• Section 1 - Purpose
• Section 2 - Policy 
• Section 3 - Procedure
• Organisational unit responsibilities
• Course approval and reaccreditation
• Stages and approval pathways
• Submission and approval process overview
• Course approval and reaccreditation responsibilities
• Business case and reaccreditation requirements
• Stage 1: Business case
• Stage 2: Award course accreditation
• Award course accreditation approval (new courses)
• Changes to existing award course (major): reaccreditation approval required
• Award course reaccreditation approval (comprehensive course reviews)
• Changes to existing award courses (no reaccreditation requirements)
• Stage 3: Course commencement (new courses) or implementation (existing courses)
• Publishing information on new courses
• Annual Course Availability List review 
• Expedited approval process
• Discontinuation and suspension of intake into courses
• Process for suspension of intake into a course
• Non accredited course approvals and changes (non-award offerings and short courses)
• Approval and recording of non-award offerings
• Certification of non-award offerings
• Presentation of certification documentation
• Validation and replacement of certification
• Course fee information
• Course and subject development
• Indigenous Australian content
• Research content
• External advisory committees
• Course development
• Course development
• Subject development
• Support for course and subject design
• Approving changes to subject outlines
• Service teaching arrangements
• Course and subject quality assurance and review
• Cancellation of intensive schools and changes to these
• Section 4 - Guidelines and other supporting documents
• Section 5 - Glossary

Section 1 - Purpose

(1) This procedure supports the Course and Subject Policy by stating detailed requirements for the following stages of the life cycle of courses and subjects:

1. development,
2. approval,
3. approval of changes, and
4. discontinuance.

(2) Requirements for other parts of the course and subject life cycle are stated by the:

1. Course and Subject Design (Coursework) Procedure
2. Course and Subject Delivery and Management Procedure
3. Course and Subject Quality Assurance and Review Procedure.

Section 2 - Policy 

(3) This procedure supports the Course and Subject Policy and should be read alongside that policy.

Section 3 - Procedure

Organisational unit responsibilities

(4) The Office of Planning and Analytics maintains the approval processes for the course commencement activities related to the Course Availability Listing and the Load Planning Steering Committee role in supporting the management responsibilities associated with the University strategic course profile. Refer to the Office of Planning and Analytics website for procedures and information.

(5) The Office of Governance and Corporate Administration, Risk and Compliance Unit maintains the approval processes for international students and compliance with relevant legislation and codes (Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000 (ESOS Act), National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students 2018 (the National Code) and Australian Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS).

(6) The Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) maintains the templates for business cases, course, and subject approvals, as well as report templates for reporting to committees of the Academic Senate. These templates can be found in the curriculum management system.

Course approval and reaccreditation

(7) The approval process described in this procedure applies to:

1. proposals for new award coursework and research courses,
2. proposals for reaccreditation of existing award coursework and research courses, and
3. associated administrative requirements.

(8) Course and subject approvals will follow either a documented management or an academic governance decision-making path, depending on the nature of the decision.

Stages and approval pathways

(9) A business case must obtain an authority to proceed, prior to being developed to ensure that:

1. management considers and makes the strategic decision to ensure alignment with University Strategy and strategic course profile,
2. if Commonwealth Grant Scheme (CGS) places are required, these are considered in context with the Strategic Load Principles and a recommendation to the allocate endorsed by the Load Planning Steering Committee to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research), and
3. this management committee makes a commitment to ensure appropriate resources are allocated to the development of the business case.

(10) The Academic and Research delegation register does not include an Authority to Proceed and whilst there is no formal reporting requirement, the Load Planning Steering Committee, in their advisory role to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research) and Executive Leadership Team, will ensure the central recording of requests and outcomes via the Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic). Whilst there is no formal reporting requirement, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research) Offices will record Authority to Proceed outcomes on the central register (s:/common/course and subject approvals). These will form part of the annual report to the Executive Leadership Team and Academic Senate (via University Courses Committee/University Research Committee as per their annual plans).

(11) The outcomes of the Authority to Proceed are communicated by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research) to the Executive Dean, with approval prompting the commencement of the business case process.

(12) Approval, accreditation, and reaccreditation is a three staged process, as outlined in the Course and Subject Policy and the following table.

Submission and approval process overview

(13) The internal approval processes within each faculty may run in parallel to the university course approval process.

(14) Faculties may prepare and submit the business case and course accreditation simultaneously.

(15) The business case must be approved by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research) before the accreditation proposal can be submitted to Faculty Courses Committee or Faculty Research Committee.

Course approval and reaccreditation responsibilities

(16) The Executive Dean is the sponsor of all new courses. In conjunction with the proposer, relevant Associate Dean or unit head (e.g. Executive Director). The Executive Dean is responsible for the following:

1. Ensuring the proposal conforms with the policy, these procedures and all university and faculty-level approval processes.
2. Ensuring that adequate financial and human resources are allocated to the development and submission of the course proposal.
3. The course proposal and its implementation (including development, management, resourcing, risk management and quality assurance).
4. Obtaining the relevant stakeholder endorsement prior to submitting the business case and course accreditation to the relevant committees.
5. Initiating and completing the required business case to a professional standard.
6. Submitting the business case and course accreditation proposals to the relevant committees.
7. Ensuring, where applicable, that approvals from all faculties or other stakeholders with an interest in the proposal have been obtained.

(17) For each new course or reaccreditation proposal, the Executive Dean assigns a responsible person. This is normally an Associate Dean, or unit head who is then responsible for the following:

1. Developing the course proposal.
2. Coordinating consultation with stakeholders, capturing, and addressing their concerns and ensuring that facilities and student support services implementation issues are resolved.
3. Initiating and completing the required course documentation to a professional standard.
4. Ensuring that facilities and student supports services are addressed.

(18) The Course and Subject Quality Assurance and Review Procedure states requirements for course reaccreditation (comprehensive course review).

Business case and reaccreditation requirements

(19) A business case as outlined in the Course and Subject Policy is required for all new courses or changes in offering, where management agreement is required, including:

1. Duration/volume of learning
2. Graduate capabilities
3. New field of education
4. New offering of an existing course
5. Discontinue a course
6. Specialisation or major
7. Partnership or industry arrangement
8. Addition or removal of course offering:
   1. Campus
   2. Session (if deemed major)
   3. Fund source (may be deemed minor)
   4. Delivery mode (if deemed major).

(20) If a major change is not covered by the above, determine any change as defined by the Tertiary Education and Quality Standards Agency as adding a new major or specialisation, changes to duration/volume of learning, changes to graduate capabilities, or inclusion of new fields of education.

(21) The University considers additional changes are major, particularly when there are resources and/or funding implications.

(22) Any changes that are not identified as major or minor will be referred to Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research) for determination.

(23) Discontinuing a course is considered a major change and requires a business case. Clause 33 Notices in Charles Sturt Commonwealth funding agreement requires the University to formally request in writing, the Higher Education Division of Department of Education, Skills and Employment to approval on any closure of a courses that are considered a National Priority. Refer to the Discontinuation section of this procedure for requirements.

(24) The Course and Subject Quality Assurance and Review Procedure states requirements for course reaccreditation (comprehensive course review).

Stage 1: Business case

(25) The business case for course approval and major changes should include the following:

1. Course name (and award title, award abbreviation and criteria for levels of award, where applicable or available).
2. Strategic alignment, consideration of the optimisation framework and research strength.
3. Market intelligence shows evidence of demand, competitive environment, and potential commercial interest. This must be validated by Brand and Performance Marketing.
4. Pricing strategy (for new courses).
5. Finance viability and modelling showing the estimated cost of the initial implementation (for new courses), estimated typical annual income and expenditure, return on investment, estimated surplus generated for the faculty as a result of offering the course and indicate the discontinue point should the course not achieve the desired targets or outcome. This section must be validated by the Division of Finance and Brand and Performance Marketing.
6. An outline detailing how the proposal will be taken from development to market (for new courses) including the marketing plan throughout the investment period. This must be validated by Brand and Performance Marketing.
7. Details of course structure (course defining criteria, minimum academic and language proficiency requirements for admissions, course and award nomenclature details and completion requirements, if available). This must align to the appropriate course structures as part of the Charles Sturt Education Framework/Curriculum Model.
8. Evidence of considering and addressing all planning issues that may impact the quality, risk management and successful delivery and management of a course and students which includes identifying:
   1. infrastructure (physical and virtual),
   2. facilities,
   3. learning resources, and
   4. organisational structure implications.
9. Risk assessment (for new courses).
10. Evidence of consideration of the staffing complement to ensure the course meets the educational, academic support, student wellbeing and safety support and administration needs, by:
    1. completing consultation with all internal and external stakeholders with an interest in the proposal,
    2. completing a subject and staff profile review to ensure level and extent of academic oversight and teaching capacity will meet the student needs (including consideration of capability for mode being delivered), and
    3. if additional staff are required, this is clearly outlined and included in the financial section.

(26) Where changes to a course are proposed as part of a major change, the following additional information must also be included in the business case:

1. Details of the proposed changes.
2. Rationale for and impact of the proposed changes.
3. Details of transition arrangements for continuing students, where applicable.

(27) Business cases for new course approval and for major course changes to existing courses are endorsed and approved as follows:

1. The Executive Dean, as sponsor, submits the business case to the Load Planning Steering Committee for strategic assessment check and confirmation of consultation and planning required.
2. The Executive Dean will consult with the Executive Dean of any other impacted faculty in relation to suspension or discontinuation of a course or course offering.
3. Submissions are then submitted to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research) and to contain a clear recommendation (including Load Planning Steering Committee insights) in the covering email.
4. The relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research):
   1. approves or rejects the business case,
   2. notifies the Executive Dean of the decision, with approval prompting the commencement of the academic approval for accreditation of the course. Notification includes key University stakeholders to initiate associated processes across the University (e.g. changes to the Course Availability Listing, Handbook, etc.),
   3. may also approve whether the faculty can start promoting the course. In such cases an appropriate proviso may be required (e.g. ‘course planned for introduction and subject to final approval’), and
   4. will record the decision on the central register (s:\common\course and subject approvals) and report approved business cases to the next meeting of the University Courses Committee or University Research Committee.
5. They may refer to the Executive Leadership Team for more contentious cases for approval.

Stage 2: Award course accreditation

(28) Approval of coursework courses, higher degree by research courses and subjects includes course accreditation approval of:

1. new courses, comprehensive course reviews, course modification and course phase out documents,
2. new subject documents, revised subject documents and obsolete subject documents, and
3. changing the name of a course or subject.

(29) Course accreditation proposal documentation for new course approval and existing course reaccreditation should outline:

1. details of the course structure (e.g. defining criteria, detailed academic and language proficiency requirements for admission, completion requirements),
2. course specific graduate profile as part of the graduate learning outcomes (including First Nations graduate attributes or course intended learning outcomes,
3. supporting documentation, e.g. business case, suspension memo, and
4. details of Faculty Courses Committee, Faculty Research Committee or Faculty Board approval recommendation.

(30) The information required for Australian Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (CRICOS) code application is determined by the Tertiary Education Qualifications Standards Agency (TEQSA).

1. Where required, the Office of Governance and Corporate Administration, Risk and Compliance Unit completes the CRICOS code applications. The Head, International Compliance is responsible for the submission of the application.
2. The Risk and Compliance Unit checks and lodges the application with TEQSA and communicates the CRICOS code and records in the University system and advises the Executive Dean and Office of Planning and Analytics.

Award course accreditation approval (new courses)

(31) Subject approvals are set out in the Table of Approval Authorities.

(32) Subject curriculum management system documents are developed by schools, endorsed by the School Board, and submitted to the Faculty Courses Committee.

(33) The Indigenous Board of Studies approves Indigenous Australian content before the Faculty Courses Committee endorsement stage.

(34) Course curriculum management system documents are developed in faculties and endorsed by the Faculty Courses Committee (with related subject documents after they have been endorsed by the School Board).

(35) After Faculty Courses Committee has endorsed curriculum management system documents, the Chair prepares an FCC Chair Report and includes, as an attachment, a Faculty Course and Subject Summary Report generated from the curriculum management system by the Office of Governance and Corporate Administration. These are submitted to the next meeting of University Courses Committee or University Research Committee for endorsement of courses and approval of subjects, and to Faculty Board for noting.

(36) University Courses Committee or University Research Committee reviews the course documentation using the review template/guide, demonstrating discussion/interest captured along with a recommendation for Academic Senate.

(37) The Chair, Indigenous Board of Studies also provides University Courses Committee with an annual summary of its approval activity and an annual report of University progress against Indigenous Australian content targets.

(38) These reviews and recommendations are provided to Academic Senate as follows:

1. List of new courses that were reviewed/recommended for approval, including:
   1. rationale for the new course,
   2. risk for implementation, or lack of implementation of the new course structure,
   3. accreditation period, and
   4. any requirements or actions attached to the course demonstrative of the discussion/interest captured from the review template/guide.
2. A list of courses reviewed but not recommended for approval demonstrative of the discussion/interest captured from the review/template guide.

Changes to existing award course (major): reaccreditation approval required

(39) The procedure is the same as steps ‘Award course accreditation approval (new courses)’ above.

(40) These changes and recommendations are provided to Academic Senate as follows:

1. Major changes to courses recommended for approval including:
   1. rationale for the major course,
   2. why it is being recommended for approval outside the normal accreditation period, and
   3. any requirements or actions attached to the course demonstrative of the discussion/interest captured from the review template/guide.
2. A list of courses reviewed but not recommended for approval demonstrative of the discussion/interest captured from the review/template guide.

Award course reaccreditation approval (comprehensive course reviews)

(41) The reaccreditation of an existing course does not require a separate business case as the requirements in stage 1 are included in the first stages of the comprehensive course review process and documentation. The Course and Subject Quality Assurance and Review Procedure states requirements for course reaccreditation (comprehensive course review) and the requirements for requests for an extension of accreditation time limit.

(42) Where changes to a course are proposed as part of the reaccreditation, the details, rationale, and impact of the proposed changes, as well as outcomes of consultation with all stakeholders in the proposal, must be included in addition to the information outlined above (clause 29).

(43) These reviews and recommendations are provided to Academic Senate as follows:

1. A list of courses reviewed, recommended for approval with conditions, including:
   1. rationale for the new course, 
   2. risk for implementation, or lack of implementation of the new course structure,
   3. accreditation period, and
   4. any requirements or actions attached to the course demonstrative of the discussion/interest captured from the review template/guide.
2. A list of courses reviewed but not recommended for approval demonstrative of the discussion/interest captured from the review/template guide.

Changes to existing award courses (no reaccreditation requirements)

(44) Major changes that relate to the addition or removal of course or course offerings, whereby the business case has been approved for campus, session, delivery mode and/or fund source, may not require reaccreditation. Such changes follow the same procedure as minor changes.

(45) Minor changes to existing courses are:

1. Session (unless deemed major)
2. Delivery mode (unless deemed major)
3. Fund source (unless deemed major)
4. Updating course structure/enrolment patterns (non-elective subjects)
5. Addition or removal of:
   1. exit point only course
   2. admission criteria (within standard)
6. Where it is determined by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) as not being of significant impact.

(46) Faculty Boards can approve some low impact changes to subjects. These include:

1. Approving assessment in a subject.
   1. Such changes should be forwarded to Executive Deans via email. The Executive Dean will approve the change to the assessment, notify the faculty member who requested the change, and develop a consolidated list of all changes.
   2. The consolidated list of all changes should be submitted to the next meeting of Faculty Board for ratification.

(47) Minor changes to approved, accredited, and commenced courses are normally endorsed by the Chair of Faculty Board or Chair of Faculty Courses Committee and approved by the responsible Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Research Delegation 4). This delegate will approve new subjects and subject changes that are part of these course changes. Changes are recorded and reported to the subsequent meeting of University Courses Committee or University Research Committee (and reported annually to Academic Senate).

(48) Irrespective of the delegation, the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor or Executive Dean may decide to direct some (more significant) minor changes through the University Courses Committee or University Research Committee approval process.

(49) To help determine between major and minor, they are generally defined by the Tertiary Education and Quality Standards Agency as adding a new major or specialisation, changes to duration/volume of learning, changes to graduate capabilities, or inclusion of new fields of education.

(50) Any changes that are not identified as major or minor will be referred to the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor for determination.

(51) Minor changes may or may not require course documentation (in the curriculum management system) to be completed.

(52) Where a course document (in the curriculum management system) is not required, a Minor Change Form is to be completed.

(53) Where a course document (in the curriculum management system) is required, a Minor Change Form is completed, and the course (in the curriculum management system) document is attached to the approval submission. Changes that require a course (in the curriculum management system) document include:

1. Addition or removal of entry or exit points (where it is determined by the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor as significant)
2. Updating course structure/enrolment patterns
3. Updating the accreditation field
4. Updating the credit field
5. Updating admissions criteria (e.g. selection interview processes)
6. Updating subject lists

(54) The respective Chair of Faculty Courses Committee or Faculty Research Committee endorses and recommends approval to the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor on the form/course document.

(55) Following approval, the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor will notify stakeholders and record the decision for reporting to the next meeting of the University Courses Committee or University Research Committee.

Stage 3: Course commencement (new courses) or implementation (existing courses)

(56) University stakeholders will be notified by either the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor or Office of Planning and Analytics (depending on the type of change) when a business case or change to course or subject is approved. These stakeholders include:

1. Facilities Management
2. Division of Finance
3. Division of Information Technology
4. Office of Global Engagement
5. Division of Learning and Teaching
6. Division of Library Services
7. Brand and Performance Marketing
8. Division of Student Success
9. Student Administration
10. Office of Planning and Analytics
11. Office of Governance and Corporate Administration
12. Faculty of Arts and Education
13. Faculty of Business, Justice and Behavioural Sciences
14. Faculty of Science and Health

(57) It is the responsibility of the key stakeholder from each division or faculty to ensure that when they receive a broadcasted decision it is distributed to the relevant parties within their business area.

(58) The course commencement stage acts as a gate for the faculty, Office of Governance and Corporate Administration and Office of Planning and Analytics to ensure that all necessary legislative, administrative and recourse conditions (if any) have been met prior to offers being made and students being admitted. Course commencement should include confirmation that:

1. all approvals have been granted including CRICOS requirements,
2. all conditions set for approval by Academic Senate have been satisfied,
3. data has been fully recorded in the curriculum management system and validated,
4. compulsory course information is available in the online course brochure and ready in the University Handbook on the public website, and
5. transition arrangements and communication plans for existing students, where applicable, are in place and have been discussed with the stakeholders.

(59) All approved course changes and associated support services must be implemented in time for admission of new students or re-enrolment of existing students in accordance with University timelines.

Publishing information on new courses

(60) The Course and Subject Information Procedure states restrictions on publishing information on new courses until these have had final academic approval and meet requirements for international offerings (where applicable), specifically ensuring that the National Code and CRICOS requirements are met.

Annual Course Availability List review 

(61) The University undertakes an annual review of the Course Availability Listing (CAL) to ensure it accurately lists available courses.

(62) This annual review is initiated by the Office of Planning and Analytics through the provision of an Annual Course Availability Report to faculties, and the coordination of CAL meetings with faculties and divisions.

(63) The final CAL is provided to them by the responsible Deputy Vice-Chancellor and the University Courses Committee and University Research Committee (for reporting to Academic Senate).

Expedited approval process

(64) The  Course and Subject Policy allows an expedited approval process for course proposals where:

1. there is an approved business case (unless that requirement has been waived)
2. there is a demonstrated benefit to the University in expediting the proposal without compromising the quality of the course, major or specialisation or the reputation of the University, and
3. the proposal relates to:
   1. a customised course required for a specific client within a short timeframe, or
   2. a full fee paying course where it can be demonstrated that the faculty has to move quickly to take advantage of an opening in the market or maintain a place in the market, or
   3. there are other circumstances that warrant action related to maintaining or enhancing the University's competitive position.

(65) The Table of Approval Authorities states the requirements for endorsing and approving expedited course approval.

(66) To request an expedited approval:

1. the Executive Dean must request approval to proceed with the proposal from the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor
2. if the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor approves, the Executive Dean must notify Governance Services and the Chair, Academic Senate
3. the Executive Dean must complete the course proposal documentation (as per the curriculum management system), which may be reviewed as required by each Chair of Faculty Courses Committee, Faculty Board and University Courses Committee
4. an independent sub-group of the University Courses Committee (UCC), nominated by the chair of UCC, will complete an in-depth review of the submission and complete the UCC review template (course allocation amendment document) and return it to the Executive Dean
5. the Executive Dean collates and finalises the course proposal documentation, course allocation amendment document, and provides a summary statement as part of the submission to request approval from to Academic Senate (or Standing Committee).

(67) Academic Senate (or Standing Committee) may approve with or without conditions.

(68) Executive Dean and relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor are notified of the outcome of the Academic Senate decision.

(69) If approved, stage 3 course commencement activities follow.

Discontinuation and suspension of intake into courses

(70) The Course and Subject Delivery and Management Procedure states the detailed requirements for phase out and teach out.

(71) Business cases for discontinuing a course or course offering are progressed in the same way as the introduction of a new course. Refer to stage 1, and only the phase out sections of the business case is to be completed.

(72) Clause 33 Notices in Charles Sturt Commonwealth funding agreement requires the University to formally request, in writing, the Higher Education Division of Department of Education, Skills and Employment approval on any closure of courses that are considered a National Priority. 

(73) The Director, Planning and Analytics manages these requests with the Department and will facilitate the submission and outcome advice for the initiator. To initiate a request, please email the Director for advice. The Department advises that any requests may take up to six months for their approval and the University must consult as early as possible in our decision making.  

(74) Particular attention needs to be made in the business case to considering and managing the impact on:

1. continuing students (phase out/teach out plan included),
2. international applicants,
3. graduates of the course,
4. National skills priority course,
5. other faculty, and
6. internal and external articulation arrangements.

(75) The business case must demonstrate that the Executive Dean has a plan to ensure that students currently enrolled in the course or offering:

1. are informed about the need to discontinue it and arrangements for either teach out or transfer to a different course or course offering (including students who have deferred their enrolment), and
2. have allowed a reasonable timeframe in which students can complete or are provided with an option to transfer to a different course or course offering.

(76) Under the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2021, National Code of Practice for Providers of Education and Training to Overseas Students, 2018 and Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000, students can either complete the course of study, or transition to a mutually agreed course at no disadvantage. Where the University is unable to continue to teach out of a course or course offering, and students remain enrolled in it, the faculty will endeavour to negotiate a credit arrangement with a similar course at another institution.

(77) Discontinuance proposals will either be for immediate phase out (if no students are enrolled/admitted) or teach out (where students are still enrolled/admitted in the course).

(78) Discontinued courses in teach out will:

1. continue to undergo comprehensive course reviews and reaccrediation approval for the duration of the teach out period, and
2. maintain existing professional accreditation if necessary for graduates to be eligible to practice. The Executive Dean will ensure the course is accredited and continues to be accredited unless the University Courses Committee or University Research Committee approves a proposal to allow the professional accreditation to lapse.

(79) The business case must be attached to the curriculum management system document which is submitted as part of the academic approval process. Refer to stage 2.

(80) Refer to the Office of Planning and Analytics website for designated timelines for business cases to be reviewed by the Load Planning Steering Committee.

(81) All changes will be reported to the University Courses Committee or University Research Committee.

Process for suspension of intake into a course

(82) Suspensions of admission intake into a course when a faculty:

1. course has been identified to be discontinued, and the approval is yet to be finalised, or
2. wishes to maintain the course as active for offering at a later stage, but not allow new students admissions for a specific period.

(83) For clause 82a., following the approval of the business case, the suspension of a course or offer may occur.

(84) The suspension memo is completed and endorsed by the Chair of Faculty Courses or Faculty Research Committee, with a recommendation of approval to the Executive Dean.

(85) The Executive Dean will consult with the Executive Dean of any other impacted faculty in relation to suspension of a course or course offering.

(86) The Executive Dean approves or rejects the request (by signing/not signing the form).

(87) The suspension memo must be attached to the curriculum management system document which is submitted as part of the course accreditation removal process (refer to stage 2).

(88) The Manager, Course Administration or Faculty Administration Manager records the decision.

(89) The Faculty Administration Manager or Faculty Executive Officer communicates the outcomes via the Faculty Executive Office mailbox to the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic or Research) and Office of Planning and Analytics.

(90) The Office of Planning and Analytics following updating of the Course Availability Listing will broadcast to relevant University stakeholders.

(91) For clause 82b., there is no business case requirement, and the suspension may occur through the completion and approval of the suspension memo.

(92) Where a course is suspended for more than 12 months, faculties will be required to show cause for the extended suspension period via the Faculty Courses Committee or Faculty Research Committee Chair Report to the Faculty Board.

Non accredited course approvals and changes (non-award offerings and short courses)

(93) Faculties, schools, Charles Sturt University's registered training organisation (RTO) and other academic or administrative units of the University may offer and provide certification for attendance at or completion of non-award offerings.

(94) The delivery and certification of non-award offerings must not in any way imply that participants are to be granted an award or qualification of the University, as awarded by the University Council.

(95) Non-award offerings may take many forms, including the offering of short courses, training events, single subject study, stackable and non-stackable micro-credentials, career lab, attendance at workshops or other group events.

(96) It is recommended that a business case is completed, and the stakeholder consultation and endorsement is obtained to ensure that all planning is complete, and facilities and support services are able to support (where appropriate).

(97) Enrolment in a non-award offering shall allow for the identity of participants to be formally affirmed and may be considered a Charles Sturt University student and require a student ID in order to access appropriate support and resources.

(98) A student completing only some components of a qualification, such as via single subject study, is undertaking non-award study if that study does not lead to an award of the University. Such students may also receive a statement of attainment, according to Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) requirements.

(99) Non-award offerings may also be offered to or in conjunction with a University approved third party.

Approval and recording of non-award offerings

(100) Including those non-award offerings under the authority of the Academic Senate (e.g. StudyLink), or by training services offered by the University, a non-award offering shall be approved according to the University's delegation schedules. Certification of the offering shall be as described in this section.

(101) Where a school or unit intends to offer a short course, the Head of School or head of the unit will propose the offering for the approval of the appropriate Associate Dean, Academic as Chair of the Faculty Courses Committee or Associate Dean, Research for a research non-award offering.

(102) Where a unit outside of a faculty intends to offer a short course, the head of the unit will propose the offering for the approval most closely aligned to the discipline of the course.

(103) Guidance may be sought from the relevant Deputy Vice-Chancellor in relation to the appropriate discipline.

(104) The Faculty Courses Committee and Research Committee will maintain a register of short courses offered by the faculty, in the University's record management system and provide a consolidated quarterly report of non-award offerings approved, changed, or removed, to University Courses Committee.

(105) The Faculty Courses Committee and Faculty Research Committee will provide an annual report of new short courses approved by the faculty, to Faculty Board.

(106) Where a school (or unit) ceases to offer a short course, it will notify the Faculty Courses Committee and/or Faculty Research Committee as appropriate.

Certification of non-award offerings

(107) Certification of non-award offerings shall include both an auditable process to attest to a participant's completion of the requirements of the offering, and issuing of any certification documentation, such as a certificate of completion or letter of completion.

(108) Where a certificate is awarded to participants, it shall be a certificate of completion with the following inclusions:

1. the design for a certificate of completion shall be as approved by the University Secretary, after consultation with the Brand and Performance Marketing,
2. the name of the recipient, as provided in the enrolment process,
3. the name of the non-award course or offering and the date of conferral,
4. the name of the University organisational unit awarding the certification,
5. the signature of the delegated authorising officer or body of the University for the offering, and
6. a very brief description of the precise role of the University in relation to the offering. For example, whether Charles Sturt University has been responsible for all aspects of the offering, or has acted together with a partner, and if so, what its specific role was in the relationship, such as quality assurance, delivery etc.

(109) Co-branding of certification documentation will only be allowed in accordance with the University Communications and Marketing Procedure - Brand Governance and must be consistent with the legal relationship between the parties involved.

(110) A summary statement of learning outcomes or other description of the content of the non-award offering may be provided with any certification.

Presentation of certification documentation

(111) The delegated approver for a non-award offering shall approve a method for the presentation of any certification documentation.

(112) Under no circumstances shall the presentation of certification documentation occur at one of the University's formal graduation ceremonies.

Validation and replacement of certification

(113) As for testamur and other formal certification, the University will have processes in place to validate any certification provided under the Conferral and Graduation Policy, and to replace such certification where it has been misplaced. Such processes may attract a fee, which will be specified in the University's annual fee schedule.

Course fee information

(114) The online Fees and Costs page is the primary and authoritative source of official fee information for Charles Sturt courses.

(115) The online Fees and Costs page must be used whenever course fee information is published. This also applies where Charles Sturt University provides fee information to a third party.

(116) The Vice-Chancellor must approve the publication of tuition (and other/related fees) in any other form (including elsewhere on the csu.edu.au. domain).

Course and subject development

(117) Refer to the Course and Subject Design (Coursework) Procedure for principles and requirements for the design of coursework courses and subjects.

Indigenous Australian content

(118) The Indigenous Australian Content in Courses and Subjects Policy states requirements for design, development, approval, delivery and review of this type of content.

Research content

(119) The Research Policy and Higher Degree Research Policy identify requirements for the design, development, approval and delivery of research content.

External advisory committees

(120) Courses will have an external advisory committee (EAC) to inform development, ongoing improvement and review of the course. A single EAC may be held for a group of courses in a discipline or cluster of closely-related disciplines.

(121) The purposes of the EAC are to ensure that:

1. the academic standing of the course remains high,
2. the course remains relevant to the profession or industry it serves, and
3. course development and review achieve the following standards:
   1. Course development and improvement are informed by changing community needs, changes in the industry, profession or discipline, and the current reputation of the course.
   2. Course designers are aware of existing, emerging and potential markets.
   3. The course has clear, appropriate aims and objectives.
   4. The course content, teaching and learning experiences and assessment strategies are aligned with the course objectives and at an appropriate Australian Qualifications Framework level.
   5. The teaching and research methods support diverse learners and progressive, sequenced learning through the course.

(122) An EAC may also:

1. enable community input into improvement of the course,
2. encourage recognition of the course by relevant bodies, and
3. help promote the course.

(123) An EAC is an advisory committee and will not make strategic or operational decisions.

(124) The Associate Dean (Academic) will:

1. be responsible for the EACs of the faculty, and
2. report to Faculty Board to assure that EACs that have been convened since the last report, and activities to ensure that EACs meet the requirements of this procedure.

(125) The faculty will seek input from the EAC into comprehensive review of the course and any proposal for substantial change to the course such as a new major.

(126) The requirements for convening EACs are as follows:

1. An EAC will meet:
   1. as often as the Faculty Board considers necessary to support continuous improvement of the course with information on how it is regarded by graduates, employers and the communities the course serves,
   2. as part of gathering external input into comprehensive review of the course, and
   3. where a strong need to improve the course and/or increase its enrolments is identified by an annual course health check.
2. External members will make up a substantial majority of the membership, and will include:
   1. a minimum of one external discipline expert who is a senior academic and/or representative of the relevant professional accreditation body with expertise in the course discipline, field of research or field of professional practice,
   2. experts operating at a high level in the industry for which the course prepares its graduates. Where the course leads to professional accreditation, these experts will be at least two currently practising professionals,
   3. where possible, a representative of any First Nations community in the region(s) the course services, and
   4. (once the course has graduates) at least one graduate of the course.
3. An EAC will include the following internal members:
   1. the Course Director,
   2. the Head of School or their nominee,
   3. the Head of Discipline (where applicable)of the primary course discipline or each of the course major disciplines, and
   4. at least one current student.
4. The Course Director and Head of School (or nominee), in consultation with the Executive Dean or Associate Dean (Academic), will appoint members to the committee.
5. The term of membership for external members is two years.
   1. A member may be reappointed for a second consecutive term, but not for a third consecutive term, unless the Associate Dean (Academic) agrees to an exception.
   2. Terms of external members will be staggered to ensure some continuity of membership.
6. The Course Director and Head of School (or nominee), in consultation with the Executive Dean or Associate Dean (Academic), may replace a member who fails to attend meetings.
7. The chair will ensure the EAC’s recommendations are followed up and will report back to the EAC on the outcome of recommendations.

(127) The faculty will keep the following records of each EAC:

1. A file of its agendas and minutes.
2. A record of the dates the EAC met, its suggestions to improve the course and whether these led to changes in the course or its delivery, with a link to the full file of the EAC papers, in the:
   1. curriculum management system course documents, and
   2. if the course is professionally accredited, the Faculty Administration Manager's faculty professional accreditation report.

Course development

Course development

(128) The Associate Dean (Academic) or Associate Dean, Research will appoint a Course Director and convene a working party to develop and design a new course, or changes to an existing course, and the related course documents for approval.

(129) As part of the design of a new course or changes to an existing course, facilities must be checked, including facilities where placements are undertaken, to ensure they are fit for educational and research purposes to accommodate student numbers and relevant activities planned.

(130) Where the course will include service-taught subjects, the working party should include academic staff of the other faculty or school.

(131) If the course will need professional accreditation, the faculty must consult the relevant professional body during course development.

(132) Courses or units of study that are offered or intended to be offered are not to be described as professional accredited until such professional accreditation has been obtained.

(133) For a double degree comprising degrees in two faculties, or a shared course, the two Executive Deans will decide which is to be the host faculty. In case of dispute, they will refer the matter to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic), who will decide.

(134) For development of a double degree, the host faculty Associate Dean (Academic) will:

1. appoint a person or group satisfactory to the other faculty to develop the business case, and
2. convene a working party to develop the course documents, comprising up to three nominees of each of the two Associate Deans, Academic or Research plus a convener chosen by the host Associate Dean.

Subject development

(135) The Head of School will nominate an academic staff member to convene a panel to develop and design a new subject or changes to an existing subject.

1. Where the subject design/redesign is part of designing/redesigning a course, the design team will work in consultation with the Course Director who is leading the course design/redesign.
2. Where the subject is a component of courses managed by more than one school or faculty, the subject design/redesign team will consult the relevant Course Directors to ensure that the design work does not compromise course learning outcomes.
3. Where the subject is a research coursework subject, the relevant Associate Dean, Research or delegate, and/or Honours Course Director, will be included in the design process.

Support for course and subject design

(136) The Division of Learning and Teaching:

1. supports faculties as a partner in course and subject design, and
2. collaborates with faculties to provide the Charles Sturt Education Framework to guide staff in this work.

(137) The Division of Library Services:

1. supports faculties to design courses and subjects so that students can achieve digital and information literacy, and
2. advises on textbooks and other learning materials for subjects.

(138) The Indigenous Board of Studies and School of Indigenous Australian Studies advise faculties on design of Indigenous Australian content in courses and subjects.

(139) The Office of Research Services and Graduate Studies will provide support for research higher degree courses and subjects.

Approving changes to subject outlines

(140) Before each offering of a subject, the Subject Coordinator may propose changes to the pre-publication subject outline in the subject outline tool, for approval by the Head of School (or delegate).

1. Where the subject is a core subject or restricted elective subject in a coursework course or major, any change to assessment tasks in the subject must preserve the alignment of assessment tasks with subject learning outcomes and the integrated course standards. The Course and Subject Design (Coursework) Procedure states detailed requirements for this alignment.
2. Assessment tasks should also, as far as possible, be part of a course assessment regime that ensures that assessment progressively develops students’ skills and knowledge through the course. For example, some types of assessment, such as group assessment work, must be carefully managed at course level.
3. For these reasons, Subject Coordinators will consult the relevant Course Director about any change to assessment task types or weightings in a subject, or any change to instructions for an assessment task, that may compromise course learning outcomes or the course assessment regime.
4. If an assessment task changes, has delivery implications (e.g. addition or removal of on-campus tutorial), endorsement from impacted stakeholders must be obtained and referred to the Executive Dean for approval and communication of outcome.
5. Course Directors may intervene where a change to an assessment task in a subject compromises integrated course standards or a course assessment regime, by asking the Head of School not to approve the change or to reverse a change already approved, even if this constitutes a change to the subject assessment after the start of the relevant session.

(141) Where a change needs to be made to the subject outline after the outline is published and/or session has started, only the Head of School can approve that change. Where the Head of School delegates these approvals, the Associate Head of School can approve the change. Details of the assessment tasks in published subject outlines should only be changed where this will not disadvantage students.

(142) In exceptional circumstances, the Head of School may approve a variation to subject assessment or an exam for an individual student, with the student’s agreement, on the advice of the Subject Coordinator.

Service teaching arrangements

(143) To ensure high standards of teaching and research, and avoid duplication, specialists in a discipline or profession will normally be concentrated in a single academic unit. It should be unusual for an academic unit to employ academics in fields peripheral to its stated disciplines and professional courses.

(144) Faculties will negotiate service teaching arrangements where courses need to include subjects in disciplines and/or professional studies based on other faculties or another school in the same faculty.

(145) The Indigenous Australian Content in Courses and Subjects Policy states which types of Indigenous Australian studies subjects and modules within subjects must be taught by the School of Indigenous Australian Studies.

(146) A service teaching arrangement will be documented as a written agreement between the academic units (faculties or schools) concerned where either unit requests it, in any of the following situations:

1. The content of an existing or proposed subject in one academic unit overlaps wholly or in part with the subject matter of the discipline or professional area of another academic unit.
2. One academic unit needs to require students in a course it manages to enrol in a subject offered by another academic unit (as a compulsory subject or restricted elective for the course or for one of its elective sequences).
3. A member of staff of one academic unit teaches all or part of a subject offered by another academic unit.
4. Academic units share delivery of a shared course or a double degree.

(147) In the first three of these situations, either academic unit may request a written service teaching agreement if they consider it is needed to reduce risk.

(148) The academic course proposal for a shared course or a double degree will normally be sufficient documentation of the service teaching arrangement, unless one of the units requests a separate written agreement.

(149) A service teaching agreement must be signed by the heads of the two units concerned, and documents the following matters:

1. Ownership of the subject(s) that are service taught.
2. Who is responsible for curriculum design and where the record of the design process will be stored.
3. Who is responsible for teaching (whether one academic unit or shared).
4. A commitment for one academic unit to continue delivering a subject(s) if the other unit’s course relies on this.
5. The kind of component the subject(s) is/are in each course (core or restricted elective in the course as a whole or in a major or minor).
6. How student load for service teaching will be assigned to the service teaching unit.
7. Arrangements for adequate advance notice and consultation between the two academic units when any change is being considered that would affect either unit, such as changes to the structure of a course that includes service-taught subjects, changes to a service-taught subject (content, code, title, delivery, availability pattern, teaching staff, etc.). Where a change may cause a significant change in load of a service-taught subject, at least a year’s notice will be normal.
8. Who in each unit is responsible for liaison on each aspect of the arrangement.
9. How and how often the arrangement will be reviewed.
10. How any disputes over the carrying out of the arrangement will be resolved.

Course and subject quality assurance and review

(150) Because quality assurance and review of courses involves several substantial activities, requirements for these are stated in a separate procedure, the Course and Subject Quality Assurance and Review Procedure.

Cancellation of intensive schools and changes to these

(151) Schools must not cancel an intensive school after information about the intensive school has been published to students unless a subject containing an intensive school is cancelled. 

(152) Where it is necessary, for exceptional reasons, to cancel an intensive school although the subject containing it will run, the cancellation must be recommended by the Head of School to the Executive Dean for approval. 

(153) The Executive Dean will then notify the Executive Director, Student Experience of the cancellation.

(154) The Executive Director, Student Experience will ensure essential services outside the faculty are notified of the cancellation.

(155) Schools must as far as possible, avoid changes to details of intensive schools as published to students’ which students may have relied on to decide to attend the intensive school, such as date, hours, location. 

(156) Where an intensive school is cancelled or its details changed after publication, the school will reimburse students for any reasonable expenses they have already incurred to attend the school. To claim reimbursement, students must provide proof of the expenses. 

Section 4 - Guidelines and other supporting documents

(157) Detailed work instructions are maintained in the Knowledge Base (in Confluence, under Faculty Admin) by the functional area supporting the specific task.

Section 5 - Glossary

(158) Most of the terms in this procedure are defined in the glossary section of the Course and Subject Policy. For the purposes of this procedure, the following additional terms have the definitions stated:

1. Authority to proceed – a management decision to provide early approval of a new course idea, including new campus or mode offerings of an existing course for developing into a full business case.
2. Certification - means the University attesting to the completion of or attendance at a non-award offering. Certification may include providing a certificate of completion.
3. Certificate of completion - means a certificate provided by the University in recognition of the attendance at or completion of a non-award offering.
4. Elective – a requirement of a course that a student can meet by completing a subject they can choose freely from any subject of the University that is available to them for elective enrolment; see also ‘restricted elective’.
5. Host faculty – the faculty responsible for administering a shared course.
6. Non-award offering - as defined in the Course and Subject Policy.
7. Restricted elective – a course requirement whereby a student can choose a subject or a specified number of subjects from a list of subjects or from a specified discipline; that is, not an unrestricted elective choice.
8. Service teaching - when one academic unit teaches a subject in a course managed by another academic unit or one academic unit collaborates with another academic unit in teaching a subject.
9. Shared course – a course developed, delivered and reviewed in collaboration between two or more faculties.
10. Teach out – means the gradual process of discontinuation whereby the Academic Senate has approved that the course no longer be offered to new students, but that students currently admitted to the course can continue their studies in accordance with the existing course structure and requirements. The course must continue to be accredited but no new students can be enrolled.
11. Teaching faculty – the faculty that manages the course in question, or to which the teaching school belongs.
12. Teaching school – the school that teaches the subject offering in question.
13. Work integrated learning (WIL) – any learning activity in which students engage in realistic work activities or activities closely related to work.
    1. WIL activities include workplace learning and simulated work activities such as simulated workplaces, role-plays, and case studies.
    2. A WIL learning activity must involve a partnership between the teaching school and an employer to design, deliver and/or assess students’ performance in the activity.
14. Workplace learning (WPL) – a type of WIL activity in which students experience an occupational role and its responsibilities in a real workplace or community service. To be considered WPL, a learning activity must meet: i.e., the definition of WIL above and the detailed requirements for the design of WPL in subjects stated in the Course and Subject Design (Coursework) Procedure.