Program Quality Assurance and Cyclical Reviews
As part of new Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents (OCAV) Quality Assurance Framework process, every publicly assisted Ontario university that grants degrees is responsible for ensuring the quality of all programs of study. The Framework resulted from the Council of Ontario Universities comprehensive analysis of the long-established OCGS procedures. The recommendations in the final report included aligning the quality assurance processes for approval and review of undergraduate and graduate programs, and establishing a new quality assurance body under the direction of the OCAV. This new body is the Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance (the Quality Council), established in 2009.
Accordingly, at the University of Toronto we are in the process of developing our own Quality Assurance Process (UTQAP) to be submitted to the University governance for approval and to the Quality Council for ratification. Once approved, the University will be responsible for commissioning external reviews for appraisal of new program proposals and cyclical program reviews. New program proposals will be submitted to the Quality Council for approval. Existing programs must be reviewed on a cycle no longer than eight years. The Quality Council will conduct its subsequent audit of our institutional compliance with our UTQAP.
The February 22nd memorandum to Chairs and Directors provides context, describes our overall process proposed under the new Framework for meeting the requirements, and outlines next steps for the Faculty’s implementation.
We welcomed Professor Cheryl Regehr, Vice-Provost, Academic Programs, to our February 24th Faculty Council to provide an overview of the recent provincial changes in Quality Assurance and to discuss the University of Toronto’s preparations for the new process.
Professor Regehr and Brian Corman, Dean of the School of Graduate Studies and Vice-Provost, Graduate Education, co-chair the Quality Assurance Working Group that is developing the UTQAP and looking at procedures for program approvals and cyclical reviews. The Group is also consulting on benchmarking data that demonstrates evidence of programs’ quality. These procedures will effect the development of new undergraduate programs within our Faculty and with the Office of the Provost. “These new processes will impact how Faculty Council considers and approves our programs,” said Professor Yu-Ling Cheng, Speaker of Faculty Council.
As of December 2010 the OCGS appraisal process will be phased-out. New undergraduate program approvals will continue under the current process until August 2011. The revised cyclical review process will be phased-in over the course of 2010-11. Degree Level Expectations will be an integral component of new program proposals and cyclical reviews, as will be the setting of some standard benchmarking criteria.
Degree Learning Expectations for Undergraduate (UDLEs) and Graduate (GDLEs) programs require students to be assessed in six different areas.
At the undergraduate level, the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering offers nine different programs which lead to one of two different degrees. Degree Level Expectations for both degrees, approved by our Faculty Council in May 2008, are based on a model created by the Council of First-Entry Deans at the University of Toronto.
At the graduate level, our Faculty offers programs in seven different graduate units. Each unit offers the research-based Master of Applied Science and Doctor of Philosophy degrees. All units, with the exception IBBME, offer a course-based Master of Engineering degree. IBBME offers a Master of Health Science degree in Clinical Engineering.
The Canadian Engineering Accreditation Board (CEAB) recently added an outcome-based approach for reviews that requires the assessment and demonstration of twelve CEAB ‘Graduate Attributes’ for students graduating from our undergraduate programs. Currently the National Council of Deans of Engineering and Applied Science (NCDEAS) is working with Engineers Canada to develop a framework and assessment metrics to facilitate the review process of the Graduate Attributes. CEAB visits will evaluate the Graduate Attributes starting in 2010 and this evaluation will be noted in subsequent CEAB decisions and will be enforced starting 2014. The CEAB reviews each program at a minimum of every 6 years. All our nine undergraduate degree programs are accredited and the Faculty’s next review is scheduled for Fall 2012.
So how will our Faculty handle so many reviews?
We propose to combine the cyclical reviews of undergraduate and graduate programs with external reviews of our Departments and Institutes. “I am pleased with the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering’s approach to bundling the undergraduate and graduate reviews,” said Professor Regehr, “Reviews can by synchronized in time with accreditation assessments so that documentation and data gathered can be used in both processes as appropriate. This is a tremendous opportunity to evaluate the quality of our programs at all levels and to gain efficiencies in our processes.”
The Undergraduate and Graduate Degree Level Expectations (UDLEs and GDLEs) and CEAB Graduate Attributes will impact the assessment of our engineering students and programs. This will require us to identify each program's major learning objectives and include CEAB Graduate Attributes, create measurable assessment criteria/quality indicators for objectives and attributes, map these criteria to courses, identify assessment measures appropriate for the criteria and utilize the assessment outcomes for feedback and improvement.
Next, the Dean’s Working Group will outline the process for assessing, demonstrating and tracking the compliance of our undergraduate programs with the new CEAB Graduate Attributes. Finally, the Working Group will describe the Faculty governance processes for ensuring that undergraduate and graduate new program proposals and changes are consistent with UDLEs and GDLEs.
External Reviewers would receive the most recent CEAB accreditation report to supplement the review of the program. They would also be supplied with the current Academic Plan for the Unit, a process that the Faculty and all Departments and Institutes are undergoing right now. The view is to provide the final Working Group report to Faculty Council for information at our May 26 meeting.
The revitalized program approval and review process will ensure continued accountability for our procedures as we strive for excellence in curriculum, teaching and learning for our undergraduate and graduate students.
Newsletter Archives
Did you miss a past issue of the Engineering Newsletter? Revisit past articles and catch up on Faculty news on the Engineering homepage.
The Engineering Newsletter is a twice-monthly summary of key headlines, events and opportunities for faculty and staff in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering. If you have questions or comments, please contact us: dean.engineering@ecf.utoronto.ca.
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/uoftengineering