Chapter 1b - Initiation of New Programmes, Validation and Approval for Taught Postgraduate Programmes
A proposed self-financed taught postgraduate programme with degree to be conferred by Lingnan needs to go through two stages before it is approved. These stages are:
| 1. | Planning a programme; and |
| 2. | Programme validation. |
A flow chart showing programme development and approval procedures is given in Appendix A.
| 1.1 | Planning a New Programme |
| 1.1.1 | An individual, or a group of staff from one department/unit1 or from a number of departments/units may put forward a proposal for a new programme as long as it is supported by the relevant Department/Unit Board(s), the Faculty Management Board (FMB)(s)2,3 and where appropriate, the School of Graduate Studies (GS). The GS is particularly relevant for degree programmes that involve inter-university and/or international collaboration. If considered useful, staff member(s)/department(s)/unit(s) are welcome to approach the GS from the beginning to discuss plans for a new programme which may or may not involve inter-university and/or international collaboration. |
| 1.1.2 | Before proposing a new programme, staff should consider carefully whether: |
| (a) there is any evidence as to community need and student demand for the proposed programme; (b) the proposed programme has distinct characteristics which differentiate it from other similar programmes offered in Hong Kong; (c) the proposed programme is consistent with the strategic direction of development of the University; (d) the proposed programme can justify the level of resources (support staff, space, library, computers) needed for the programme; (e) there is adequate academic expertise within the University to support the programme; and (f) any additional academic expertise required can be readily obtained. | |
| 1.1.3 | The staff member(s) should prepare an initial programme proposal which should include the items in Appendix B, and then raise it at the relevant Department/Unit Board(s) and FMB(s) for discussion. For a new programme which will be co-offered with overseas institution(s), the initial programme proposal should also be raised to the GS. |
| 1.1.4 | With the recommendation of the relevant Department/Unit Board(s), the FMB(s) and, if applicable, the GS, a Programme Planning Committee (PPC) should be formed to prepare a full submission for validation, which will be conducted in the form of either on-site or postal exercise to be decided by the Chairman of the Postgraduate Studies Committee (PSC) in consultation with the Dean(s) concerned based on the guiding principle that postal validation is normally opted for only if the discipline or area of study is not new to the University or the programme offering unit(s) already has/have the required expertise and experience in the relevant discipline. The detailed terms of reference and membership of the PPC should be included in the initial programme proposal. |
| 1.1.5 | The main job of a PPC is to plan the programme/concentration in final detail and to prepare the full submission for validation. The GS will support all PPCs in their planning and preparation of the full submission through experience and information sharing, in order to help smoothen the whole process from preparation to submission to the PSC. |
1.1.6 | The general format of a full submission is given in Appendix C. The document shall give a prominent place to outcome-based approaches to learning, teaching and assessment. It shall cover the intended learning outcomes of the programme, how the programme curriculum, the learning and teaching activities will lead to achievement of these outcomes and what measures will be taken or evidence will be gathered to determine whether the intended outcomes are achieved. |
| 1.1.7 | The PPC should invite the Director of Centre for Innovative Teaching and Learning to provide written input to the outcome-based elements in the programme proposal and the blended learning elements in the proposed programme/courses. For details, please refer to Section 3.3.9 in Chapter 3. In addition, the proposed budget of the programme, together with justifications for the rate of tuition fee, should be submitted to the Finance Office for advice and endorsement. |
| 1.1.8 | When planning the detailed curriculum, the PPC should understand clearly and bear in mind the broad resource parameters which the University has agreed for the programme. This is to avoid rejection of the full submission on resource grounds. The fine tuning of the resources demands should be referred to appropriate committee(s) for consideration separately but concurrently with the validation process. |
| 1.1.9 | The PPC of a taught postgraduate programme should report to the PSC on the progress of its work. The Chairman of the PPC should give as much notice as possible, and certainly not less than four weeks, of the precise date when the full submission will be ready, so that arrangement for consideration of the document by the Faculty Board concerned can be made and the Programme Validation Panel (PVP) (for on-site validation) or external assessors (for postal validation) can be appointed by the PSC. He/She should also ensure that all necessary documentation is prepared to meet the agreed deadline. |
| 1.2 | Programme Validation |
| 1.2.1 | After the programme submission is prepared, a validation shall be conducted, either in the form of a postal or an on-site exercise as earlier decided by the Chairman of PSC in consultation with the Dean(s) concerned. |
| 1.2.2 | The general aim of a validation is to establish that the submission merits the full support of the University. In more specific terms, the PVP/external assessors will consider: |
| (a) the rationale and coherence of the following items, both separately and in the overall programme context: |
(i) uniqueness of the proposed programme; (ii) community needs; (iii) student demand; (iv) admission requirements; (v) aims and learning outcomes; (vi) the required standard at relevant level in the Hong Kong Qualifications Framework (HKQF); (vii) programme design philosophy, structure and credit units; (viii) programme curriculum and content; (ix) programme operation, management, quality assurance and enhancement; (x) teaching/learning activities; (xii) employment opportunities and their match with output; (xiii) the overall intellectual level of the programme and the intellectualdemands it places on students; and (xiv) the consistency between the programme standards and those articulated for the University. |
| (b) the adequacy of staff and resource support, both current and planned, and any resource implications for the University over and above the previously agreed levels; (c) the quality and experience of academic staff who will teach the programme, together with any staff development plans and intended staff appointments; (d) the relationship with the University’s policies and regulations, and with any published principles/regulations/guidelines of the external professional body, if appropriate; (e) the presentation and quality of the submission document; and (f) where relevant, the likelihood of acceptance by a specified professional body. | |
| In addition, the PVP/external assessors has/have to advise on and determine whether the proposed curriculum, learning and teaching activities and the assessment methods are adequate and appropriate for achieving the learning outcomes, as well as whether the evidence to be collected will be adequate and appropriate for measuring outcomes. | |
| 1.2.3 | Postal Validation |
| 1.2.3.1 | Two external assessors who are usually reputable experts from other institutions, including one member selected from one of the benchmarking institutions of the University4 or the academic unit(s) proposing the programme, where possible, shall be appointed by the PSC. If necessary (such as for a programme involving more disciplines), more external assessors can be appointed. |
| 1.2.3.2 | The PPC has to submit the validation document to the Faculty Board concerned which will ensure its quality and compliance with the guidelines as set out in Appendix C. The PPC should revise the document taking into account comments, if any, from the Faculty Board concerned. |
| |
| 1.2.3.3 | After obtaining endorsement from the Faculty Board concerned2 on the validation document, the PPC shall approach the external assessors to seek their input and comments on the programme submission. A sample template is given in Appendix D. In the assessment reports, the external assessors shall indicate support to the submission (with or without amendments) or refer the submission back for further considerations of specific issues. In addition, to facilitate communication between the PPC and the external assessor(s), a teleconference or video conference can be arranged. It is not necessary for the external assessors to make a recommendation on approval/non-approval of the programme submission. The document, upon endorsement from the Faculty Board concerned, should also be forwarded to the PSC Secretariat concurrently for vetting against Appendix C. |
| 1.2.3.4 | An honorarium of HK$4,500 will be paid to an external assessor who has completed the assessment. |
| 1.2.3.5 | The PPC has to prepare a response to the comments made by the external assessors, and where appropriate, revise its submission taking into account the assessors’ comments as well as those from the PSC Secretariat (if any). The PPC has the discretion whether to send the response to relevant assessors. |
| 1.2.3.6 | The assessment reports and the response of the PPC will form part of the documentation to be attached to the programme submission to be submitted to the FMB concerned for endorsement and to the PSC. |
| 1.2.4 | On-Site Validation |
| 1.2.4.1 | The PPC has to submit the validation document to the Faculty Board concerned which will ensure its quality and compliance with the guidelines as set out in Appendix C. The document should also be forwarded to the PSC Secretariat for vetting against Appendix C. The PPC should revise the document taking into account comments, if any, from the Faculty Board concerned and the PSC Secretariat. |
| 1.2.4.2 | The PSC will appoint a PVP with the composition as follows to conduct the exercise: |
(a) a Chairman – a senior academic outside the host Department(s)/Unit(s) to be nominated by the host Department(s)/Unit(s) or the GS (for a new programme involving inter- university and/or international collaboration) and appointed by the PSC; - two external members who are usually reputable experts from other institutions, including one from one of the benchmarking institutions of the University or the academic unit(s) proposing the programme, where possible; and if necessary (such as for programmes involving more disciplines), more external members can be appointed; (c) GS and the host Department(s)/Unit(s) will provide secretarial support to PVPs. | |
| 1.2.4.3 | There should be a suitable combination of members reflecting internal responsibility for academic standards, subject expertise, programme planning and validating experience, knowledge of programmes of a similar type, and knowledge of the graduate employment possibilities arising from the programme. |
| 1.2.4.4 | The GS will organise the validation and later draft the validation report, in collaboration with the Chairman of the PVP. |
| 1.2.4.5 | For a visit of a non-local external member, the visit shall be up to four days. The package will include a return air ticket of economy class (with a ceiling rate based on point-to-point direct full-fare economy ticket rate), accommodation expenses of up to HK$1,700 per night and a per diem allowance at HK$900 per day. |
| 1.2.4.6 | The Panel should adopt a peer group approach in its consideration of the submission and in its discussions with the PPC but must, nevertheless, conduct a rigorous evaluation of the merits of the submission. The validation shall normally be a one-day on-site exercise to facilitate more thorough and in depth discussion. However, to cater for the availability of the PVP, flexibility is allowed for conducting the validation. If a member cannot join the validation meetings on campus, he/she will be invited to provide input using video conference or by paper assessment. External members will be invited to provide written comments in areas specified under 1.2.2 above. If deemed necessary, they can request additional information from the PPC. |
| 1.2.4.7 | The Panel will meet privately with the PPC to consider the submission and may choose to see particular facilities relevant to the programme. The panel can have a separate session to meet with junior academic staff, if deemed necessary. The panel may also meet with relevant graduates and students. The validation document (except sensitive data) should be provided to them. |
| 1.2.4.8 | The Panel or its Chairman will verbally convey the outcome of the validation to the PPC. Then the external members will provide written feedback/recommendations which form the basis of a report which, in conclusion, will recommend to the PSC that the submission: |
| (a) be approved with or without recommendations; or (b) be referred back for further considerations of specific issues, subject to a further, full validation. | |
| 1.2.4.9 | An honorarium of HK$4,500 will be paid to an external member who has completed his/her duties. |
| 1.2.4.10 | A report prepared by the Secretariat will be forwarded without delay to the PPC. The PPC has to prepare a response to the specified recommendations and, where appropriate, revise its submission taking into account the specified recommendations. |
| 1.2.5 | After the Validation |
| 1.2.5.1 | The FMB concerned will consider and endorse as appropriate the response and the revised submission from the PPC. On the basis of the report(s) of the PVP (for on-site validation)/external assessors’ reports (for postal validation), the endorsed response and the revised submission from the PPC, the PSC will be responsible for deciding: |
| (a) that the academic validity of the programme submission is acceptable, either without conditions or subject to specified conditions being met; or (b) that the academic validity of the programme submission is not acceptable, and the submission is referred back for further consideration of specified issues or conditions and is then subject to reconsideration by the validating panel and the PSC; or (c) that, in exceptional cases, the programme submission is deferred for a limited or indefinite period for stated reasons. | |
| 1.2.5.2 | The PSC will forward the report(s) of the PVP (for on-site validation) and the revised programme submission (with external assessors’ reports attached for a postal validation) to the Senate for approval/information and possible comment. |
| 1.2.5.3 | Following approval by the Senate, the programme submission document may need to be thoroughly revised, taking into account the comments made by the PVP/external assessors, the FMB concerned, the PSC and the Senate. The Council will be informed of the approved programme. |
[Note: Please refer to Appendix E for approved procedures for launching self-financed postgraduate programmes. Please also refer to the “Guidelines for Self-financed Programmes” available from the webpage of the Finance Office (via intranet)]
1 A division, its Division Head, i.e. Person-in-charge (PiC), and its Division Board assume similar roles and responsibilities of a department/unit, its Department/Unit Head and its Department/Unit Board.
2 The role of the FMB in the Faculty of Arts is taken up by the Executive Committee in Arts.
3 The Board of Graduate Studies/School of Data Science Management Board/Wu Jieh Yee School of Interdisciplinary Studies Management Board shall assume the role of Faculty Board (FB) and FMB for programmes offered by the School of Graduate Studies/School of Data Science/Wu Jieh Yee School of Interdisciplinary Studies respectively.
4 International Christian University of Japan, NUS College (formerly known as Yale-NUS College) of Singapore, Sun Yat-sen University of China, and Williams College and Oberlin College and Conservatory of USA
Initiation of New Programmes, Validation and Approval for Undergraduate Programmes (PDF)