Quality Assurance Review Core Elements and Process

AC-CAQ-PRO-045
Quality Assurance Review Core Elements and Process
DepartmentAcademic/Centre for Academic Quality
Creation DateJuly 17, 2020
Approval DateJuly 20, 2020
Effective DateSeptember 8, 2020

Organizational Scope

The Process applies to all full-time and part-time programs offered in The Michener Institute of Education at UHN, School for Applied Health Sciences (“Michener”).

Purpose

This process accompanies the Quality Assurance and Formal Program Review Policy to ensure the content and delivery of programs for which a credential is awarded within Michener are responsive, current and relevant in meeting employer, community, student and government needs.

Process

Michener’s approach to program quality assurance and improvement involves the program team (faculty and Chair) meeting to discuss and reflect on evidence about the quality of individual courses and program, making plans to improve quality, and following through on those plans. Michener support departments, such as Applied Educational Research, may be invited to join these meetings to support data analysis and interpretation and promote the operationalization of identified CQI priorities.

Systematic documentation supports the entire process.

Quality Assurance Review Core Elements

  • Collective reflection about program quality
  • Decisions grounded in evidence
  • Action planning (considering capacity/resources)
  • Accountability and follow-through
  • Documentation

The quality assurance review can be carried out at the course and program level. Details of courses and opportunities for improvement will be discussed at end-of-semester meetings. The overall program and opportunities for improvement will be discussed annually.

Suggestions at the course level Suggestions at the program level
Timing/ frequency End-of-semester meetings

  • Fall semester debrief: late January
  • Winter semester debrief: late May
  • Summer semester debrief: late September
 End-of-year meetings

Meeting held annually ~September/October

Attendees
  • Chair
  • Faculty
  • Support Services staff (as required)
    • Chair
    • Faculty
    • Support Services staff (as required)
      Focus (suggested) How courses are doing in terms of:

      • Content – clarity, sequencing
      • Alignment with program goals
      • Instructional approaches:
      • Learning activities
      • Assessment methods
      • Student experience
      How the overall program is doing in terms of:

      • Student recruitment/retention
      • Readiness for clinical and employment
      • Clinical placements and partnerships
      • Student experience
      • Employer interest in graduates
      • Curriculum alignment and program length
      • Instructional equipment
      • Faculty knowledge/skills/credentials
      • Addressing health profession needs
      • Capacity for scholarship and research
      Sources of evidence (examples)
      • Course evaluations (select data)
      • Clinical performance assessments
      • Student grades
      • Best practices (in relevant focus area)
      •  Accreditation results (relevant to courses)
      • External data (e.g., surveys by membership bodies)
      • Competitive analysis and best practices
      • Course evaluations (rolled up)
      • Student / graduate surveys
      • Clinical partner feedback
      • Clinical co-coordinator evaluations
      • Graduation and attrition rates
      • Certification/credentialing exam rates
      • Employer survey
      • Labour market demand
      • Faculty Liaison Committee (FLC)/Program Advisory Committee (PAC) feedback
      • Accreditation results (relevant to program)
      • Relevant external research

       

      Associated Documentation

      Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board (PEQAB) Manual for Public Organizations: 2019

      Quality Assurance and Formal Program Review Policy

      Quality Assurance and Formal Program Review Procedure

      Quality Assurance and Formal Program Review Procedure Flowchart

      Revision History

      Date Reviewer Change(s) Made
      July 17, 2020 Sydney Redpath, Fiona Cherryman, Ann Russell Process formalized to complement Quality Assurance and Formal Program Review Policy and Procedure.