Review of Units Procedures

• Teaching methods and materials, including the relative use of lectures, support classes, reading, project work etc, and an evaluation of their effectiveness in assisting students to learn.
• Assessment procedures, including reasons for the relative use of formative methods (eg reports and assignments with feedback) and summative methods (eg tests and examinations). The methods of assessment should be reviewed in the context of the published unit objectives, for example noting how either they assist students to learn knowledge or develop skills, or to assess students on the knowledge and skills required to achieve the desired student outcomes.
• Student enrolment data, including trends in enrolment numbers, withdrawals during semester, and distribution by course.
• Student achievement, including grade distribution by course and  comparison to cognate units at the same level.
• Review of any changes made to the unit since the last formal review: A brief analysis of the effectiveness of any adjustments made.
• Summary of any student or peer feedback
• Where a unit is offered on more than one campus, the self-review should also include:
  • an analysis of the differences (if any) in teaching activities, assessment, distribution of marks, and student feedback.
  • a description of the mechanisms in place  to ensure that the various campus offerings are equivalent.

5.1  The panel will consider the Self-Review Report and information from some key data sources, including student feedback, peer evaluation and, where desirable, input from trained educational advisors. The panel will then interview some of the teaching staff of the unit, including (at least) the unit coordinator and any teaching staff who specifically request an interview.

5.2  The Panel will then prepare a draft Unit Review Report that addresses all of the key areas of the operation of the unit as stated in the policy, and using the faculty proforma. This report need not be extensive but it should demonstrate that the overall evaluation process was thorough and comprehensive. The report may include some commendations for specific achievements and successes, and/or provide specific recommendations for improvement or adjustment, and should indicate a draft timeline for their implementation.

5.3  Upon completion of the draft Unit Review Report it is important that feedback on the draft report be obtained from relevant staff before it is finalised and accepted by the school. In particular, it is recommended that:

• The draft report be submitted initially to the head of school (or their senior nominee, for example the chair of the School Education Committee), who will provide an opportunity for all relevant academic staff in the school, including the unit coordinator and all teaching staff of the unit, to respond to the draft report and recommendations prior to its acceptance;
• Copies of any responses from within the school should be provided to the panel, which will then prepare the final Unit Review report – the panel may choose to amend some aspects of the draft report at this stage, or provide the head with their reasons for not making changes as a result of particular responses.

5.4  The final Unit Review Report should then be considered and signed by the head (or senior nominee), who will provide a short statement on every recommendation (either confirming they will be acted upon or providing reasons for not accepting some of them)

5.5  The final Unit Review Report and head’s written comments should then be forwarded to the Associate Dean (Education), normally within three months of the completion of the semester in which the unit has been reviewed.