PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT, REVIEW AND EVALUATION POLICY
Classification: Academic
Responsible: Product Development Team Members, Executive Sponsor: Vice President, Product and Operations
Approval Authority: Robertson College Leadership Team
Date First Approved: October 14, 2022
Date Last Reviewed: N/A
Scheduled Review Date: 2024 10 13, or as needed
A. PURPOSE
The Program Development, Review and Evaluation Policy provides a framework to guide program development and revision at Robertson College.
B. SCOPE
This policy applies to all Robertson certificate and diploma programs which are licensed by Private Career Colleges, Alberta and the Private Vocational Institutions Branch, Manitoba; this policy does not apply to micro courses
C. DEFINITIONS
Word/Term Definition
Academic Program An Academic Program is a certificate or diploma program at the College which leads to a credential within a specific discipline.
Program Review Team
A team of internal stakeholders responsible for participating in the Program Review and Evaluation process.
Program Life Cycle Guide
External Stakeholders
A comprehensive document outlining the various phases of the program development life cycle at Robertson College.
External Stakeholders include individuals with a vested interest in and knowledge of the program being developed, reviewed and evaluated by Robertson and typically includes subject matter experts and Professional Advisory Committee Members.
D. POLICY
Ongoing program revision is an essential function of well functioning, excellent, and relevant College level Programs. Robertson College’s adherence to a consistent program review process ensures high quality and consistent programming This also ensures that the content and delivery of programs are responsive to industry, employer, community, student, and government needs.
1 PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
1.1 The development of Programs at Robertson College is informed by the College’s vision, mission, goals, values and strategic plan.
1 2 Proposals for new program development will follow a standardized and systemic process described in the Program Life Cycle Guide.
2 PROGRAM REVIEW and EVALUATION
2.1 The revision of Programs at Robertson College is informed by the College’s vision, mission, goals, values and strategic plan
2.2 All Programs will undertake a review and evaluation process as outlined in Phase 5: Review and Evaluation of Robertson’s Program Life Cycle Guide
2 3 The timeline of review of each program is in alignment with the Program Review Cycle document and based on program type.
2.4 The Program will be evaluated as specified on the Program Review Cycle in alignment with the standardized review process which includes a review of; a. industry demands b student demand c community needs d. labor market studies e. stakeholder/PAC advise f cost effectiveness g institutional capacity h. alignment with Robertson College vision, mission, goals, values, and strategic plan, and i government or regulatory directives
2.5 Programs assessment and revisions will follow a standardized and systemic process described in the Program Life Cycle Guide
2 6 Based on the outcome of the review, the program is evaluated as follows:
- Program is Healthy: The program is sustainable and continues to meet the needs of students, industry and stakeholders with only minor adjustments or revisions
Revisions will not require submission to provincial regulators and/or accreditation bodies for approval. Program is Vulnerable: The program is sustainable but needs significant adjustments or revisions to meet the needs of students, industry and stakeholders. Revisions will require a submission to provincial regulators and/or accreditation body for approval.
-
Program is at Risk: The program has high risk because of low student enrolment, changing labour market demand, or other factors. The program is no longer meeting the needs for which it was originally intended and should be reviewed with an updated needs and feasibility analysis.
Pending the results of the analysis, required revisions will be made which require a submission to provincial regulators and/or accreditation body for approval.
Program Cessation. The program is no longer sustainable. The program review process has shown that its original need has been met and the program is no longer viable. The program will cease to be offered and regulators will be informed as required.
