions. The model may vary.
”Dual/double or multiple awards describes collaborative arrangements under which two or more awarding institutions together provide a jointly- delivered programme (or programmes) leading to separate awards being granted by both, or all of them.” (Definition from Section 2 of QAA Quality Code Chapter B10
KEY FEATURES Collaborative delivery arrangement leading to a joint award (ie one certificate in the name of both partner institutions). Programme is jointly delivered by both partners. Must be jointly developed, quality-assured, delivered and assessed. A minimum of one third of the credits must be awarded by the University of Sheffield. Of the remaining two thirds a substantial contribution shall come from at least one other institution which may then be a partner and jointly award the degree.
Collaborative delivery arrangement leading to an award of one of the partner organisations. In the case of a University of Sheffield award, Sheffield would take the lead in developing, quality assuring and assessing the programme.
Collaborative arrangement leading to dual (double) award. This model is normally appropriate only when a partner institution does not have the regulatory capacity to establish a joint award. May involve specific credit recognition and transfer mechanisms between awarding bodies.
Section 8. Guidance On The Development Of Collaborative PGT Programmes
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
51
JOINT AWARD SINGLE AWARD (JOINT DELIVERY) DUAL AWARD
QAA QUALITY CODE (CHAPTER B10)
The programme must be fully compliant with CoP and national academic infrastructure.
A programme leading to a University of Sheffield degree must be fully compliant with CoP and national academic infrastructure.
The programme leading to the University of Sheffield award must be fully compliant with CoP and the national academic infrastructure.
AWARDING BODY Both partner organisations. One of the partner organisations. Each partner makes its own award.
STUDENT STATUS / REGISTRATION
Students normally register at both institutions for the duration of the programme, although registration may be limited to attendance periods. Advisable to agree a ‘home’ institution for student registration.
Students normally register at the awarding institution for the duration of the programme. Registration with the partner organisation may be limited to attendance periods.
Students normally register at both institutions, although registration may be limited to attendance periods.
STUDENT NUMBERS The University of Sheffield would undertake statutory reporting unless agreed otherwise agreed with the partner institution (if UK-based).
In the case of a University of Sheffield award, the statutory reporting would be undertaken by the University of Sheffield unless otherwise agreed with the partner organisation (if UK-based).
The University of Sheffield would undertake UK reporting for its programme/award.
STUDENT ENTITLEMENT
Students will normally have access to resources of both the University and partner organisation.
Students will normally have access to resources in relation to their registration status, which may be linked to attendance periods.
Students would normally have access to resources of the partner organisations in relation to their registration/attendance status. For example, students may register/have access to resources at partner organisation for year 1, then register /have access to resources at Sheffield for year 2. Need to consider student registration status through out programme and what access students need to learning resources at different stages of the programme.
Section 8. Guidance On The Development Of Collaborative PGT Programmes
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
52
JOINT AWARD SINGLE AWARD (JOINT DELIVERY) DUAL AWARD
STUDENT ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS AND APPEALS PROCEDURES
Partners will develop and approve a set of Joint Regulations and associated policies. Advisable for the “home” institution to take the lead in this area.
For TUoS PGT awards, the University’s General Ordinances and Regulations will normally apply.
Each partner’s Regulations apply to their own award and individual elements of the award. However, alignment between aspects of the partners’ regulations may be required, in particular where credits from one partner’s programme are counted towards the award of the other partner.
STUDENT DISCIPLINE, TERMS AND CONDITIONS
The “home” university’s terms will normally apply. However, the partner organisation’s terms (or aspects of their terms) may apply during periods of attendance/registration at the partner organisation. Arrangements require University approval.
The awarding university’s terms normally apply. However, the partner organisation’s terms (or aspects of their terms) may apply during periods of attendance/registration at the partner organisation. Arrangements require University approval.
Students normally enrol with both institutions and be subject to terms and conditions of both.
QUALITY AND STANDARDS
Requires the development of joint processes which satisfy the requirements of each partner organisation. Normally the “home” institution would take the lead in this area.
In the case of a University of Sheffield award, the usual Sheffield procedures would normally apply in addition to any requirements specific to the collaborative programme.
Each partner’s procedures would normally apply to their own award. For elements (eg modules or dissertation) contributing to both awards, the partner organisation which owns the credits has responsibility for quality and standards. However, the exam board of the awarding institution may, in some cases, contribute to maintaining the standards of those elements.
EXTERNAL EXAMINING
External examiners usually appointed by ‘home’ university but reports/responses are made available to both partner organisations.
External examiners usually appointed by the awarding university.
External examiners appointed by the University of Sheffield for the Sheffield award.
Section 8. Guidance On The Development Of Collaborative PGT Programmes
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
53
JOINT AWARD SINGLE AWARD (JOINT DELIVERY) DUAL AWARD
ACADEMIC STANDARDS / TEACHING QUALITY
Partners are both responsible for the academic standards and teaching quality. The collaborating HEIs will normally work together on staff development to ensure consistency and quality of student experience of teaching.
TUoS is responsible for the academic standards and teaching quality of the programme as a whole that leads to the award made in its name. A partner institution will also be responsible for the elements of the programme that they deliver.
Each organisation responsible for the teaching quality on its award. The collaborating HEIs will normally work together on staff development to ensure consistency and quality of student experience of teaching
ADMISSIONS Partner HEIs agree joint, standard admissions procedures that as a minimum comply with TUoS minimum entry requirements.
TUoS will set admissions criteria and have responsibility for admissions.
Partners agree to recognise each other’s admissions procedures. Partner’s procedures must comply with TUoS minimum entry requirements.
STUDENT COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE
Partner institutions will agree joint complaints procedures.
Students will normally submit complaint to the awarding institution.
Students will normally complain to the institution where complaint arose.
STUDENT DATA AND ADMIN
For UK joint awards, TUoS and partner must agree which HEI will claim and return student numbers to HESA.
TUoS will return student numbers to HESA and is responsible for data and admin relating to Sheffield award.
For UK dual awards, TUoS and partner must agree who will return student numbers to HESA. TUoS responsible for data and admin relating to Sheffield award.
AWARDS, CERTIFICATES AND GRADUATION
Both partners agree single certificate with both institutions represented. Agree joint arrangements for graduation ceremonies.
TUoS will produce transcripts and certificates for Sheffield award.
Each Institution makes its own separate award and graduation ceremony arrangements.
IPR Joint IPR ownership and licences are explicitly agreed by HEIs.
Ownership and licenses are agreed by HEIs taking into account the parts of the programme owned by each institution.
Each awarding body retains IPR for its own programme.
Section 9. Guidance On The Development Of Articulation Arrangements
54 Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
9. GUIDANCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF ARTICULATION ARRANGEMENTS
9.1 INTRODUCTION
Articulation arrangement (QAA Definition): “a process whereby an awarding
institution reviews provision at another organisation and judges that the curriculum of a
specified programme (or a specified part) provides an appropriate basis, and is of an
appropriate academic standard, to be deemed equivalent to the identified components
of one or more specified programmes delivered by the institution and thus to enable
direct entry to year two, three or four of these programme(s). Arrangements normally
involve credit accumulation and transfer, so that credit achieved for the approved study
at the first institution is transferred to contribute to the programme and award
completed at the second institution (the awarding institution).The two separate
components are the responsibility of the respective institutions delivering them but
together contribute to a single award (of the awarding institution). The arrangements
include a formal agreement whereby an awarding institution agrees that any students
who have satisfactorily completed the specified programme (or a specified part) at the
partner organisation and satisfied the stipulated assessment requirements are entitled
to enter directly into subsequent stages of one or more specified programmes
delivered by the awarding institution. Students normally have a contractual relationship
with the partner organisation which delivers the first component and subsequently with
the awarding institution.” (Definition taken from the QAA Quality Code Chapter B10)
Section 9. Guidance On The Development Of Articulation Arrangements
57 Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
9.3.3 Approval of Academic Programme
The relevant Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee (or equivalent) will be
required to approve the programme. Proposals will need to include information
on:
i. Subject area
ii. Information on programme at proposed partner organisation: curriculum
content, learning outcomes, level, volume and nature of teaching and
assessment. Evidence of mapping exercise to demonstrate equivalence
and fit with the Level 1 curriculum (or as relevant) at the University of
Sheffield and consistency with the Framework for Higher Education
Qualifications
iii. Details of any professional body accreditation requirements
iv. University programme that successful students will transfer on to
v. Expected numbers of students
vi. Entry requirements (for twinning programme)
vii. Required level of attainment to transfer to the University of Sheffield
viii. Arrangements for the ongoing assurance of standards and quality
9.4 AGREEMENT
In order to define the means by which the academic standards of the programme will
be maintained and to ensure that the rights, roles and responsibilities of all parties are
clearly set out, an institutional agreement should be drawn up and signed by the
appropriate members of the University of Sheffield and the partner institution.
The institutional agreement should include provisions to cover the following:
i. The legal names of the bodies which are parties to the agreement
ii. The duration of the agreement and review arrangements
iii. Status of the students
iv. The responsibilities and obligations of each of the parties in the delivery and
assessment of the programme and for the academic standards and quality of
provision
v. Quality assurance arrangements
vi. Reporting and communication requirements
Section 9. Guidance On The Development Of Articulation Arrangements
60 Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
vii. Intellectual property considerations (the IPR is owned by the partner for the
articulated programme; the University of Sheffield owns the IPR for the associated
University of Sheffield award)
viii. Publicity and promotional material
ix. Admissions criteria and responsibilities in the admissions process
x. Responsibilities for maintaining student records
xi. Number of students permitted to be recruited onto the programme and to transfer
to the University
xii. Language of instruction and assessment
xiii. Suspension, termination and arbitration provisions
xiv. Residual obligations to students on termination of the agreement
xv. Financial arrangements
xvi. The legal jurisdiction under which disputes will be resolved
xvii. Signatures of appropriate members of both institutions
The above list is not exhaustive and further provisions may be needed. LeTs holds
templates for the main forms of collaboration which may be used to develop the
agreement.
Agreements for collaborative taught programmes must be signed by the following:
1) Director of Finance or Chief Financial Officer AND 2) Pro-Vice Chancellor for Learning and Teaching and/or the relevant Faculty Pro-Vice Chancellor.
The Vice-Chancellor may be asked to sign particularly significant agreements.
9.5 ONGOING ASSURANCE OF QUALITY AND STANDARDS
Primary responsibility for ensuring that the programme is delivered in accordance with
the agreement rests with the relevant University academic department. The head of
department is required to nominate a member of staff as an academic link, usually the
programme director or admissions tutor, who will undertake the tasks that are required
to ensure the department fulfils its obligations. Principal responsibilities are likely to
cover the monitoring of:
i. Staffing quality
ii. Course delivery
iii. Resources
iv. Student support
Section 9. Guidance On The Development Of Articulation Arrangements
60 Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
v. Assessment (the usual expectation would be for University of Sheffield staff to
have a role in moderation of assessment)
vi. Any changes to the course content or assessment methods and continued
equivalence/fit vii. Student performance
viii. Admissions to the University of Sheffield
ix. Progression to the University of Sheffield
x. Student performance at the University of Sheffield
xi. Adherence to the terms of the agreement
The programme director (or other nominated member of academic staff) would
normally be expected to make an annual visit to the partner institution and to report on
the outcomes of the visit.
9.6 ANNUAL MONITORING
In order to monitor the performance of the University of Sheffield’s articulations
arrangements, Academic Departments are required to complete an annual monitoring
report each academic year, the outcomes of which will a) feed into
Departmental/Faculty Annual Reflection and b) be used by the University to inform
the future development and management of articulation arrangements. 9.7 EXTERNAL EXAMINING
Given that the partner organisation’s programme does not lead to a University of
Sheffield award, the University does not require an external examiner to be appointed.
60 Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
10. COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENTS As well as ensuring that all appropriate approval processes are observed in accordance with
University of Sheffield policy, the delivery of provision in association with an external body
will normally require the University to enter into a written and legally binding agreement or
contract setting out the rights and obligations of the parties. It is essential that any such
agreements are established on a sound legal basis and are appropriate in scope and
content, to protect the interests of the University of Sheffield and its students, the quality and
standards of provision that is delivered in the University of Sheffield´s name, and to limit the
level of risk to which departments and the University are exposed. For this reason, any department considering introducing a programme which is likely to
involve an external party should refer to these notes of guidance and consult the named staff
contacts in Learning and Teaching Services (LeTS) (see Section 1) who hold templates for
different types of collaborative arrangements and will provide co-ordination for the drafting
and approval of agreements Issues that should be considered by those proposing to
establish some form of partnership for the delivery of a programme and which may feature in
a contract might include:
• Period of agreement
• Obligations of the University of Sheffield and the partner body for:
• quality and academic standards;
• course delivery and management;
• assessment;
• recruitment;
• student support/administration;
• student discipline, complaints and appeals;
• learning resources/accommodation;
• awards;
• issuing of certificates and transcripts.
• Intellectual property rights;
• Student status;
• Student numbers;
• Programme and contract review arrangements;
• Insurance arrangements;
61 Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
Section 10. Collaborative Agreements
• Termination arrangements;
• Consequences of termination;
• Dispute resolution procedures;
• Governing law and jurisdiction;
• Publicity and confidentiality issues;
• Data protection;
• Issues relating to compliance with the Equality Act 2010 and Bribery Act 2010;
• Fees.
Process for Establishing Memoranda of Understanding
Memoranda of Understanding normally express a general convergence of good will between
the parties, indicating an intended common line of action. They tend to be used in cases
where parties either do not imply a legal commitment or where the parties cannot create a
legally enforceable agreement. Ideally, generic MoUs should only be used as a preamble to a
more specific and binding agreement. To find out more about how to establish a
Memorandum of Understanding, please see: http://www.shef.ac.uk/ssd/student-
62 Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision September 2015
11. RENEWAL OF AN EXISTING COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENT Agreements should indicate the timescale for review of the agreement prior to renewal.
Approval will be needed as follows based on review of a proposal from the Programme
Director (or University of Sheffield lead academic) and existing documentation on the
collaboration:
• Approval by Department
• Approval of academic and business case for continuation by Faculty
• Approval by FLTC (or equivalent faculty committee) for continuation of the
programme following a review of L&T
• Approval by the Committee for Collaborative Provision of the
collaborative arrangements
• Approval of the text of the new agreement by Faculty and the Committee for Collaborative Provision
Proposals will vary depending on the nature of the collaboration but will normally need to
include:
Part A:
• Overview of the collaboration
• Statement from the Programme Director proposing extension
• Academic and business case for extension
• Any proposed changes to the existing business/financial arrangements/agreement
Part B:
• Self-evaluation of L&T over the period of the agreement
• Copies of programme committee minutes and annual reports
• Copies of external examiner reports
• Any proposed changes to the collaborative arrangements/agreement
Please contact the International Relations Office (international collaborations) or LeTs (UK
collaborations) to discuss planning for the review and re-approval of an existing collaborative
agreement.
12. FACULTY AND INSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR THE OVERSIGHT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE
UNIVERSITY’S COLLABORATIVE PROVISION
Area of Work
Faculty Responsibility
Central Oversight
Comments
Approval of new collaborative programme
FPVC or designated person/committee: Approval in principle of business plan
FLTC: Approval of programme of study.
Committee for Collaborative Provision: Approval of partner organisation and model of collaboration Representative of Dept/Faculty to be invited to present proposal at Sub-Group meeting as appropriate.
Support for new programme approval provided by LeTS and other professional services
Annual monitoring/annual reflection
FLTC: Consider outcomes of annual monitoring of ofcollaborative programmes as part of Annual Reflection exercise Report on annual reflection/ monitoring and external examining to QSC.
Committee for Collaborative Provision/QSC: Oversight of Faculty annual reflection/monitoring reports.
Support regarding annual reporting requirements provided by LeTS
Periodic review
Input into Periodic Review as for standard provision
QSC: Oversight of Periodic Review
Managed by LeTS
Collaborative agreements
Faculty Finance Officer or designated person: Checking draft agreement
FPVC: Co-signature of collaborative agreement if
i d
Committee for Collaborative Provision: Oversight of collaborative agreements.
Support for drafting collaborative agreements provided by LeTS. Agreements to be approved by the Collaborative Provision Committee prior to signature on behalf of the University.
Review and renewal of an existing collaborative agreement
FPVC: Approval of business case for extension of agreement
FLTC: Renewal of approval of programme of study. Support for extension of agreement
Committee for Collaborative Provision: Renewal of approval of partner organisation and model of collaboration
Support for reviews of collaborative programmes provided by IRO with input from LeTS/Faculty.
Agreement extensions/renewals to be approved as outlined above.
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision 63 September 2015
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision Revised Aug 2015, currently under review
64
13. ROLE OF COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMME DIRECTOR (OR NAMED LEAD ACADEMIC)
For jointly-delivered, jointly-awarded and dual award programmes
The Programme Director (or named collaborative lead academic) will be the University’s key
contact regarding the collaborative programme and will also be the first point of contact for
the partner organisation. Programme Directors play an important role in managing the
quality of the collaborative programme and communicating with the Department, Faculty and
other parts of the University on issues relating to the collaborative programme. The Head of Department is responsible for designating a member of staff to be the
Programme Director for each of the department’s collaborative programmes. Programme
Directors should be full members of the relevant Department and should be conversant with
the UK academic infrastructure and University quality assurance processes. The Programme Director will be expected to undertake the following:
• Liaise with the key academic contact and other relevant staff at the partner
organisation on all aspects of the programme
• Ensure that the terms of the collaborative agreement (in relation to recruitment,
management, access to University facilities and assessment and so forth)
continue to be met by the Department and partner organisation
• Ensure that appropriate quality assurance arrangements are in place across the
programme
• Visit the partner institution at least once a year (unless otherwise agreed by
Faculty) to meet staff and students to gain an overview of how the programme is
being delivered at the partner organisation and to ensure the continued suitability
facilities and learning resources at the partner institution
• Complete an Annual Review of the collaborative programme on behalf of the
Department, to be submitted to the Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee.
Monitor actions resulting from Annual Review.
• Update the Departmental Risk Register for the collaborative programme on an
annual basis
• Ensure that all academic staff at the partner organisation involved in the delivery
and assessment of any part of the programme which leads to TUOS credits have
received appropriate TUOS approval
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision Revised Aug 2015, currently under review
65
Section 13. Role Of Collaborative Programme Director (Or Named Lead Academic)
• Oversee the assessment arrangements between the partner organisations
• Ensure that suitable external examining arrangements are in place and that the
external examiner is fully briefed on the collaborative programme
• Undertake other activities relating to the collaborative partnership, as may be
required For information on the responsibilities of the academic lead for articulation programmes,
please see Section 8.
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision Revised Aug 2015, currently under review
66
Section 16. Student Handbooks
14. REVIEW AND MONITORING OF COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES
Extract from QAA Quality Code Chapter B10 on Management of Collaborative
Arrangements
"Institutions should consider the appropriate balance between routine monitoring and
periodic review of programmes so that there is a continuous cycle. Routine monitoring is an
activity likely to be undertaken within the providing unit. Periodic review is normally an
institutional process, involving external participants of high calibre and with
academic/professional credibility. In developing and evaluating such processes, institutions
will want to be assured that they are monitoring the cumulative impact of small/incremental
changes.” 14.1 ANNUAL MONITORING
The annual monitoring of collaborative programmes is a key part of the University’s
processes for the assurance of standards and quality and risk management of its
collaborative provision.
Annual monitoring forms are circulated by the Faculty Support Team to Collaborative
Programme Directors/Academic Leads in Summer each year.
The completed forms are also be forwarded to Departmental Directors of L&T for
inclusion in Departmental/Faculty Annual Reflection. The outcomes of annual
monitoring of collaborative provision are also used by the University to inform the
future development and management of collaborative provision. 14.2 PERIODIC (FIVE YEAR) REVIEW OF COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES
The University conducts five yearly Periodic Reviews of the taught provision of
academic departments. Arrangements will normally made for collaborative
programmes to be considered within these Reviews (unless otherwise advised by the
Quality and Scrutiny Sub-Committee or its Sub-Group for Collaborative Provision). A
separate Review may be required in certain cases, for example for large overseas
collaborations or prior to the renewal of a collaborative agreement (see Section 11).
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision Revised Aug 2015, currently under review
67
Section 16. Student Handbooks
15. STUDENT REGISTRATION STATUS AND SUPPORT, STUDENT REPRESENTATION AND STUDENT FEEDBACK
15.1 STUDENT REGISTRATION STATUS AND SUPPORT
Student registration status and arrangements for student support by the collaborative
partners will vary considerably depending on the model of collaboration. The
proposed provisions will be considered as a part of the development and approval
process and the arrangements will be detailed in the collaborative agreement. Further
information on student registration is provided in Section 8 of the Framework.
It is particularly important for staff and students to be fully aware of the student
registration status at all stages of the collaboration, the support arrangements and
access to facilities provided by the collaborating institutions and the relevant staff and
student responsibilities. Departments and Programme Directors are responsible for
disseminating this information in student handbooks and other channels, as
appropriate. 15.2 STUDENT REPRESENTATION
Arrangements for student representation may vary, depending on the model of
collaboration and on local practices at a partner institution. However, there should be
opportunities for students to be represented on relevant committees. Proposed
arrangements will be considered as part of the approval process. Details should be
provided in Student Handbooks. 15.3 STUDENT FEEDBACK
Provisions should be made with partner organisations for collecting student feedback
and sharing information which is relevant to both of the partners, depending on the
model of collaboration. Proposed arrangements will be considered as part of the
approval process. Details should be provided in Student handbooks.
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision Revised Aug 2015, currently under review
68
Section 16. Student Handbooks
16. STUDENT HANDBOOKS Programme Directors/Link Academics are responsible for the production of student
programme handbooks. Prior to the start of the programme, draft handbooks should be
submitted to Learning and Teaching Services (see Section 1) for approval. Generic guidance on student handbook content is provided on the Learning and Teaching
Services website www.sheffield.ac.uk/lets Further guidance on handbooks for particular
collaborative arrangements is provided below. 16.1 HANDBOOKS FOR JOINT AWARD PROGRAMMES
Jointly-prepared by both universities, the student programme handbook should
normally include the following information (unless provided by another agreed means):
• Statement on student registration status (checked by Registry Services) and
related entitlements
• The programme specification/programme regulations approved by both partner
universities
• Approved unit outlines or link to these
• Copy of approved joint assessment regulations
• Assessment arrangements
• List of key contacts at each institution
• Details of periods of study at each institution (with details of how to access
support with accommodation, visas etc)
• Complaints procedure
• Appeals procedure 16.2 Handbooks for Dual Award Programmes
Either a jointly-prepared student programme handbook providing information on the
programmes/awards of both universities or a separate handbook should normally be
provided by each party at the start of the dual award programme including the
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision Revised Aug 2015, currently under review
69
Section 16. Student Handbooks
• Statement on UoS student registration status (checked by Registry Services)
and related entitlements
• The UoS programme specification/programme regulations (or link to these)
• Approved UoS unit outlines and those of any provision by the partner
organisation that will count towards the UoS award
• Link to UoS assessment regulations
• Assessment arrangements
• List of key contacts at each institution
• Details of periods of study at each institution (with details of how to access
support with accommodation, visas etc)
• Complaints procedure
• Appeals procedure 16.3 Handbooks for Jointly-Delivered Programmes (which lead to a UoS award only)
A jointly-prepared student programme handbook should normally include the following
information:
• Statement on student registration status (checked by Registry Services) and
related entitlements
• The programme specification
• Approved unit outlines or link to these
• Link to UoS general assessment regulations
• Assessment arrangements (including arrangements for assessment at partner
organisation)
• List of key contacts at each institution
• Details of periods of study at each institution (with details of how to access
support with accommodation, visas etc)
• Complaints procedure
• Appeals procedure
Framework for the Approval and Management of Taught Collaborative Provision Revised Aug 2015, currently under review
70
Section 16. Student Handbooks
17. STAFFING AND STAFF DEVELOPMENT FOR COLLABORATIVE PROGRAMMES
Collaborative proposals require information about the staffing and staff development for
collaborative programmes, although the precise requirements may vary according to the
type of collaboration and proposed partner organisation. In the case of a joint award with a peer institution, the normal expectation would be that due
diligence checks would include information on staffing provision at the partner organisation,
but that approval of individual staff CVs would not be required. For some types of
collaborative arrangement, approval of partner staff CVs may be required by the QSC
Collaborative Sub-Group for Collaborative Developments. In particular, approval of partner
organisation staff CVs will be required in order to grant “Associate Lecturer” status, which
allows access to University electronic and library resources. Departments developing a collaborative programme will need to consider staff development
needs including:
• Staff development for staff involved in overseas delivery: cultural awareness,
student expectations and needs, local contextual information
• Staff development/training for the whole team, including staff at partner institution
to ensure consistency in approaches where needed, including delivery of teaching