Expedited Review Process
Learn about CAQC’s expedited review process for degree programs
Expedited Review
An applicant institution may formally request a partially or fully expedited review and is expected to make its case based on Council’s criteria for such a review.
The Proposal Review Standing Committee (PRSC) normally acts on Council’s behalf to review requests for expedited reviews, and to conduct desk reviews of proposals accorded fully expedited reviews.
The purpose of an expedited review is to reduce the length of time it takes for Council to carry out its assessment, recognizing that the extent of review and the amount of information required for approval should in each case reflect the type of proposal and the experience of the applicant institution with new degree program development, implementation, and monitoring.
If the case presented is not accepted, the application will be subject to a full review or partially expedited review, where the Council will appoint external evaluators. Applicants considering seeking partially or fully expedited reviews are encouraged to consult the CAQC Secretariat prior to making the request.
Expedited Review Process – Resident Institutions
Types of Reviews
Reviews by Council may proceed in one of three ways:
- Full Review – for applicants proposing to offer a first degree or a first degree at a new level. Council will conduct both an organizational review and a program review using external evaluators for both organizational and program reviews.
- Partially Expedited Review – when Council determines that it can omit the organizational review but will conduct a program review using external evaluators. In certain cases, Council reserves the right to include elements of an organizational review within the program review.
- Fully Expedited Review – when Council determines that neither an organizational review nor program review using Council-appointed external evaluators is needed. Council members and the Secretariat will do a desk review.
Expedited Review
An applicant institution may formally request a partially or fully expedited review and must make its case based on Council’s criteria for such a review. If the case presented is not accepted, the application will be subject to a full review or partially expedited review, where the Council will appoint external evaluators. Applicants considering seeking partially or fully expedited reviews are encouraged to consult the CAQC Secretariat prior to making the request.
A request for a partially expedited review will be considered if one of the following criteria is met:
- An applicable organizational review has been conducted and the results have been found satisfactory by Council, or
- Council has moved the institution to an audit status as Council’s main mechanism to monitor the institution’s on-going quality of approved degree programs.
A request for a fully expedited review will be considered on its own merits, and only if an institution meets one of the criteria for a partially expedited review. Council's willingness to conduct a fully expedited review in the same discipline at one level (e.g., a concentration in a 3 year BA) does not constitute a precedent for a fully expedited review at another (e.g., a major in a 4 year BA). An institution will not normally be eligible for a fully expedited review if the degree is considered precedent setting either for that institution or for the system. Examples of precedent-setting proposals are those that involve the institution offering a degree at a higher level than it offers or involving a subject area that the institution does not offer at the proposed level. In the process of considering a fully expedited review request, PRSC commences a desk review of the proposal. If that desk review identifies issues that PRSC cannot resolve without a site visit by a review team, a full review or a partially expedited review with a review team will be commissioned by Council. In addition to meeting the criterion for a partially expedited review, the following are the criteria to be met:
- The proposal is for
- a new major/specialization/concentration (e.g., History) in an already approved degree program (e.g., BA) that has been offered across a range of disciplines within that degree in the institution, thus demonstrating that the institution has a successful track record in implementing similar new programs within that degree, or
-
a new degree program that builds on an existing major/specialization currently offered under another program and is at the same level (e.g., Bachelor of International Studies where a BA with a major in International Relations exists), or
- a new degree program that is at the same level and/or in a related discipline to degrees already being offered by the institution, but is not considered precedent setting either for that institution or for the system (e.g., an institution is proposing a doctorate in chemistry and already offers several other science doctorates).
-
An appropriate number of continuing, qualified academic staff are in place in the department/discipline.
-
The proposal clearly identifies an appropriate set of program learning outcomes for students, and describes the policies and procedures that are in place or under development for assessing them and for applying this assessment for the purposes of curriculum review and program improvement.
- Degree nomenclature of the proposed program accurately and clearly conveys to stakeholders (e.g., students, prospective employers, academic institutions) the content of the proposed program.
-
Program scale is well within the capacity and the resources of the institution to implement and sustain the program.
- Evidence of risk assessment both with respect to risks to existing programs and to the program under review (e.g., unexpected enrolment issues, inability to procure staff) is presented and no financial concerns are apparent.
-
Internal vetting and quality assurance practices, including those for post implementation review, are well established and clearly documented. The use of independent academic experts by the institution to review the full proposal (Parts A and B) prior to submission to Council benefits program development and provides the judgment of experts whose specialized knowledge may not be found among the members of PRSC. For these reasons, an external review is expected. The full external assessment report(s) and the institution’s response must accompany the proposal and request, and should describe the materials made available to reviewers and the basis for its decision as to whether or not a site visit was carried out. If an institution chooses not to engage external reviewer(s), it must justify its decision. In engaging external experts, institutions should be guided by Council’s guideline on Independent Academic Experts (Appendix H).
Expedited Review Process – Non-Resident Institutions
Types of Reviews
Reviews by Council may proceed in one of three ways:
- Full Review – when Council determines that both an organizational review and a program review using external evaluators are necessary. Normally, non-resident institutions proposing a first degree program in Alberta (e.g., first baccalaureate), a first degree at a new level (e.g., first graduate degree), or other precedent-setting degree (e.g., first BSc when only BA programs are offered), will be subject to a full review.
- Partially Expedited Review – when Council determines that it can omit the organizational review but will conduct a program review using external evaluators. In certain cases, Council reserves the right to include elements of an organizational review within the program review.
- Fully Expedited Review – when Council determines that neither an organizational review nor program review using Council-appointed external evaluators is needed. Council members and the Secretariat will do a desk review.
Expedited Review
A non-resident institution may formally request a partially or fully expedited review and is expected to make its case based on Council’s criteria for such a review. The Proposal Review Standing Committee (PRSC) normally acts on Council’s behalf to review requests for expedited reviews and to conduct proposals accorded fully expedited reviews.
If the case presented is not accepted, the application will be subject to a full review (or partially expedited review) where the Council will appoint external evaluators. Applicants considering seeking partially or fully expedited reviews are encouraged to consult the CAQC Secretariat prior to making the request.
A request from a non-resident institution for a partially expedited review will be considered if the following criteria are met:
- An institution has had approval in its home jurisdiction to offer the same degree program in its own name for at least five years;
- An institution has been appropriately recognized (either at the program or institutional level) by an accrediting body or quality assurance agency acceptable to the Council, where such a body or agency exists, and/or by the appropriate public authority for at least five years; and
- An institution has been successfully enrolling students in approved degree programs at that level in its home jurisdiction for at least five years.
A recent completion of a successful organizational review conducted by an accrediting body, quality assurance agency or appropriate public authority acceptable to the Council strengthens the case for a partially expedited review.
A request for a fully expedited review from a non-resident institution will be considered on its own merits: an institution should not assume that Council's willingness to conduct a fully expedited review in the same discipline at one level (e.g., a concentration in a 3-year B.A.) entitles it to a fully expedited review at another level (e.g., a major in a 4-year B.A.). An institution will not normally be eligible for a fully expedited review if the degree is considered precedent-setting for the system.
The following are the criteria to be met:
- The proposal is for
- a new major/specialization/concentration (e.g., History) in an already approved degree program (e.g., BA, BSc, etc.) that has been offered across a range of disciplines in the institution in Alberta (i.e., the institution has a successful track record in implementing new programs and has experience in offering that level of degree in Alberta), or
- a new degree program that is building on an existing major/specialization currently offered under another program in Alberta and is at the same level (e.g., Bachelor of International Studies where a Bachelor of Arts with a major in International Relations exists).
- An appropriate number of permanent, qualified faculty are in place in the department/discipline.
- Degree nomenclature of the proposed program is widely recognized.
- Program scale is well within the capacity and the resources of the institution to implement and sustain the program.
- Evidence of risk assessment both with respect to risks to existing programs and to the program under review (i.e., unexpected enrolment, inability to procure staff) is presented and no financial concerns are apparent.
- Internal vetting and assessment practices, including those for post-implementation review, are well established and clearly documented. The use of external assessment and consultation with stakeholders in the initial proposal strengthens the case for an expedited review. Normally, this external assessment and the institution’s response to it must accompany the proposal and request. In engaging external experts, institutions should be guided by Council’s guideline on Independent Academic Experts.