Subject Validation

This guides the Head of School through filling in the Subject Validation form.

Critical aspects

  • The head of school (or an administrator on their behalf) can skip a comprehensive review if the design changes are only minor.
  • The form is intended to be completed 6 weeks before the start of the session.
  • If a comprehensive review is required, it will involve both the convenor (a little) and the moderator (approx 1 hour).
  • The process is most efficient when tied to the subject outline. So outline may need to be prepared earlier.

Initial step

You need to determine what subjects will need to be considered for Subject Validation. There are three ways to do this:

  1. QUASAR will automatically send reminder emails for possible subjects 6 months and 3 months before the start of the session. The emails contain the URLs for the relevant pages.

    OR

  2. Visit the QUASAR landing page select the appropriate session then sort the table by pressing the arrow next to ‘Due’/’Subject Validation’. The list of subjects will then appear at the top (with multi-session subjects with intake from previous sessions appearing first).

    OR

  3. Run the form progress report for the appropriate session and similarly sort by ‘Due Date’/’Subject Validation’. You may instead want to ‘Export CSV’ and use Excel’s filter features.

What you need to do

Subject Validation

You have one mandatory question to complete for each eligible subject.

Q: Is a comprehensive validation required for this subject due to the above CASIMS changes?

If the changes are minor:

  1. Select ‘No’.
  2. Add an explanation.
  3. Press ‘Approve without review’.

This completes the form for the given subject.

If the changes are major (eg if the subject is new or if learning outcomes/syllabus have changed):

  1. Select ‘Yes’.
  2. ‘Submit for full review’.

The head of school (or the subjects administration team) needs to assign a convenor and moderator to do the review, noting:

  • The convenor and moderator for this form may be different from the other forms that are completed at the end of the session. To make the review more efficient:
    • It is recommended that the convenor role be assigned to the author of the master subject outline.
    • It is recommended that the moderator role be assigned to the QA officer of the master subject outline.
  • Since the due date is earlier than might otherwise be the case, give the staff sufficient notice.
  • The subjects administration team can also adjust the staff assigned to the roles.

Convenor Step

The convenor writes a few sentences explaining what has been changed and presses the ‘submit to moderator’ button.

Moderator Step

The moderator checks changes listed in CASIMS/CDAP document have been implemented. They have four questions related to (1) assessment items (2) syllabus/modules (3) learning strategies and (4) any other issues. It is estimated to take at most 1 additional hour of work for the moderator.

The moderator needs to complete their section 6 weeks before the start of the session.

  • If no issues moderator will press the ‘Sign off’ button and the form is automatically approved. This completes the form for the given subject.
  • If issues moderator will press the ‘Submit to HOS’ button and the head of school needs to intervene (see next step).

The moderator should be encouraged to resolve minor issues through the Subject Outline QA process before completing the Subject Validation form.

Head of School final step (if needed)

If the moderator finds issues, you will receive an automated email.

You will organise a resolution and document this in the Subject Validation form before pressing the ‘Sign Off’ button.

Please ‘Return to Moderator’ if you need further information, or feel that the issue is minor enough for the normal Subject Outline QA process to address.

Some example issues and actions:

  • Issue: The moderator answers ‘do not know’ for a question. Action: The head of school could arrange for the convenor to supply the appropriate information and ‘return to moderator’ to complete the process normally.
  • Issue: The assessment has not been updated to reflect new learning outcomes. Action: The convenor is given until 3 weeks before the start of the session to update the assessment.
  • Issue: The process shows a mistake in CDAP. Action: The Head of school organises an urgent executive approval to correct the mistake.
  • Issue: The subject does not match the design and there is insufficient time to address it for the current session. Action 1: The head of school discusses with Course Director and some components are rolled back to the previous version while only the most critical changes are dealt with. OR Action 2: The subject is removed from the SAL to give enough time to improve the subject.
  • Issue: The content and assessment changes are appropriate, but grammar and expression are lacking. Action: Head of school to organise an editor to complete the update 2 weeks before the start of the session.
  • Issue: Convenor has been unwell and has not completed the update on the subject. Action: Head of School brings in a new person to complete the update.

Some issues take some time to resolve.
That is why the due date is 6 weeks before the start of the session – this allows a month to resolve issues before students have access to the subject outline and subject site 2 weeks before the start of the session.