Institutional Quality Assurance Process

Expedited Approvals

The process for Expedited Approvals will apply when proposing a:

The expedited proposal process does not require external consultants.

Institutional Process

Steps

  1. The proposal is developed by the academic unit and subject to the Faculty’s internal approval process. The proposal is identified in the Faculty’s annual planning document.
  2. The proposal is received by SUPR-G; SUPR-G appoints internal reviewers to review the proposal. The internal reviewers prepare a summary report of the review for SUPR-G.
  3. On the basis of the internal reviewers’ summary, SUPR-G makes a recommendation to SCAPA.
  4. SCAPA reviews the report of SUPR-G and makes a recommendation to Senate.
  5. Senate approves the new program.
  6. Provost’s Office submits the proposal to the Quality Council for approval.
  7. The proposal is submitted to the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities for funding purposes.
  8. The new program is monitored by the University through the annual planning process.
  9. The first cyclical review occurs within 8 years of the first enrolment into the program.

Proposal Brief

The proposal brief will describe the new program, diploma or field including, as appropriate, reference to learning outcomes and the academic unit’s resources. The proposal will provide rationale for the new program, diploma or field and will include the following criteria, as applicable:

Expedited Approval Process

Once Senate approval has been obtained, the proposal brief will be submitted by the Provost to the Quality Council Appraisal Committee for consideration. The QC Appraisal Committee will determine:

Within 45 days of receipt of a final and complete submission from Western, the Executive Director of the QC will report the outcome of the expedited approval process to the Provost and to the QC.

Major Modifications to Existing Programs

Major modifications to existing programs include one or more of the following:

The list above is not intended to be inclusive and it may, at times, be difficult to determine whether or not a proposed change constitutes a “significant change”. In such situations, SUPR-G will serve as the arbiter in determining whether a proposed change constitutes a major modification or a minor change. In addition, SUPR-G may, at its discretion, request that the Quality Council review a major modification proposal through the Expedited Approval process.

Steps

Annual Report to the Quality Council

All major modifications to existing programs that were approved through Western’s internal review and approval process will be included in an Annual Report to the QC, submitted by the Office of the Provost and Vice-President (Academic).