The process for Expedited Approvals will apply when proposing a new Graduate Diploma
The expedited proposal process does not require external consultants.
- 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.
- The proposal is received and reviewed by SUPR-G;
- SUPR-G makes a recommendation to SCAPA.
- SCAPA makes a recommendation to Senate.
- Senate approves the new program.
- Provost’s Office submits the proposal to the Quality Council for approval.
- The proposal is submitted to the Ministry of Training, Colleges, and Universities for funding purposes.
- The new program is monitored by the University through the annual planning process.
- The first cyclical review occurs within 8 years of the first enrolment into the program.
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:
- Admission requirements
- Program structure
- Program content
- Mode of delivery
- Assessment of teaching and learning
- Quality and other indicators
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:
- that Western can proceed with the proposed new program/diploma/field; or
- that further consultation with Western is required.
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:
- a change in program requirements that differ significantly from those existing at the time of the previous cyclical review or the introduction of the program, including, for example:
- the merger or two or more existing programs
- the introduction of a combined program option
- the introduction or deletion of a thesis requirement
- the introduction or deletion of a laboratory requirement
- the introduction or deletion of a practicum, work-experience, internship, or portfolio requirement
- creation, deletion or renaming of a field in a graduate program;
- changes to program content, other than those listed in a) above, that affect the learning outcomes, but do not meet the threshold for a new program;
- significant changes to the faculty engaged in delivering the program and/or to the essential physical resources, including, but not limited to changes in the mode of delivery of the program; examples may include:
- introduction of an existing program at an additional site
- introducing a on-line version of an existing program
- introducing a part-time option in an existing full-time graduate program.
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.
- The proposal is developed by the academic unit and subject to the Faculty’s internal approval process.
- The proposal is received by SUPR-G; SUPR-G makes a recommendation to SCAPA.
- SCAPA reviews the recommendation of SUPR-G and makes a recommendation to Senate.
- Senate approves the proposed modifications.
- Provost’s Office includes the major modification in an annual report to the Quality Council for approval.
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).