Curriculum Quality Assurance Reports include records of consultation activity occurring through the Centre for Learning, Innovation and Simulation (CLIS) over the last reporting period that meets the criteria of “new”, “major” and “minor” course revisions, as defined in the Course Management Policy.

Procedure:

1. Course changes are identified by staff and/or faculty – driven by internal or external needs – and are presented to the Academic Chair and faculty.
2. Based on the criteria outlined in the Course Management Policy an individual is assigned responsibility for ensuring the proposed changes are captured within a course.
3. In consultation with the CLIS Instructional Design Specialist or designate, the assigned individual develops and/or revises course materials (e.g., course outline, learning plans, teaching plans, Blackboard course site, assessments, etc.) until such a time as the course meets all quality assurance criteria.
   Note: CLIS consultations may include input from the Applied Educational Research (AER), Learning Resource Center (LRC) and the Centre for Academic Quality (CAQ).
4. CLIS is responsible for tracking consultation discussions for all “New”, “Major” and “Minor” course revision for the Quality Assurance Report and ensuring the Quality Assurance Report is on the AAC agenda by completing and submitting the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form”.
5. Course revisions that are categorized as “New” and “Major” require an additional “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” to be submitted with a copy of the course outline to the AAC for the upcoming meeting.

Timeline:

1. Courses (new or revised) must be completed and approved by AAC one semester in advance of the course commencement
2. The CLIS consultation and completion of the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” must take place at minimum three (3) weeks prior to the AAC meeting.
3. The “AAC Request for Approval/ Recommendation Form” is completed and forwarded with the appropriate documentation to the AAC Secretary a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the AAC meeting.
4.  The AAC Secretary and/or AAC Chair will
   • confirm to the presenter that all required steps, consultations and documentation are complete (requirements outlined on the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” are met), or
   • request that further steps be taken, consultation made and/or documentation submitted within 3 business days failure of which will result in postponement to the next scheduled AAC meeting and resubmission of all materials.
5. Instruction Design Specialist or designate attendance for presentation at the upcoming AAC meeting will be confirmed and added to the meeting Agenda under Quality Assurance Report
   • AAC members will receive the AAC agenda and all proposal documentation one week prior to the scheduled meeting to allow time for Committee members to review the materials and prepare for the meeting ahead of time. The curriculum/faculty development specialist presenting is asked to review key points of the revision only and be prepared to engage in discussion and answer questions from the committee immediately following. Faculty may choose to attend AAC meetings where their courses are being presented.

Approval Process:

1. AAC members will review the proposal documentation prior to the scheduled meeting in order to be prepared to make one of the following decisions/ recommendations at the meeting, with respect to the Quality Assurance Report :
   • Approve the information as presented or with minor recommendations, or
   • Provide conditional approval with recommendations to be implemented, within 5 business days, for final approval, or
   • Require the information to be re-submitted at a future meeting
2. All decisions will be clearly documented in the minutes and supported with rationale.
3. Consensus is the basis for decision making. However if consensus cannot be reached within a reasonable time, as set by the AAC Chair, (this time will generally be the time set aside on the agenda for the item under review), the majority vote shall rule. The AAC Chair will vote in the event of a tie.
   

Model Routes define the educational pathway for a particular cohort of students in a particular year to meet the graduation requirements for the program.  All Model Routes are approved annually prior to Ministry submission for the Ontario Student Assistant Program (OSAP).  Changes to Model Routes may also occur and include those that:

• impact the total number of program hours
• change the learning outcomes at the program level, and therefore, may impact accreditation status
• include changes in program delivery modes (i.e., e-learning, simulation) in the course or program
• result in a change of program focus
• result in changes to program resource requirements (human, physical, fiscal, clinical, facilities, etc.), requiring approval of the Academic Chair

Procedure:

1. Staff and/or faculty will identify changes required to the model route – , driven by internal or external needs – and present them to the Academic Chair
2. The Academic Chair will determine the impact on course delivery, course development, equipment /human resource/financial requirements (including OSAP), student graduation requirements, future accreditation status,
3. The Academic Chair will verify with the Registrar’s Office any course code change required.
4. The Academic Chair will complete the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” and submit it- with a copy of the New Model Route – to the AAC secretary for addition to the AAC agenda.

Timeline:

1. Model Routes remaining the same from year to year are submitted to AAC annually in October/November for implementation for the following academic year intake. Approved Model Routes are posted on the intranet under each program area.
2. Model Routes changes, where impact on development or financial/ equipment/ or human resources are expected to be minimal, the New Model Route and the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” must be submitted and approved at AAC by the October/November preceding the Academic year in which the Model Route is to be implemented.
3. Where changes to the Model Route are expected to have a major impact on financial, human, equipment, and development resources, or where major consultation will be required, the approval process will take place early enough to allow for adequate consultation, development, and attainment of other resources is reasonable.  The minimum timeline for the New Model Route and “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” to submitted and approved at AAC is at least the October/November prior to the Academic year in which the Model Route is to be implemented. It is the responsibility of the presenter to ensure adequate time has been allotted for the approval and implementation process.
4. In all cases, the AAC Request for Approval/ Recommendation Form will be completed and forwarded – with the appropriate documentation – to the AAC Secretary a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the AAC meeting.
5. Once it is confirmed by the AAC Secretary and/or AAC Chair that all required steps, consultations and documentation are complete (requirements outlined on the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” )are met, presenter attendance for presentation at the next AAC meeting will be confirmed and added to the meeting Agenda under Model Route Approval.
6. AAC members will receive and read the proposal documentation prior to the meeting.
7. The Academic Chair or designate presenting are asked to review key points of the revision only and be prepared to engage in discussion and answer questions from the committee immediately following the presentation.

Approval Process:

1. AAC members will review the proposal documentation prior to the scheduled meeting, in order to be prepared to make one of the following decisions/ recommendations at the meeting with respect to the Model Route:
   • Approve as presented or with minor recommendations, or
   • Provide conditional approval with recommendations to be implemented, within 5 business days, for final approval, or
   • Require the information to be re-submitted at a future meeting. An expedited meeting may be called by the AAC Chair to ensure timelines for Model Route submission to the Ministry are met
2. All decisions will be clearly documented in the minutes and supported with rationale.
3. Consensus is the basis for decision making. However if consensus cannot be reached within a reasonable time, as set by the AAC Chair, the majority vote shall rule. The AAC Chair will vote in the event of a tie.
4. Once approved Model Routes will be posted to Michener’s intranet site by the Program Administrative Assistant

Program Admission Requirements define the minimum standards that must be met by applicants in a particular year to be considered eligible for entry into the program.  Admission requirements are established as part of the initiation of new programs.  Changes to Program Admissions Requirements may also be identified once the program is in place.

Procedure:

1. Staff and/or faculty will identify changes required to the admission requirements – , driven by internal or external needs – and present them to the Academic Chair
2. The Academic Chair in consultation with the appropriate departments (e.g. CLI, CAQ, RO Finance etc.) will determine the impact on course delivery, course development, equipment /human resource/financial requirements (including OSAP), student graduation requirements, future accreditation status,
3. The Academic Chair will verify with the Registrar’s Office any course code change required.
4. The Academic Chair will complete the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” and submit it- with a copy of the New Model Route – to the AAC secretary for addition to the AAC agenda.

Timeline:

1. Proposed changes to existing admission requirements and the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” must be submitted and approved at AAC a minimum of eighteen (18) months prior to the intake year in which the Admission Requirements are to be implemented.
2. Where changes to the Admission Requirements require major consultation, the approval process will take place early enough to allow for adequate consultation, development, and attainment of other resources is reasonable.
3. It is the responsibility of the presenter to ensure adequate time has been allotted for the approval and implementation process (including, but not limited to, website and viewbook updates).
4. In all cases, the AAC Request for Approval/ Recommendation Form will be completed and forwarded – with the appropriate documentation – to the AAC Secretary a minimum of two (2) weeks prior to the AAC meeting.
5. Once it is confirmed by the AAC Secretary and/or AAC Chair that all required steps, consultations and documentation are complete (requirements outlined on the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” )are met, presenter attendance for presentation at the next AAC meeting will be confirmed and added to the meeting Agenda under Admission Requirements Approval.
6. AAC members will receive and read the proposal documentation prior to the meeting.
7. The Academic Chair or designate presenting are asked to review key points of the revision only and be prepared to engage in discussion and answer questions from the committee immediately following the presentation.

Approval Process:

1. AAC members will review the proposal documentation prior to the scheduled meeting, in order to be prepared to make one of the following decisions/ recommendations at the meeting with respect to the Admission Requirements:
   • Approve as presented or with minor recommendations, or
   • Provide conditional approval with recommendations to be implemented, within 5 business days, for final approval, or
2. Require the information to be re-submitted at a future meeting. An expedited meeting may be called by the AAC Chair to ensure timelines for updating Admission Requirements on organizational recruitment materials (eg. Webpages, Viewbook) are met if required.
3. All decisions will be clearly documented in the minutes and supported with rationale.
4. Consensus is the basis for decision making. However if consensus cannot be reached within a reasonable time, as set by the AAC Chair, the majority vote shall rule. The AAC Chair will vote in the event of a tie.
5. Once approved the revised Admission Requirements will be:
   • Updated in Michener Viewbook by Office of the Registrar
   • Updated on external program webpage by the Program Administrative Assistant
   • Updated on Michener Admissions webpage by Office of the Registrar

New program initiation or program closure and suspension have the potential to impact significantly both fiscal and human resources.  As such it is imperative that a proposal considering any of the above is carefully thought out and adheres to all Board policies and Collective Agreement understanding.

Program Initiation:

Procedure:

When a proposal for a new program is to be considered by AAC for recommendation for approval, the submission must be thorough and supported with the appropriate evidence.  As such, in order to be reviewed by AAC, all timelines must be met and all requirements, as indicated on the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form”,   completed in full and supported with documentation.

Timeline:

1. In all cases the “AAC Request for Approval/ Recommendation Form” will be completed and forwarded, with the appropriate supporting documentation, to the AAC Secretary a minimum of one month prior to the AAC meeting.
2. Once it is confirmed by the AAC Secretary and/or AAC Chair that all required steps, consultations and documentation are complete (requirements outlined on the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” are met), presenter attendance for presentation at the next AAC meeting will be confirmed and added to the meeting Agenda under New Program Initiation
3. AAC members will receive and read the submission paperwork prior to the meeting.
4. The individual(s) presenting are asked to review key points of the proposal and be prepared to engage in discussion and answer questions from the committee immediately following.

Approval Process:

1. Academic Approval Council members review the proposal documentation prior to the scheduled meeting in order to be prepared to make one of the following decisions/ recommendations at the meeting with respect to the new program proposal:
   • Approve as presented or with minor recommendations, or
   • Provide conditional approval with recommendations to be implemented, within 10 business days, for final approval, or
   • Require the information to be re-submitted at a future meeting. An expedited meeting may be called at the call of the AAC Chair to ensure timelines for submission of the New Model Route to the Ministry are met for the new program if required

2. All decisions will be clearly documented in the minutes and supported with rationale.
3. Consensus is the basis for decision making. However if consensus cannot be reached within a reasonable time, as set by the AAC Chair, the majority vote shall rule.

Program Closure/Suspension:

Timeline:

1. In all cases the AAC Request for Approval/ Recommendation Form is completed and forwarded with the appropriate supporting documentation to the AAC Secretary a minimum of one month prior to the Academic Approval Council meeting.
2. Due to the sensitivity of this topic AAC members may receive and be required to read the submission paperwork during the meeting.
3. The individual(s) presenting are asked to review key points of the proposal and be prepared to engage in discussion and answer questions from the committee immediately following.

Approval Process:

1. Academic Approval Council members review the proposal documentation and make one of the following decisions/ recommendations at the meeting with respect to the program closure/ suspension:
   • Approve as presented or with minor recommendations
   • Provide conditional approval with recommendations to be implemented, within 10  business days, for final approval
   • Require the information to be re-submitted at a future meeting. An expedited meeting may be called at the call of the AAC Chair.
2. All decisions will be clearly documented in the minutes and supported with rationale.
3. Consensus is the basis for decision making. However if consensus cannot be reached within a reasonable time, as set by the AAC Chair, the majority vote shall rule.
4. Decisions will be forwarded to the EVP Education and Education Executive
5. All decisions remain confidential until such time as a final decision is made by the EVP Education and Education Executive and all steps of the Communication Plan on Program Closures/ Suspensions are complete.

Academic policies, processes, and guidelines refer to documents that impact and guide the academic area.  These policies, processes, and guidelines require review within a maximum period of three years to ensure currency.  When changes are required during or prior to this time period, a consultation with the Senior Director, Academic Planning & Operations will take place to determine if the changes proposed require AAC recommendation for approval.

All new policies affecting the academic area must receive AAC approval.  Major revisions requiring AAC approval are those which result in changes to the mandate, membership, or processes within policies. The review period for a major revision is three years from the date of AAC approval.  When revisions are deemed to be minor, the review period will remain the same, however the revision date will be recorded on the policy, process, and guideline template.

All revisions, whether minor or approved through AAC, will follow the same process for posting and communication to the Michener community to ensure only current policies, processes, and guidelines are available to those who access them.   Once the new or revised policy, process, or guideline is posted, the previous version will be archived according to a standardized process.  Please refer to Policy Process and Guidelines.

Timeline:

1. When AAC approval for recommendation is deemed appropriate, the “AAC Request for Approval/ Recommendation Form” is completed and forwarded to the AAC Chair/Secretary a minimum of 10 business days prior to the next scheduled AAC meeting.
2. Once it is confirmed by the AAC Secretary and/or Chair that all required steps, consultations and documentation are complete (requirements outlined on the “AAC Request for Approval/Recommendation Form” are met), project manager attendance for presentation at the next AAC meeting will be confirmed and added to the meeting Agenda under Academic Policy
3. AAC members will receive and read the submission paperwork prior to the meeting.
4. The individual(s) presenting are asked to review key points of the proposal and be prepared to engage in discussion and answer questions from the committee immediately following.

Process:

1. The new or revised academic policy will be presented to the committee for review and discussion.
2. AAC members will recommend one of the following:
   1. Approval of the policy and forward the recommendation to the Executive Vice President Education, or
   2. Conditional approval with recommendations to be implemented, within 10 business days, for final approval, or
   3. Request for re-submission of the policy for review at a future meeting
3. All decisions will be clearly documented in the minutes and supported with rationale.
4. Consensus is the basis for decision making. However if consensus cannot be reached within a reasonable time, as set by the AAC Chair, the majority vote shall rule. The AAC Chair will vote in the event of a tie.
5. The AAC Chair will forward the policy and recommendation for approval to the Executive Vice President, Education. The Executive Vice President, Education will review and provide final approval of the policy.
6. In all cases, the AAC secretary will notify the parties involved of the final approval.
7. Once the individual(s) is/are informed of the approval, the new or revised policy, process and guideline will be posted and the previous policy, process and guideline archived as per the Policy Process and Guidelines noted above.

Policies and other documentation linked to this policy are:

• Integrated Academic Strategy
• COARTE and EQual Canada (Health Standards Organization and Accreditation Canada)
• Collective Agreement 2018-2021
• Course Management Policy
• Policy Process and Guidelines
• Communication Plan on Program Closures/ Suspensions
• Quality Assurance Report