University of Otago

Graduating Year Review (GYR) Handbook

for

Self-Review Coordinators

and

Review Panel Members

2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1.Graduating Year Review (GYR): Introduction...... 1

2.Graduating Year Review (GYR): Handbook...... 3

3.Graduating Year Review (GYR): Key Contacts...... 4

4. Graduating Year Review (GYR): Role of the Self-Review Coordinator...... 5

5.Graduating Year Review (GYR): Role of the Panel...... 6

6.Graduating Year Review (GYR): Timeline and Tasks...... 7

7.Graduating Year Review (GYR): Self-Review Report...... 10

8.Graduating Year Review (GYR): Self-Review Evidence (Supporting Documents)...11

9.Graduating Year Review (GYR) Report ...... 12

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: CUAP Criteria for assessing GYR Reports...... 13

APPENDIX B: Graduating Year Review: Information for Discipline Specialists...... 14

APPENDIX C: Graduating Year Review (GYR): Self-Review Report Template...... 15

APPENDIX D: Graduating Year Review (GYR) Report Template...... 18

APPENDIX E: University of Otago Internal Reviews: Payment Policy...... 21

  1. Graduating Year Review (GYR):Introduction

Context

New Zealand universities are required by the Committee on University Academic Programmes (CUAP) to undertake a follow-up review of all successful (conditionally approved) proposals involving the introduction of new qualifications and major subjects and endorsements comprising 40% or more of a qualification (collectively referred to as ‘programme/s’ in this Handbook). CUAP has given the name Graduating Year Review to this moderation process. Graduating Year Review is the final stage in confirming approval of a new programme.

Purpose

Graduating Year Review (also known as GYR) is intended to assure CUAP that a new programme is meeting its original aims and objectives and an acceptable standard of delivery. A GYR is normally completed within 3 years of the graduation of the first cohort of students from a programme i.e. Year 6 for a three-year degree programme and Year 4 for a one-year diploma programme.

Process

CUAP expects a formal review to be undertaken by the University, has a prescribed reporting format (called the Graduating Year Review Report or GYR Report) and set criteria for assessment[1] and consideration of the GYR report. The GYR Report submitted to CUAP must stand-alone and cover the topics outlined in the format for reporting[2]. Within these parameters, the University may establish its own internal processes for self-evaluation, conduct of the formal review, report writing and endorsement of the review outcomes.

Sanctions

If a University fails to provide a GYR report when requested, CUAP may suspend approval pending receipt of the report. The effect of such a decision would be that no new students could be enrolled in the programme until CUAP lifts the approval suspension.

Outcomes

CUAP subjects each GYR report to scrutiny after which it may:

  • Accept the report thereby confirming approval;
  • Accept the report with specified changes;
  • Require a further report by a specified time; or
  • Withdraw approval.

Deferral

Universities may request deferral of a GYR if:

  • The programme either has not yet been offered or was first offered at a later date than first envisaged;
  • All or most enrolments are part-time and there have been no completions by the time the report is due; or
  • The due date for the GYR precedes or coincides with a scheduled departmental or programme review.

Deferrals will be granted for a maximum of two years from the first due date of a GYR.

If a programme has not been offered, or has attracted no enrolments, in the five years following its introduction, it should be re-submitted to CUAP for re-evaluation or formally deleted. In the latter case no GYR is required.

Additional Information

For further information about Graduating Year Review, see the Committee on University Academic Programmes Handbook on the Universities New Zealand web site at: cuap/cuap-handbook

  1. Graduating Year Review (GYR):Handbook

The University of Otago has put in place a formal internal process to enact CUAP’s GYR requirements. The University’s process is described in this Graduating Year Review (GYR) Handbook, which outlines key contacts and roles, provides advice and guidance on how to complete the required paperwork, and indicates key tasks and dates.

The primary audience for the Graduating Year Review (GYR) Handbook is:

  • Staff delegated responsibility for undertaking the self-evaluation (self-review) and completing the required paperwork in the form of a Self-Review Report and supporting evidence.
  • Members of the GYR Panel appointed to carry out the formal review of the programme and prepare the GYR Report.
  1. Graduating Year Review (GYR):Key Contacts

The Academic Committees Office

The Academic Committees Office manages the approval process for academic proposals and the process for external accreditation of new academic programmes through CUAP. This responsibility includes advising relevant parties of CUAP conditional approvals, initiating the annual GYR process, ensuring relevant University Boards consider GYR Reports, preparing an overview summary that front ends the University’s collation of GYR Reports[3] and submitting the GYR Reports to CUAP.

Staff in the Academic Committees Office work closely with the University of Otago’s representative on CUAP, Associate Professor Pat Cragg.

For further information on policy matters in relation to GYRs, please contact either:

Gary Witte, Manager Academic Committees ph. 479 8256, email ; or

Jane Hinkley, Academic Committees Administrator ph. 479 6531, email .

The Quality Advancement Unit (QAU)

The QAU coordinates the University's ongoing cycle of academic and administrative reviews and administers the ‘review’ part of the internal GYR process including liaison with those staff responsible for preparing the self-review paperwork (Self-Review Report and supporting evidence), servicing of the GYR panels and return of the GYR Report to the Academic Committees Office for the next stage in the process.

For information or queries about GYR administration, please contact one of the Review Administrators either:

Chriss Hamilton, ph. 479 8861, email ; and

Annabel Rutherford, ph. 479 8432, email .

4.Graduating Year Review (GYR):Role of the Self-Review Coordinator

The divisional Pro Vice-Chancellor, on receipt of advice from the Academic Committees Office that a GYR for a new programme is due, will appoint a member of staff to carry out the self-review of the programme. The appointment is usually made in consultation with the relevant Dean or Head of Department (HoD) and is often the current Programme Coordinator.

This role is called the Self-Review Coordinator and key responsibilities include:

  • Coordinating the self-evaluation (self-review) of the programme;
  • Completing the Self-Review Report using the Self-Review Report template (Appendix C);
  • Collating the supporting documents, which provide evidence and context for statements made in the Self-Review Report;
  • Obtaining sign-off for the Self-Review Report from the Dean or HoD;
  • Appointing, in consultation with the Dean or HoD, the person who will serve as Discipline Specialist on the GYR panel (refer to Appendix B: Information for Discipline Specialists for an explanation of this role);
  • Sending the Discipline Specialist’s name, contact details (and, if the appointee is external to the University, a brief description of their expertise) to the QAU Review Administrator who is servicing the review panel;
  • Submitting the Self-Review Report and supporting evidence to the GYR panel via the QAU Review Administrator;
  • Meeting with the GYR panel if required; and
  • Fact checking the GYR Report, which is produced by the review panel and is the outcome of its deliberations.

The responsibilities of the Self-Review Coordinator are enabled if the department that hosts the new programme has put in place monitoring and data gathering procedures from Year 1 of the programme’s commencement.

  1. Graduating Year Review (GYR):Role of the Panel

The review panel consists of four people with roles and responsibilities as follows:

1.Convenor

The Convenor leads the review panel in consideration of the Self-Review Report and supporting evidence and, based on the findings of the review, writes the Graduating Year Review Report. The Convenor is a senior academic (current or retired) appointed by the Quality Advancement Unit in consultation with the Academic Committees Office.

2.Divisional Representative

This role provides the panel with information and guidance about how the programme fits within the teaching and research of the Division, and is responsible for sourcing further information from the department/division as appropriate. This information may take the form of data clarification, enrolment strategies, staffing matters etc… The Divisional Representative is normally a divisional academic dean (or similar) appointed by the Pro Vice-Chancellor.

3.Discipline Specialist

This role provides the panel with a perspective external to the programme. The person selected should be external to the programme but familiar with the programme and the subject area under review. The Discipline Specialist provides expertise from an industry/professional perspective, e.g. a clinical practitioner or an employer of graduates from the programme. This person may be a guest lecturer or external examiner for the programme, but would not be someone with academic oversight of the programme. The Discipline Specialist is appointed by the Self-Review Coordinator in consultation with the Dean or HoD.

4.Review Administrator

This role provides administrative and secretarial support to the panel and is responsible for liaison with the Self-Review Coordinator and submission of the Graduating Year Review Report to the Academic Committees Office. The Review Administrator is appointed by the Quality Advancement Unit.

  1. Graduating Year Review (GYR):Timeline and Tasks

January/February

  • The Manager, Academic Committees Office contacts each academic Pro Vice-Chancellor to:

i)Advise the number and names of programmes scheduled for GYR in their Division;

ii)Request the appointment of, and return of the name and contact details for, the Self-Review Coordinator (or Self-Review Coordinators if more than one programme is due for review); and

iii)Request the appointment of, and return of the name and contact details for the role of Divisional Representative on the GYR panel.

  • The Manager, Academic Committees Office sends the CUAP list of programmes scheduled for GYR to the Quality Advancement Unit (QAU).
  • The QAU assigns a Review Administrator to each GYR panel.

February

  • The Manager, Academic Committees writes to each Self-Review Coordinator to initiate the self-review activity and provides them with copies of:

i)The University of OtagoGraduating Year Review Handbook as an information resource;

ii)The original academic proposal sent to and conditionally approved by CUAP; and

iii)An Excel spreadsheet of enrolment and completion data.[4]

  • The QAU in consultation with the Academic Committees Office appoints a Convenor for each GYR panel.

April

  • The Self-Review Coordinator sends to the QAU Review Administrator by 30April:

i)The completed Self-Review Report and evidence (supporting documents); and

ii)The name and contact details of the Discipline Specialist (and, if the appointee is external to the University, a brief description outlining their expertise).

May

  • The QAU Review Administrator[5]:

i)Liaises with the Convenor and panel members about the process; and

ii)Schedules and makes administrative arrangements for the GYR panel meeting.

June/July

  • The GYR panel meeting takes place.

July/August

  • The GYR panel Convenor drafts the GYR Report, with panel input and approval.
  • The Self-Review Coordinator is sent the GYR Report to correct errors of fact.
  • The Convenor finalises the content of the GYR Report and forwards the completed document to the Review Administrator.
  • The Review Administrator formats the GYR Report and then submits it to the Academic Committees Office.
  • The Academic Committees Office collates all of the GYR Reports and refers them on to the relevant Pro Vice-Chancellors for divisional consideration.

September

  • The Pro Vice-Chancellor:

i)Refers the GYR report to divisional board;

ii)Following consultation with divisional board, makes a recommendation for continuation or discontinuation of the programme and completes what is known as a GYR Assessment Form; and

iii)Returns the completed GYR Assessment Form and the GYR Report to the Academic Committees Office by the 3rd Friday in September.

October

  • The GYR Assessment Form and GYR Report is considered by either the Board of Undergraduate Studies (BUGS) or the Board of Graduate Studies (BoGs).
  • Following the meetings of BUGS and BoGs, any consequential amendments to the GYR Report are made by the CUAP Representative and the Manager, Academic Committees.
  • As the University submits several GYRs to CUAP each year, the Manager, Academic Committees, on behalf of BUGS and BoGs, writes an overview summary that front-ends the GYR reports.
  • Academic Committees Office submits the completed reports to CUAP, late October.

November

  • CUAP meets.

December

  • The University is notified of the outcome of CUAP’s consideration of the GYR reports.
  • The Academic Committees Office advises the outcome of CUAP’s deliberations to the Self-Review Coordinator, Head of Department, Pro Vice-Chancellor, GYR Convener and Quality Advancement Unit and provides a copy of the final GYR Report (as submitted to CUAP) for information.
  • Staff from the Academic Committees Office and QAU meet with the CUAP representative and GYR Convenors to consider CUAP feedback, debrief, and make improvements to the internal process for the next year’s GYR round.
  1. Graduating Year Review (GYR):Self-Review Report

Self-review

The GYR self-review is the internal evaluation, led by the Self-Review Coordinator of the new programme’s performance against its formal course objectives (as articulated in the original academic proposal) and the CUAP criteria for assessment (Appendix A).

The Self-Review Coordinator in consultation with the relevant Head of Department or head of programme, may carry out the self-review in whichever way they deem most appropriate for ensuring the successful writing of the Self-Review Report and collation of the supporting evidence.

Self-Review Report

The outcome of the self-evaluation is reported in the form of a Self-Review Report (using the template provided as Appendix C). The Self-Review Report Template covers the topics that comprise the CUAP criteria for assessment. Instructions for writing the Self-Review Report are included on the Self-Review Report Template.

The Self-Review Report must be supported by documentsthat provide evidence and/or context for the statements made and conclusions reached in the Self-Review Report (see Section 8 for more information about data gathering and types of evidence).

The GYR panel uses the information in the Self-Review Report validated by the accompanying supporting evidence, to produce the Graduating Year Review Report.

  1. Graduating Year Review (GYR):Self-Review Evidence

(Supporting Documents)

The Self-Review Report is accompanied by a selection of supporting documents that provide evidence and/or context for the statements made and conclusions reached in the Self-Review Report. CUAP takes a particular interest in evidence and a key role of the GYR panel is to confirm and summarise the existence of evidence.

To facilitate the panel’s task, it is important the statements made in the Self-Review Report clearly identify and reference the supporting evidence. The evidence may be provided to the review panel (via the Review Administrator) in either electronic or hard copy form. Anecdotal evidence is valid; but it should be made clear that it is anecdotal when citing it in the Self-Review Report. Similarly, if the quality of the evidence available is fragmented or patchy, say so. Supply the most recent evidence in order to assure the panel (and therefore CUAP) of the validity of any reported statement.

Data gathering and record keeping

The data gathering exercise is easier to manage and more robust in form, if the department that hosts the new programme has been record keeping from Year 1 of the programme’s commencement. A department is encouraged to gather evidence that graduate attributes are being met and learning outcomes achieved, keep programme meeting notes, seek student feedback on the papers and programme, undertake evaluations to identify strengths and weaknesses of the programme and to track the destination of its graduates.

The University’s Guidelines for Teaching at Otago provides guidance on evaluative practice and identifies a range of sources of evaluative data at:

Types of Evidence