1

2

UNIT FOR QUALITY PROMOTION:

ANNUAL REPORT 2012

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY …………………………………………………………………………3

1. OPERATING CONTEXT ..................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Governance Structure .................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Physical Location ......................................................................................................... 5

2. RISKS AND MANAGEMENT OF RISKS ............................................................................. 5

3. STRATEGIC FOCUS .......................................................................................................... 6

4. PERFORMANCE……………………………………………………………………………….......7

5. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT……………………………………………………….………………13

5.1 Human Resources……………………………………………………………………………..13

5.2 Financial Management…………………………………………………………………..…..15

6. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT .........................................................................................16

6.1 National Involvement ..................................................................................................16

6.2 Internal Engagement ...................................................................................................16

7. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABLILITY…………………………………………………….……16

8. LEADERSHIP FOOTPRINT ..................................................................................................17

9. CONCLUSION AND THE WAY FORWARD ........................................................................17

3

UNIT FOR QUALITY PROMOTION:

ANNUAL REPORT 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The goals of the UQP (aligned with UJ Strategic Thrusts) are to i) facilitate, support and oversee the implementation of the UJ Quality Promotion

Plan: 2010 – 2016. ii) sustain, support and improve the UJ Quality Promotion System. iii) enhance and contribute to the effective functioning of the Unit for Quality

Promotion. The following reviews are in process as part of the implementation of the Quality Promotion Plan: Table: Reviews 2012

Faculties Reviews completed in 2012

Reviews in process in 2012 – site visits in 2013

Education None 2 programmes

FADA 2 combined reviews: 2 departments and 5 programmes

1 professional council visit 1 combined review: dept and programmes

FEBE 1 professional council review: 2 programmes

5 professional council visits 6 module reviews 1 research M and D review

FEFS 4 module reviews 12 programme reviews 6 module reviews

Health Sciences 1 programme review 2 programme review 4 prof council reviews 3 prof council visits to accredit new facilities

Humanities 3 programme 1 programme review 1 national review

Law 1 programme review 1 programme review 1 SLP review 1 research M and D review

Management 11 programme reviews 28 programme reviews 12 professional council reviews

Science None 4 combined reviews: 4 academic departments, undergraduate modules and 4 programmes 1 prof council review

Service and support divisions

2 divisions/units in divisions 5 divisions/units in divisions

4

The following support has been provided to the UJ Quality Promotion system: (i) Annual updating of the UJ Progress Report by means of contributions from different

role players in the UJ: Submitting Progress Report I and compiling progress Report II for submission in 2013.

(ii) The reworking OF the proposed Framework for non-subsidised programmes as a Practice Note which served at the STLC of Aug 2012. Prof Parekh proposed that the document should stand over till next year when she is back from her sabbatical.

(iii) A proposal on the Scope and nature of faculty reviews was developed and approved by the MEC (23 October). Ina Pretorius and Hester Geyser will take responsibility for support to faculties.

(iv) A first draft of a set of guidelines for academic staff on the implementation of RPL has been developed and served at the RPL Task Team meeting of 30 July 2012. A small group of staff members (Profs De Kadt, Spowart, Van Warmelo, Steenekamp and Geyser) will meet to compare and discuss the guidelines for staff with the guidelines for students. Follow-up discussions are being held.

With reference to the development of scholarship in the area of quality promotion, benchmarking UJ quality reviews, as well as contributing to national and international educational associations/fora:

Prof Geyser presented a paper on Improvement plans, monitoring and follow-ups at an inter-institutional discussion forum for quality managers (February 2012 at the NWU).

Ms Ina Pretorius presented a paper on the Alignment of quality reviews in a multi-campus environment at an inter-institutional discussion forum for quality managers (February 2012 at the NWU).

Prof Geyser presented a paper on Quality Reviews in Service and Support Units: A question of criteria at the SAAIR Institute (29-30 August 2012) at UNISA.

Ms I Pretorius presented a paper on Communication (Internal and external: Silo-functioning) at the SAAIR Institute (29 – 30 Aug) at UNISA.

Mr M Vongo and Ms I Pretorius conducted a successful workshop on Student Involvement in Quality Promotion at the SAAIR Forum (3-5 October) at the UFS. Contributions are being analysed and incorporated into the next proposal on this topic.

Ms Dragana Weistra (nee Tatic) and Prof Geyser presented a paper on Quality reviews in service and support units: Value added? at the SAAIR Forum (3-5 October) at the UFS.

Prof Geyser and Ms Dragana Weistra (nee Tatic) attended the 7th European Quality Assurance Forum (22 – 24 November 2012), in Tallinn in Estonia in November. They presented a paper entitled Quality reviews in service and support units: Value added?

Mr Mthu Vongo applied for participation in the SANTED project and was accepted. He will attend workshops and seminars in 2013.

---oOo---

5

UNIT FOR QUALITY PROMOTION:

ANNUAL REPORT 2012

1. OPERATING CONTEXT

1.1 Governance Structure

Up to the end of 2011, the Unit for Quality Promotion (UQP) was part of the Division for Institutional Planning and Quality Promotion (DIPQP) that reported to the DVC: HR and Institutional Planning. Towards the end of 2011, the Division was subjected to a process of restructuring, resulting in the establishment of the UQP as a separate unit that reports to the Registrar.

The UQP oversees and facilitates the implementation of the UJ Quality Promotion Plan in faculties and academic development, service and support divisions. At institutional level, it supports and continuously improves the UJ Quality Promotion System. Although the UQP offices are situated on the APK campus, staff members travel regularly to other campuses to conduct workshops, consult with management committees and provide support to individuals or small groups w.r.t quality reviews and related matters. Often, UJ staff members prefer attending meetings in the UQP offices as they are a ‘safe’ environment to discuss confidential matters.

1.2 Physical Location

The UQP shares the bigger office space where DIPQP was located (i.e. A Ring 1 on APK) with the Division for Institutional Planning, Evaluation and Monitoring (DIPEM). The office space was subdivided into two sections, one for UQP and one for DIPEM. Facilities such as a boardroom, the kitchen, the storeroom, etc. are shared.

2. RISKS AND MANAGEMENT OF RISKS The risk identified was the lack of buy-in into UJ Quality Management w.r.t. the quality reviews. The following mitigation and support activities were undertaken to address the risk: (i) A Quality Discussion Forum for Faculties meets regularly (at least 3 times per

year). The purpose is to inform, consult, etc. with faculty quality managers on quality matters.

(ii) A similar Forum was initiated for S & S divisions. The purpose is to inform, consult, etc. with quality managers/unit representatives on quality matters.

6

(iii) Training of UJ staff as chairpersons for peer review panels. The first workshop for academics was conducted 25-26 April and was attended by 20 persons from 7 Faculties, as well as DIPEM, ADC and UQP.

(iv) The identification of key elements in the quality review processes as quality checks by the UQP.

A questionnaire to determine client satisfaction with UQP services has been developed. A pilot run was done; full implementation in 2013.

3. STRATEGIC FOCUS

The goals of the UQP are aligned with UJ Strategic Thrusts as follows:

Table: UQP goals

UJ Strategic Thrusts UQP Goals

UJ Thrust 1: Sustained excellence of academic programmes, research and community engagement.

Provides leadership and support with the implementation of the UJ Quality Promotion Plan: 2010 – 2016.

UJ Trust 6: Leadership that matters in the institution and in civil society.

Sustain, support and improve the UJ Quality Promotion System.

UJ Thrust 8: Generate, cultivate and sustain resources and structures.

Enhance the effective functioning of the Unit for Quality Promotion.

4. PERFORMANCE

The table below provides a summary of the progress made with the achievement of the UQP goal on providing leadership and support with the implementation of the UJ Quality Promotion Plan in 2012:

Table: Reviews 2012

Faculties Reviews completed in 2012

(i.e. up to site visit)

Reviews in process in 2012 – site visits in 2013

Education None 2 programmes

FADA 2 combined reviews: 2 departments and 5 programmes

1 professional council visit 1 combined review: Department and programmes

FEBE 1 professional council review: 2 programmes

5 professional council visits 6 module reviews 1 research M and D review

FEFS 4 module reviews 12 programme reviews 6 module reviews

Health Sciences 1 programme review 2 programme reviews 4 prof council reviews

7

3 prof council visits to accredited new facilities

Humanities 3 programme 1 programme review 1 national review (CHE)

Law 1 programme review 1 programme review 1 SLP review 1 research M and D review

Management 11 programme reviews 28 programme reviews 12 professional council reviews

Science None 4 combined reviews: 4 academic departments, undergraduate modules and 4 programmes 1 prof council review

Service and support divisions

2 divisions/units in divisions 5 divisions/units in divisions

The following progress has been made with the achievement of UQP goal on sustaining, supporting and improving the UJ Quality Promotion System:

Table: Supporting the UJ Quality Promotion System

Performance indicators

Progress towards targets

a) UJ Quality Progress Report.

(i) The first UJ Progress Report was approved by the MEC in April 2012 and submitted to the HEQC as part of the preparation for the CHE visit on 8 May 2012. The Report served as a discussion document during the HEQC visit.

(ii) Updating of the Progress Report II was initiated in October: Contributions from different roleplayers in the UJ were integrated into a new draft. This will be submitted, in Jan/Feb 2013) to the MEC, etc. for approval.

b) Finalise the Quality Framework for Non-subsidised Programmes for approval by the MEC and/or Senate.

The Framework has served a second time at MECA and Faculties have been requested to comment (again) before the end of April 2012. (i) After the second round of comments, a task team

consisting of Profs Daneel, O’Brien, Swart and Ryan, Ms Trish Gibbon and Prof Geyser, with Prof Parekh as chairperson, met twice to finalise the document.

(ii) The document has been condensed under a new title, The Quality Management of Continuing and Professional Development Programmes and served

8

at MECA on 31 July 2012. (iii) The document was tabled at the STLC meeting of

Aug 2012: Prof Parekh proposed that the document should stand over till next year when she is back from her sabbatical.

(iv) The document has been redeveloped as a policy document to be finalised in 2013.

c) Develop a set of guidelines for UJ academic and support staff on the implementation of RPL.

A first draft has been developed and served at the RPL Task Team meeting of 30 July 2012. A small group of staff members (Profs De Kadt, Spowart, Von Warmelo, Steenekamp and Geyser) will meet to compare and discuss the guidelines for staff with the guidelines for students (developed by Prof Von Warmelo). Follow-up discussions have been held – document to be finalised in 2013.

d) Oversee and guide the development of a framework for student involvement in quality promotion.

(i) One UQP staff member (Mr Vongo) is exploring the topic and has undertaken a visit (together with Ina Pretorius and Dragana Tatic) to TUT as part of the initial research.

(ii) A UQP delegation also visited the quality office at UP.

(iii) Regular discussions between Mthu Vongo and Hester Geyser are conducted to provide guidance and support.

(iv) Mthu Vongo and Ina Pretorius conducted a workshop at the SAAIR conference in September (Bloemfontein).

(v) Attendance of a conference in Glasgow, Scotland in 2013 is envisaged: one of the conference themes is student involvement.

e) Oversee and guide research on the roles, criteria, etc. of relevant professional councils with a view to develop a UJ protocol for professional council visits.

An initial list of professional councils has been drawn up. Permission from the Registrar has been obtained to collect more information from the faculties, e.g. on the status of the council/statutory body, purpose of campus visits, etc. Dragana Weistra will collect additional information from the faculties.

f) Faculty reviews A document on the Scope and nature of faculty reviews has been developed and submitted to the MEC (meeting on 23 October) for approval. If approved, a number of support materials should be developed. Ina Pretorius and

9

Hester Geyser will take responsibility for the support to faculties. The Faculty Review Management Committee has met a number of times. Ina Pretorius and Hester Geyser provide support: meeting administration, support to faculties as needed.

g) Sustained and committed participation in UJ committees and structures, i.e. the SQC, STLC, Faculty Quality Discussion Forum, Division Quality Discussion Forum, Community Engagement Committee, Faculty of Education’s Quality Committee, Faculty of Humanities Quality Committee, UJ Quality Conferences, PWG, RPL Task Team, WIL Task Team, CE Advisory Board.

UQP staff members are members of all these committees - attend meetings regularly and provide support as required: The following meetings were organised and conducted by the UQP: (i) Faculty Quality Discussion Forum met on 7 March

2012. A number of quality-related matters were discussed, e.g. non-subsidised programmes, alignment of Category B programmes, etc.

(ii) Internal Quality Conference on 12 June was dedicated to Teaching and Learning in Service Modules: Challenges and Possibilities. A guest speaker from UP, as well as 3 UJ lecturers presented different perspectives on the matter.

(iii) A second Faculty Quality Discussion Forum was held in September to discuss a research report on faculty quality management structures; a reflection on reviews this year (i.e. concerns); quality reviews of non-subsidised programmes and also the review of processes underpinning research master’s and doctoral programmes.

(iv) A first meeting of the Division Quality Discussion Forum was held in September in an effort to establish such a forum for S & S divisions. A discussion of the key elements of quality reviews was held by inviting those that have conducted reviews in the past to share their experiences with the divisions that are preparing for reviews in 2013. This will become a regular forum (similar to the one for faculties).

h) Develop and submit for approval (to the SQC) a proposal on the reporting lines for quality-related reports.

A PPT presentation was made to the SQC in February. It was decided that the Faculties should comment on the document and that it will be discussed at the Quality Discussion Forum. A proposal was submitted to the SQC (of May 2012) for approval. A proposal on The Dissolution of the SQC and the reporting lines for quality-related reports was approved by Senate.

10

i) Monitor and support the submission of improvement plans and progress reports to the SQC/STLC and other committees (according to the reporting lines).

The following reports and improvement plans served at the STLC: (i) Report on Applied Communicative Skills (module

reviews in the Faculty of Humanities) (ii) Report on a programme review of the Diploma in

Public Relations (Humanities) (iii) Module reviews in the Faculty of Law. (iv) Report and improvement plan on the ND

Somatology. (v) Report on and improvement plan for the ADC. (vi) Progress report by PsyCaD.

j) Benchmarking UJ Quality system; contributing to external/national higher education structures, associations and forums, e.g. HEQC, SAAIR, international conferences, GARMIN Group, etc.

(i) Two UQP delegates attended the CHE Quality Assurance Forum (21 February 2012 at the CHE’s Murisi Auditorium). A report was submitted to the STLC and SQC, as well as to a number of academic leaders (i.e. the Registrar, the ED: ADS, Director: DIPEM, etc.)

(ii) All the staff members (excluding Ms Violet Pienaar) attended an inter-institutional discussion forum (7-8 February 2012) at the Potchefstroom Campus of the NWU. Other universities represented include the University of Pretoria, University of Stellenbosch, NMMU and the North West University.

(iii) Prof Geyser presented a paper on Quality Reviews in Service and Support Units: A Question of criteria at the SAAIR Institute (29-30 August 2012) at UNISA.

(iv) Ms I Pretorius presented a paper on Communication (Internal and external: Silo-functioning) at the SAAIR Institute (29 – 30 Aug) at UNISA.

(v) Mr M Vongo and Ms I Pretorius conducted a successful workshop on Student Involvement in Quality Promotion at the SAAIR Forum (3-5 October) at the UFS. Contributions are being analysed and incorporated into the next proposal on this topic.

(vi) Ms Dragana Weistra (nee Tatic) and Prof Geyser presented a paper on Quality reviews in service and support units: Value added? at the SAAIR Forum (3-5 October) at the UFS.

(vii) Two staff members attended the CHE Forum for Quality Managers (28 August) and a report served at the R Exco meeting.

(viii) Prof Geyser and Ms Dragana Weistra (nee Tatic)

11

attended the 7th European Quality Assurance Forum (22 – 24 November 2012), in Tallinn in Estonia in November. They presented a paper entitled Quality reviews in service and support units: Value added?

k) Contribute to an increasing focus on scholarly engagement, involvement and outputs, with special reference to the value added by the quality reviews of S & S divisions.

The research project on the value added through quality reviews of service and support divisions has been finalised, and papers presented (see (j) (viii) above).

l) Oversee and support the implementation of the MoU with Edge Hill University.

The Head of the Unit serves as the UJ contact person and the UQP hosted two events for visiting academics to the UJ, namely to the Department of Sport Management and the Department of Emergency Medical Care. The EHU contact person, Prof Mark Schofield, visited UJ (and the UQP) in November 2012.

The following progress has been made with the achievement of UQP goal on the enhancement and contribution to the effective functioning of the Unit for Quality Promotion:

Table: Effective functioning of the UQP

Performance indicators

Progress towards targets

a) Provide effective leadership and management of the human resources of the Unit to optimise the Unit’s core functions.

Monthly staff meetings are held with a formal agenda and minutes (decision register) of the previous meeting. An important part of each meeting is the updating of the UQP Tracking System on the implementation of the UJ Quality Plan and the discussion of progress with the programme reviews. The position of Facilitator: Quality Promotion was advertised for the fourth time and interviews conducted. Ms Tatic was recommended as the only suitable candidate for the post. Her permanent appointment was approved and she was appointed as from 1 May 2012.

12

b) Provide effective leadership and management of financial resources of the Unit to optimise the Unit’s core functions by limiting budget variance expenditure to not more

c) than 2%; keeping capital expenditure within budget, and by complying with the institutional indicator on encumbrances transferred to next year.

Monthly staff meetings are held with a formal agenda and minutes (decision register) of the previous meeting. A standing item on the agendas of these meetings is the financial record of the Unit’s expenses, management of financial resources, etc. The UQP has spent 100% of its budget for 2012.

d) Provide effective leadership and management of infrastructural resources of the Unit to optimise the Unit’s core functions.

On-going. This is also a standing item on the UQP agendas for the monthly meetings.

e) Develop a culture of performance by implementing the UJ Performance Contract system in the Unit.

Performance contracts have been drawn up, signed and submitted to HR. All the staff members have submitted progress reports which were discussed to monitor progress within the Unit.

f) Oversee and contribute to activities that address the professional development, wellness and overall resilience of the UQP staff.

g) Increase participation in cultural integration activities to at least two (institutional/ UQP) events.

(i) See 5.1 below for a list of these staff development opportunities for UQP staff members.

(ii) Wellness and transformation activities have been combined and a combined program for UQP and DIPEM developed and approved by the UQP. These include: - celebrations (birthdays, weddings, engagements, etc.) - celebration of St Valentine’s Day, St Patrick’s Day, etc. - cultural exchanges, (know your colleague better), etc. - ad hoc lunches, etc. as deemed necessary for morale boosting.

13

h) Establish an open and conducive climate, e.g. via periodic brainstorming and self-reflection sessions.

Three break-away sessions have been conducted: (i) A planning session on 27 February 2012 (UQP goals

for 2012, individual performance contracts, etc.). (ii) On 22 March a reflection on the UQP business

processes (w.r.t. the different kinds of quality reviews) with special reference to the key elements for UQP quality checks (i.e. the reliability of the process).

(iii) In June a reflection session was held to focus on a number of UQP functions, namely the evaluation questionnaire to faculties and S & S units after a quality review has been conducted and the development of guidelines for the review of processes underpinning research master’s and doctoral programmes.

i) Liaise with partners in the support sector of the University and external role players.

(i) Closer collaboration with DIPEM on the alignment of Category B programmes and the quality reviews of these programmes.

(ii) Regular meetings with the ED: ADS, the Director: DIPEM and the Director: Curriculum Development in ADS on programme quality matters.

(iii) Meetings with ADC staff on service modules.

j) Oversee and guide the development and regular updating of a website for the UQP.

A staff member in the UQP has taken on this responsibility. An outline has been developed and all the staff members are involved in providing contents for the UQP website.

k) Oversee and support the development and regular updating of a tracking system for the UQP.

One UQP staff member is responsible for the development and management of the UQP database. All staff members are responsible for the regular updating of the database. This is an on-going process and also formally done during UQP monthly meetings.

l) Oversee the management of the student assistants in UQP.

One staff member in the UQP has taken on this responsibility. See staff organogram below.

5. RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

5.1 Human Resources

The UQP consists of five staff members and two student assistants. All five staff members have permanent appointments.

14

Figure: UQP organogram

As far as gender is concerned, the UQP staff component (including student-assistants) consists of: Males: 2 (29%) Females: 5 (71%). In terms of race, the staff component consists of:

REGISTRAR

UNIT FOR QUALITY PROMOTION

HEAD: UQP

Prof Hester Geyser

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY

Ms Violet Pienaar

COORDINATOR: QUALITY PROMOTION

Mr Mthu Vongo

COORDINATOR: QUALITY PROMOTION

Ms Ina Pretorius

FACILITATOR: QUALITY PROMOTION

Ms Dragana Weistra

STUDENT ASSISTANTS

Ms Zanele Mtwecu

Ms Andile Ngobese

15

African: 1 (14%) White: 6 (86%).

UQP attended the following UJ staff development opportunities:

(i) The ‘326 Workshop’ presented by Dr Pieter Kitshoff (on Monday 19 March, STH Auditorium, APB) on the topic “Prevent Conflict and Stress and Apply the Laws of Agreement in your Personal and Organisational space”.

(ii) A one day workshop presented by Mr Davide Zaccariello (Founder of Poxibilita in Italy) on “Responsible Conversation: From Re-active to Re-directive” (on Monday 26 March 2012, Conference room C, Madibeng).

The UQP organises regular in-house capacity development opportunities for its own staff. The following opportunities have been attended:

(i) Advanced MS Word referencing skills.

(ii) Research project on the value added by quality reviews (including the development of interview questions, etc.).

(iii) Discussions of the UQP research report on faculty quality management at UJ w.r.t the follow-up activities.

(iv) An information session on the standards development project by the CHE.

Development opportunities external to the UJ were also utilised. See Stakeholder Engagement (at national level) below.

5.2 Financial Management

The DIPQP budget for 2012 consisted of three sections, i.e. a budget for the two units (i.e. UQP and UIRDS) and a central DIPQP budget. The central DIPQP budget was subdivided (50:50) between UQP and UIRDS (now part of DIPEM) with the understanding that additional funding could be transferred from one unit to the other as needed. A new cost centre has been created for UQP and the money transferred from DIPQP central to UQP.

The DIPQP research fund has been subdivided and a new research fund for UQP has been established.

In UQP, the secretary, Ms Violet Pienaar, provides support w.r.t. procurement, payments, and related financial transactions.

The submitted budget for 2013 was approved.

16

6. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

6.1 National Involvement

National engagement in 2012 includes attendance of/visits to:

(i) Other universities, e.g. TUT and UP.

(ii) A small inter-institutional quality discussion forum (the Garmin Group).

(iii) Two CHE Quality Assurance Forums.

(iv) A meeting between the HEQC and the UJ senior management to discuss the UJ

Quality Improvement Plan and Progress Report.

(v) HESA meeting in July.

(vi) SAAIR Quality Institute at Unisa. UQP presented two papers.

(vii) SAAIR Forum in Bloemfontein. UQP presented a workshop and a paper.

6.2 Internal Engagement

Within UJ, staff members of UQP were involved in the following engagement activities:

(i) Two Quality Discussion Forums were held during which a number of quality

matters were discussed with the quality representatives of faculties.

(ii) A Quality Discussion Forum for service and support divisions was established.

(iii) A series of meetings with ADC staff on matters of common interest was

conducted.

(iv) UQP members serve on a number of UJ committees, task teams and working

groups such as the STLC, the PWG, CEAB, the RPL working group and the WIL

working group.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

The use of paperless meetings has been cascaded down within the institution and UQP

staff members are being encouraged to implement paperless meetings.

Environmental sustainability efforts include full support of UJ’s waste management and

recycling initiatives by recycling paper, limiting printing to both sides and switching off

lights at night.

17

8. LEADERSHIP FOOTPRINT

Internally, the UQP provides leadership/expertise in a number of areas, such as:

(i) The development of the document, Quality management of Continuing and

Professional Development Programmes in collaboration with a staff member from

DIPEM.

(ii) A set of guidelines for academics/staff on the implementation of RPL in faculties.

(iii) The development of a framework for student engagement in quality promotion (in

process).

(iv) The development (in consultation with UJ staff members) of the UJ Progress

Report (in response to the UJ Improvement Plan) and the identification of follow-

up activities.

(v) Development of a proposal for faculty reviews, i.e. Scope and nature of faculty

reviews, submitted to the MEC (23 October 2012) for approval.

9. CONCLUSION AND THE WAY FORWARD

The flexibility of the UJ Quality Plan, combined with the decision to review all

programmes by 2015, poses an on-going challenge to the UQP: customising support for

the different kinds of reviews (e.g. module reviews, combined programme and

departmental reviews, non-subsidised programmes, etc.) and keeping track of the

progress in faculties and in the S & S divisions are on-going challenges. The UQP

remains responsible for the custodianship of the quality review processes. Regular

communication with the faculties, more specifically HoDs, as a way to address this

concern, was initiated in 2012 and must be continued and extended in 2013.

The number of programme reviews (i.e. to meet the target of reviewing all programmes

by 2015) in 2013 has to be increased. Reporting on institutional trends, as identified in

the programme reviews conducted in 2012, must also be addressed in 2013.

---oOo---