Fri, 31 Mar 2023
Quality Assurance Policy
This policy provides an overarching academic quality assurance framework for Metavision Institute to ensure that its higher education courses are systematically reviewed for continuous improvement, and to outline ongoing improvement processes to ensure the quality of Metavision Institute’s higher education operations. This policy is also designed to ensure ongoing monitoring of targeted, planned outcomes for students and graduates.
This policy applies to Metavision Institute’s accredited higher education courses, and to governance committees and staff.
Academic quality assurance refers to an ongoing institutional process of evaluation and improvement to ensure a high level of quality in academic activities of teaching, learning and scholarship is attained and maintained.
Line manager refers to staff members who will manage academic teaching staff, provide induction for new staff members and conduct annual performance reviews
Relevant TEQSA Threshold Standards
This policy aligns with the requirements outlined in Sections 5.1.2 Quality Assurance, 5.3 Monitoring, Review and Improvement and 6.3 Academic Governance in the Higher Education Standards Framework 2015.
1. Academic quality
Metavision Institute sets high standards for academic quality in its higher education operations that include both inputs and outcomes that are aligned with the Higher Education Standards Framework.
These standards include:
- Admission pathways for Metavision Institute’s higher education courses are benchmarked against similar courses in the discipline of counselling and psychotherapy and are likely to lead to study success for students,
- Academic teaching staff qualifications are an AQF level above the level of the Metavision Institute higher education courses in which they teach,
- Professional equivalence of academic teaching staff qualifications on the basis of extensive professional experience and training is benchmarked, mapped according to the Staff Recruitment, Selection, Appointment and Professional Equivalency Policy, and recorded,
- A commitment to supporting academic teaching staff without PhD qualifications to gain higher degrees in research,
- A commitment to promoting a scholarly and research culture and for academic teaching staff to be actively producing scholarly and research outputs in line with the Strategic Plan’s objectives,
- Processes for ensuring timely and respectful services for prospective and enrolled students are in place and evaluated, including admission, progression, assessment feedback and academic complaints and appeals, and
- Processes for ensuring academic integrity and reducing the incidence of academic misconduct, including plagiarism, are implemented, monitored and evaluated.
- Student completion rates in Metavision Institute’s higher education courses are comparable with established courses in the same discipline at the same AQF levels,
- Mapping of academic staff qualifications at one AQF level higher than the course on which they teach, and/or mapping of professional equivalency of academic teaching staff according to the
- Staff Recruitment, Selection, Appointment and Professional Equivalency Policy, is reported to the Academic Board on an annual basis,
- Participation by academic teaching staff in higher degree research, and scholarship and research outputs, is monitored by the Academic Board and meets Strategic Plan objectives,
- Higher education services, student pathways from admission to graduation, assessment, and academic complaints and appeals, are benchmarked with external partners, and
- Students’ and graduates’ achievement of course learning outcomes and Metavision Institute’s graduate attributes is mapped and assessed.
2. Quality assurance cycle of internal and external reviews
Metavision Institute is committed to an ongoing regular quality assurance cycle of internal and external review and feedback to inform improvements in its higher education operations.
2.1 Internal review
- Metavision Institute conducts student evaluation surveys at the end of each semester to inform ongoing oversight and review of the quality of teaching and learning, and unit learning outcomes, curriculum and assessment, with oversight by the Teaching and Learning Committee.
- The Teaching and Learning Committee makes recommendations to the Academic Board for ongoing unit and course improvements based on student and staff feedback, and communicates the Action Plan to students by Week 4 of the following year.
- The Teaching and Learning Committee oversights the development of annual course reports analysing Metavision Institute’s progress and performance, and student evaluation feedback, against the Teaching and Learning Plan’s goals, strategies and key performance indicators.
- Course reports are submitted to the Academic Board at the first meeting of each year for discussion and decisions on improvement actions.
- The Academic Board reports to the Governance Board on improvement actions to be undertaken with timelines for approval by the Governance Board.
2.2 External Review
- Metavision Institute is committed to regular and ongoing external review of its higher education courses, student performance and student feedback data through benchmarking agreements with partners, implemented according to the Benchmarking Policy. Courses are reviewed on annual and three-year cycles to ensure course quality, currency and integrity are being maintained.
- Metavision Institute draws on independent academic feedback from discipline experts approved by the Academic Board, to inform course development, course review and renewal of course accreditation applications, in alignment with the Course Development and Approval Policy and the Course Evaluation and Review Policy.
- The performance of Metavision Institute’s key governance boards is reviewed every three years by external governance experts, as outlined in the Governance and Delegations Framework. Recommendations by external experts will be discussed by the governance boards, and may inform improvements across a broad range of functions including governance, financial reporting, operations, risk management and academic operations and processes.
- The performance of academic teaching staff is reviewed annually by line managers according to the Academic Staff Performance Review and Management Policy.
3. Minor and major course changes
- Minor course changes must be submitted to Academic Board for approval by the Course Coordinator or Unit Coordinator, with an accompanying rationale for the changes, at the beginning of the semester before planned implementation.
- Major course changes that require a material change notification to TEQSA must be submitted to Academic Board for endorsement by the Academic Director Higher Education, with a detailed analysis of the rationale and impacts of the proposed changes, one year prior to planned implementation.
- If supported, the Academic Board will report to the Governance Board on the proposed material changes. If the proposed major course changes are approved by the Governance Board, a material change notification will be submitted to TEQSA by the Academic Director Higher Education, and the changes will be implemented.
The Governance Board is responsible for approving new course accreditation and renewal of course accreditation applications prior to submission to TEQSA. The Governance Board is responsible for receiving, discussing and approving or rejecting recommendations for major course changes that require material change notifications and making decisions. The Governance Board is also responsible for oversighting regular internal and external reviews of key governance boards and committees.
The Academic Board approves the appointment of external discipline experts to conduct three-yearly course reviews. The Board is responsible for receiving and considering annual and three-yearly course reports, benchmarking reports, and developing and submitting recommendations for ongoing course improvements, including growth in staffing, to the Governance Board.
The Academic Board is also responsible for conducting annual self-reviews of the Board and its sub- committees, and for monitoring academic teaching staff qualifications and scholarship and research outputs.
The Teaching and Learning Committee is responsible for monitoring the ongoing quality of learning and teaching, receiving and discussing student evaluation reports on teaching and learning, and annual course reports. The Committee oversights the three-yearly external course review processes.
The Academic Director Higher Education is responsible for the development of annual course reports analysing progress against the goals and key performance indicators of the Teaching and Learning Plan, and submitting approved material change notifications to TEQSA. The Academic Director Higher Education is also responsible for reporting academic staff participation in higher degree research and scholarship and research outputs to the Academic Board.
- Governance and Delegations Framework
- Strategic Plan
- Teaching and Learning Plan 2019-2021