Course Approval Policy

1. Purpose

1.1 The Course Approval Policy (the policy) outlines the requirements and authorities for approving courses at UTS.

1.2 The policy is implemented by the Course Approval and Publication Procedure (the procedure).

2. Scope

2.1 This policy applies to:

all award courses, and
non-award preparatory courses offered by UTS and UTS foundation studies courses delivered by UTS College (hereafter non-award courses).

2.2 The following are out of scope of this policy:

the approval of changes to the admission criteria of a course (refer Rule 3.6, Student Rules and the Admissions and Recognition of Prior Learning Policy)
the approval of short forms of learning (refer Short Forms of Learning Policy)
the approval of changes to a course’s name, award title and award abbreviation (refer Award Course Nomenclature and Issuance Policy).

3. Principles

3.1 This policy supports the authorisation and accreditation of high-quality courses that:

are developed based on sound curriculum design principles and reflect UTS’s distinctive approach to teaching and learning
meet UTS's educational standards and requirements for the assigned award level
provide learning outcomes and experiences that are aligned with the UTS Student Experience Framework
are sustainable and accessible (based on any inherent requirements) (refer Accessibility and Inclusion Policy)
comply with the relevant provisions of the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021 (Cwlth) and the Australian Qualifications Framework.

3.2 The authorisation of courses allows UTS to build and maintain a portfolio of courses that are strategically aligned (refer UTS 2027 strategy) and financially viable.

3.3 The accreditation of courses allows UTS to oversee the design and management of courses and ensure they are guided by relevant legislation and UTS rules, policies and principles.

4. Policy statements

Course approval requirements

4.1 A course is approved when both course authorisation and course accreditation activities have been completed in line with this policy.

4.2 Each course must have an identified owning faculty.

4.3 The dean has overall responsibility for requests for course approvals (via authorisation and accreditation proposals) developed by their faculty, ensuring course compliance and regulatory requirements are met.

Course authorisation

4.4 Courses are authorised by the Provost (as the Vice-Chancellor’s nominee) via the Courses Planning Committee (CPC).

4.5 Course authorisation is required for:

new courses, and
major changes (refer Definitions) to existing courses.

4.6 Requests for course authorisation are made in the form of a business case in the Curriculum Management System (CMS).

Course accreditation

4.7 Courses are accredited by Academic Board (or the Executive Committee of Academic Board (ECAB)) in line with the UTS Delegations via the Courses Accreditation Committee (CAC) or the Higher Degree Research Committee (HDRC).

4.8 Course accreditation is required for:

the accreditation of new courses
the reaccreditation of existing courses, and
major changes to an accredited course that impacts enrolled or future students.

4.9 Requests for course accreditation are made in the form of a proposal in the CMS.

Accreditation periods

4.10 All coursework courses, non-award courses and research courses with more than one-third of a coursework component (categorised as doctoral degree by research and coursework (DRC) and masters degrees by research and coursework (MRC)) are normally accredited for a period of 6 years.

4.11 Course accreditation for postgraduate research award courses categorised as doctoral degrees by research (DR) and masters degrees by research (MR) is normally given for an unlimited period. HDRC can request and require a course review and consideration of continued offering on the recommendation of the Director, Graduate Research School.

4.12 An extension of accreditation period may be requested in exceptional circumstances, including where:

unforeseen events have prevented the faculty from offering/admitting students in the accredited course
unforeseen events have prevented the faculty from finalising the reaccreditation in the required timeframe, or
a major strategic issue has been identified and there is insufficient time to address the matter in the normal reaccreditation cycle.

4.13 Extension of accreditation is a major change that:

may be sought and granted only once within the accreditation period, and
cannot cause the overall period of accreditation to exceed 7 years.

Course changes

4.14 Changes to accredited courses that are not major changes are approved by faculty boards in line with Rule 3.6.3 and the faculty’s curriculum change approval processes (hereafter faculty approval processes).

4.15 Major changes to accredited courses, other than suspension of intake (approved by the Provost), are approved in line with the course approval requirements (refer Course authorisation and Course accreditation).

Monitoring and review

4.16 Courses are monitored annually to assess and mitigate any future educational quality risks and to guide and evaluate proposed course improvements.

4.17 Courses are subject to external referencing including, but not limited to, a cross-sector comparison or an independent review to provide evidence of the quality and standing of the course, and to inform course improvements where relevant. This must take place at least once per accreditation period.

4.18 Courses are subject to a comprehensive review, informed by annual monitoring and external referencing, before the end of the accreditation period to inform the course design proposed for reaccreditation.

4.19 The academic and financial performance of the university’s portfolio of award coursework courses is reviewed and benchmarked annually against key tracking indicators to monitor performance and initiate action to improve the course portfolio.

Annual reporting

4.20 An annual report is provided to Academic Board and the senior executive listing all approvals under the policy (as outlined in the procedure).

Policy exemptions

4.21 The Provost may advise, in exceptional circumstances, on any exemptions to this policy. All approved exemptions must have a clear justification and are reported to Academic Board via CPC, CAC and/or HDRC as appropriate.

5. Roles and responsibilities

5.1 Policy owner: The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education and Students) is responsible for the enforcement of and compliance with this policy, ensuring that its principles and statements are observed. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education and Students) is also responsible for the approval of any associated university-level procedures.

5.2 Policy contact: The Head, University Academic Programs Office (UAPO) is responsible for providing advice on the implementation of this policy and its procedure, and for ensuring the efficiency and quality of the systems that support the approval process.

5.3 Implementation and governance roles:

The Vice-Chancellor (or Provost as the Vice-Chancellor’s nominee) is responsible for course authorisation.

The Provost is responsible for determining appropriate approval pathways (or exemptions to those pathways) and suspension of intake.

The Teaching and Learning Committee monitors course quality and makes recommendations to Academic Board on actions to improve course quality.

Academic Board and the Executive Committee of Academic Board (where decisions are required outside Academic Board meeting times) approves the accreditation of proposed award courses, reaccreditation of existing award courses, and the removal or phasing out of approved or existing award courses as recommended by the Courses Accreditation Committee.

The Executive Committee of Academic Board (ECAB) must report all approvals made on behalf of Academic Board to the next meeting of the board for noting.

The Higher Degree Research Committee (HDRC) endorses course accreditation for research courses and makes a recommendation to Academic Board or ECAB that course accreditation approval be granted for research courses that meet, or continue to meet, UTS’s educational requirements and standards for the appropriate level of award.

The Courses Accreditation Committee (CAC) endorses course accreditation for coursework courses and makes a recommendation to Academic Board or ECAB that course accreditation approval be granted for coursework courses that meet, or continue to meet, UTS’s educational requirements and standards for the appropriate level of award.

The Courses Planning Committee (CPC) endorses the business case for courses and makes recommendations to the Provost for authorisation. It also makes recommendations to the Provost whether authorisation is required for reaccreditation of existing coursework courses.

Deans are responsible for:

ensuring that courses offered by their faculty are developed and approved in compliance with the Student Rules, this policy and the procedure
nominating academic contacts and ensuring that adequate resources are dedicated to course development and approval and for appointing an academic contact (refer the procedure)
submitting business cases and course accreditation requests to the relevant committees in line with this policy and the procedure, and
confirming the faculty’s awareness of UTS compliance obligations for course registration on the CRICOS (deans can delegate responsibility to a nominee).

Faculty boards endorse requests for course accreditation before submission to CAC for recommendation to Academic Board or ECAB for course accreditation approval.

6. Definitions

The following definitions apply for this policy and all associated procedures. These are in addition to the definitions outlined in Schedule 1, Student Rules. Definitions in the singular also include the plural meaning of the word.

Curriculum Management System (CMS) means the enterprise system used by UTS to support the approval, review and publication of curriculum information. The CMS is the primary and authoritative source of curriculum information for publication in the UTS Handbook. CMS data is also used in the subject information in Canvas and on UTS's public website.

Curriculum and Student System (CASS) means the storage system for the high-level curriculum data collected and approved during the course approval or reaccreditation approval process.

Discontinuation means the approval to end an existing award course as determined by the Provost and Academic Board in line with Rule 3.1.4, Rule 3.6.1 and Rule 3.6.2. Discontinued is a status in the CMS and CASS referring to a course that is no longer offered to new students. No existing students may be admitted to the course.

Extension of course accreditation means the extension of the accreditation period for an existing course to enable more time for preparation and submission of reaccreditation documentation in line with this policy and the procedure.

Faculty curriculum change approval process (also faculty approval process) is the approval process developed by each faculty to align with university-level curriculum management in line with Rule 3.6.3. These processes are published at Faculty approval processes (SharePoint).

Major change means a substantial change to a course, including but not limited to, suspension of intake, discontinuation, phasing-out, extension of accreditation period, change in total credit points, courses delivered in partnership with a third party, courses to be delivered offshore and/or other changes to existing courses that have substantial financial, resource or risk implications as determined by the Provost. Refer Rule 3.1.4, Rule 3.6.1 and Rule 3.6.2.

Non-award preparatory course (also preparatory course) means a form of non-award study specifically designed to enable students to prepare for university study. These preparatory courses have defined eligibility requirements for admission, a defined structure and specified learning outcomes and may also be used as an alternative to assess eligibility for admission into UTS undergraduate award courses.

Owning faculty means the faculty that has primary responsibility for and ownership of the course. The course leader must be from the owning faculty.

Phasing out means a gradual process of discontinuation determined by Academic Board. Phasing out is a status of a course in the CMS and CASS where the Provost has authorised that the course will no longer be offered to new students, but that students currently admitted to the course can continue their studies in accordance with the existing course structure and requirements.

Suspension of intake means the temporary pausing of admission of new students into a course in line with Rule 3.1.3. Suspension of intake is a major change approved by the Provost and does not require Academic Board approval.

Approval information

Policy contact	Head, University Academic Programs Office
Approval authority	Academic Board
Review date	2025
File number	UR24/2053
Superseded documents	Award Course Approval Policy (UR18/248)