Self-evaluation questionnaire for new Doctoral programmes /
You should complete this questionnaire if you are proposing a new UK Doctoral programme for accreditation against the requirements for Chartered Membership of the Society, and full membership of one of the Society’s Divisions. This includes integrated Doctorates that are designed to meet our standards in full, as well as those programmes that are designed to meet stage two of our requirements, where a two-stage training model exists.
The questionnaire is split into two sections:
· Section A asks for key information about the award you are submitting for accreditation, including details of who we should contact if we have queries about your application.
· Section B invites you to self-evaluate your programme against each of our nine programme standards.
You should read this questionnaire alongside our handbook Accreditation of new UK programmes: a guide to our application process, and alongside our accreditation standards.
You should provide your completed submission in three hard copies and on three USB sticks. Please post them to:
Partnership & Accreditation Team
The British Psychological Society
St Andrews House, 48 Princess Road East
Leicester LE1 7DR
If you have any queries in relation to your submission, please contact
Section A: about your provision
1. The programme(s)
Full name of programme as it appears on award certificate / Mode of study (tick all that apply) / Is the award validated? / Trainee numbers (FTE) / Date of first intake / Intake from which accreditation soughtFull-time / Part-time / Blended learning / Distance learning / Yes / No* / Current
(if the programme is already running) / Projected
(if the programme is brand new)
* Note: If your programme has not yet been validated, please indicate the date on which the validation event (or equivalent) is planned to take place.
2. The education provider
Name of awarding institution:Academic unit(s) in which the provision is based:
Full address (to assist us in relation to future visit planning and logistics):
Name of Programme Director: / You should tell us the name of the staff member with overall academic responsibility for the provision and its delivery and development.
Franchising arrangements: / Is the provision franchised for delivery by a partner institution? Y/N
If yes, please state the name of the partner institution.
3. The application
Who should we approach with any queries about this application? / You should tell us the name and role of who we should approach with any queries about your application, and provide us with an email address and telephone number for them.Senior management sign off: / We require the Head of the academic unit in which the provision is based to confirm the accuracy of the information contained within this application, and the provision of the additional evidence outlined below.
Signature (electronic):
Name and role:
Date of submission:
4. The checklist
The sources of evidence to be supplied alongside this self-evaluation questionnaire are outlined below. If you think it would be helpful for our reviewers to consider alternative or additional documentation please indicate what you have provided below. This list should be considered alongside our handbook, Accreditation of new UK programmes: a guide to our application process.
Programme standard / Evidence source (or equivalent alternative source if appropriate) / Enclosed?Y/N
Programme standard 1: Learning, research and practice / Completed competencies mapping document.
Programme handbook.
Module handbooks (or module outlines if handbooks are not yet available).
Curriculum, research, placement (if appropriate) and/or other handbooks, if applicable.
Programme specification.
Programme standard 3: Selection and entry / Selection and recruitment policy.
Programme standard 6: Staffing / Brief biographies for all staff who make a significant contribution to programme delivery and development. CVs may be provided if this is easier for you.
Programme standard 9: Quality management / Most recent internal quality assurance exercise (e.g. validation report) if available. This should include an overview of how your relationship with any external partner is managed from a quality management perspective (where applicable).
Section B: self-evaluation against our standards
In this part of our questionnaire, we ask you to tell us about the context in which your provision is delivered and the rationale for its development. We then outline our nine programme standards, and invite you to self-evaluate your provision against them. You should read each section of the questionnaire alongside the corresponding section of our accreditation standards.
In each section, we outline the information we need you to give us, and then set out any additional sources of evidence you should provide with your submission. The greyed-out columns will be completed by our reviewers as they work through your submission.
At the end of the questionnaire, we will also give you the opportunity to highlight any good practice in relation to your provision. It is up to you decide what aspects of good practice you wish to promote most strongly, and how you relate these to our standards.
Context and rationale
Information required / Commentary / Reviewers’ comments if relevant to standards)Why has this new programme been developed?
Please briefly outline the rationale for the development of this new programme, and describe how the programme contributes to the strategic aims of your institution.
What are the distinctive features of this provision?
Please briefly outline what you feel to be the distinctive features or strengths of this provision, using bullet points. These may relate to the provision, the academic unit in which it is based, or the education provider more generally.
Programme standard 1: Learning, research and practice
a. Required competencies
· This part of the self-evaluation questionnaire is intended to assist you in demonstrating to our reviewers that you have taken account of our requirements in relation to the development of the required competencies.
· Note: If you are putting forward an integrated Doctorate in an area of psychology where the training model in place typically comprises completion of an MSc prior to progression to a stage two Doctorate, you should also complete the corresponding section of the self-evaluation questionnaire for new MSc programmes, as well as the relevant MSc curriculum mapping document.
· You should provide a brief commentary on the following, and signpost us to the relevant supporting evidence in your module or programme handbooks, or other materials as appropriate.
· You should also complete the relevant mapping document to evidence how you address our requirements.
Information required / Commentary / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
If the programme offers a particular emphasis or distinctive identity, e.g. in line with staff expertise, please outline that here.
Please provide a brief commentary on your approach to curriculum design and delivery.
You should consider this a narrative to support your completion of our mapping document.
b. Supervised practice
· This part of the self-evaluation questionnaire is intended to assist you in demonstrating to our reviewers that you have taken account of our requirements in relation to trainees’ engagement in supervised practice.
· You should provide a brief commentary on the following, and signpost us to the relevant supporting evidence in your module or programme handbooks (e.g. placement handbook), or other materials as appropriate.
Information required / Commentary / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
What arrangements are in place for monitoring supervised practice?
Please describe the supervisory resource to which the programme has access.
What arrangements are in place for monitoring the quality of supervision that is provided?
c. Additional evidence
You should ensure that the following, or an appropriate equivalent, are included with your submission. If our suggestion does not meet your needs, please feel free to provide an alternative source of evidence that you think tells us what we need to know (e.g. a link to online material), together with a brief rationale so that we can understand why you have selected the evidence source in question.
Evidence source / Brief rationale (if an alternative evidence source is provided) / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
Competencies mapping document / This enables our reviewers to confirm that your programme addresses the competency requirements outlined in our standards.
You may provide a copy of the Standards of Proficiency mapping document that you have completed for HCPC approval purposes, but please note that this should be provided in addition to and not instead of the Society’s own competencies mapping document.
Programme handbook / This enables us to see how the programme will be presented to trainees.
Module handbooks (or module outlines if handbooks are not yet available) / These enable us to see how your programme will address particular aspects of our curriculum requirements.
Curriculum, research, placement (if appropriate) and/or other handbooks / You should provide any additional handbooks that trainees receive in relation to specific components of their programme, as appropriate.
Programme specification / This enables us to understand the overall teaching, learning and assessment strategy for the programme, enabling us to be confident that it reflects contemporary learning, research and practice in psychology.
Programme standard 2: Working ethically
a. Coverage
Our reviewers need to be able to understand the ways in which you engage your trainees with the Society’s Code of Ethics and Conduct and supplementary ethical guidelines, which provide clear ethical principles, values and standards to guide and support psychologists’ decisions in the difficult and challenging situations they may face. You should provide a brief commentary on the following, and signpost us to the relevant supporting evidence in your module or programme handbooks, or other materials as appropriate.
Information required / Commentary / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
How and where is ethics taught?
You should indicate teaching of ethics in relation to the submission of ethics applications for research projects, and beyond. / Providers should refer to the Society’s Guidance on teaching and assessment of ethical competence in psychology education (2015).
How is students’ understanding of ethics evaluated?
You should indicate assessment of ethics in relation to the submission of ethics applications for research projects, and beyond.
What procedures are in place for gaining ethical approval for trainees’ research?
How do trainees develop skills in applying relevant ethical, legal and professional practice frameworks?
How do you ensure that trainees are aware of the legal and statutory obligations and restrictions on psychological practice in the UK context?
Programme standard 3: Selection and entry
a. Policies and procedures
· This standard sets out the Society’s expectations in relation to selection and entry processes that education providers will implement.
· You should provide a brief commentary on the following, and signpost us to the relevant supporting evidence as appropriate.
Information required / Commentary / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
What departmental/ institution-wide widening access initiatives are in place? How does the programme contribute to these?
How does the programme consider applications for recognition of prior learning or existing competence? / RPL should be granted against level 7 learning only.
REC should be granted against competencies gained post-GBC only.
b. Additional evidence
You should ensure that the following, or an appropriate equivalent, are included with your submission. If our suggestion does not meet your needs, please feel free to provide an alternative source of evidence that you think tells us what we need to know, together with a brief rationale so that we can understand why you have selected the evidence source in question.
Evidence source / Brief rationale (if an alternative evidence source is provided) / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
Selection and recruitment policy / This enables us to understand the steps you take to promote equality of opportunity and access to psychology to as diverse a range of applicants as possible.
Programme standard 4: Society membership
a. Coverage
· We expect education providers to communicate the benefits of completing an accredited programme to their trainees.
· Many programmes provide this information in their programme handbooks (see for example the information provided on pages 6 to 8 of our Standards handbooks).
· Others cover this in face-to-face teaching, both during induction and at other points during the programme.
· You should provide a brief commentary, and signpost us to relevant supporting evidence in your module or programme handbooks, or other materials as appropriate.
Information required / Commentary / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
How does the programme provide information about Society membership to trainees? Where in the programme does this occur?
If trainees are provided with this information in a handbook, please tell us on which page(s) this can be found.
Programme standard 5: Personal and professional development
a. Coverage
This standard sets out the Society’s expectations in relation to the ways in which trainee development is supported. You should provide a brief commentary on the following, and signpost us to the relevant supporting evidence in your module or programme handbooks, or other materials as appropriate.
Information required / Commentary / Reviewers’ commentsMore info needed? / Notes
What personal tutoring and support arrangements are in place for trainees on the programme?
How are trainees supported in reflecting on and synthesising different aspects of their work to inform their developing professional identity as a trainee?
What opportunities do trainees have to study alongside students from other disciplines or professions?
What other provision is in place to enhance trainee employability?
Programme standard 6: Staffing
· Our reviewers need to be able to evaluate the adequacy of the staffing resources that are in place to support delivery of the provision in question. In order to do this, we need to understand the staff: student ratio (SSR) that is in place.
a. Staff numbers
· Please complete the table below.
· You should note the main responsibilities each member of staff has to this specific programme, including module co-ordination, significant teaching contributions, supervision of dissertations and managerial responsibilities, in order that our reviewers are able to gain an understanding of the spread of the teaching load for the programme(s).