Program Monitoring and Review

The University is committed to annual evidence-based monitoring and periodic review of its educational provision. The implementation of these exercises and follow-up on the outcomes are overseen by the Senate Committee on Teaching and Learning Quality (CTLQ), which has been mandated to provide oversight of the external review of taught programs, including professional accreditation, and monitoring the implementation of review outcomes.  The CTLQ makes references to the agreed core principles in assessing arrangements for program reviews.

Annual reporting on teaching and learning activities by departments and Schools provides the backbone of the University’s arrangements for monitoring the quality of teaching and learning.

Periodic review of programs is based on agreed core principles, including a requirement for external input to facilitate the international benchmarking of curricula and academic standards.

Details of these arrangements can be accessed below:

• Annual Reports on Teaching & Learning Quality
• Undergraduate Program Review
• Taught Postgraduate Program Review

At the institutional level, the periodic review of undergraduate education is linked to the triennial presentation to the UGC of the Planning Exercise Proposal (PEP) [formerly the Academic Development Proposal (ADP)]. This review is broad in scope, taking into account the student experience as well as the academic curriculum. External benchmarks are an important feature of the process and external peers and stakeholders are extensively involved.

The periodic review of undergraduate education at the program level is chiefly the work of Schools/IPO. In establishing arrangements for review, Schools/IPO make reference to agreed core principles:

• Production of a self-evaluation document based on an internal review by those responsible for the educational provision under review, in consultation with the faculty/course instructors;
• Review of the self-evaluation and other relevant documentation by an external review panel;
• A visit to the University by the external review panel, to meet staff and students, and to observe facilities and learning resources;
• Production of a report with input from the external panel, including confirmation that the curriculum and academic standards meet international benchmarks, and recommendations for enhancement with an action plan;
• A clear process for overseeing the implementation of action plans.

The following provides an introduction to School/IPO arrangements for the periodic review of undergraduate provision.

School of Science (SSCI): The School of Science has a process of External Undergraduate Education Advising (UGEA). One or more External Advisors (who are subject specialists) visit each of the School’s Departments/Division approximately every four years. The School’s Departments/Division receive reports from their Advisors, which are then considered by the School’s Quality Assurance Committee. Departments/Division and the School then produce action plans to take forward any recommendations.

School of Engineering (SENG): Undergraduate provision is periodically accredited by the Hong Kong Institute of Engineers (HKIE). Following the accreditation visit, the School prepares an action plan to take forward the recommendations of the Accreditation Report. The HKIE approach to accreditation is increasingly oriented to the establishment of relevant learning outcomes and measures to evaluate the success of programs in achieving these outcomes for students.

School of Business and Management (SBM): The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) and the EFMD Quality Improvement System (EQUIS) undertake periodic accreditation of the School’s undergraduate, taught postgraduate and research postgraduate provision. The School prepares progress reports to address recommendations strategically.

School of Humanities and Social Science (SHSS): International Advisory Committees at the School and Divisional levels provide expert advice on strategic planning, which includes faculty, research, and curricular development. In September 2020, SOSC commissioned a (virtual) external review of its new undergraduate major in Quantitative Social Analysis to coincide with the fourth year of its program.  The Global China Studies program will be subject to an external review in 2022. In addition to external reviews, the undergraduate programs conduct annual focus groups with students to ensure timely responses to teaching and learning issues. Student Feedback Questionnaires are reviewed each semester to identify areas for improvement in required courses.

Interdisciplinary Programs Office (IPO): IPO’s academic and industry advisory committees, from both local and overseas, provide independent expert advice on interdisciplinary curricula, research strategic directions and overall objectives.  Individual programs of IPO conduct program-level reviews regularly, with reference to the core principles agreed by the CTLQ.  Feedback has been taken seriously and put into action to improve teaching and learning quality for students. IPO conducts School-level External Reviews as well as Internal Reviews on all undergraduate, postgraduate and research programs of its divisions and programs.  The last visits of external and internal review were held in April and Summer of 2019, respectively. At program level, the Dual Degree Program in Technology and Management (DDP)’s Industrial Advisory Board meet and review the program every year.  DDP’s BEng and BBA degrees are accredited via SENG and SBM, respectively by the Hong Kong Institution of Engineers (HKIE) and the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB).  The BSc in Environment and Management Technology (EVMT) is regularly reviewed for accreditation by the Hong Kong Institute of Qualified Environmental Professionals Limited (HKIQEP). The BSc in Individualized Interdisciplinary Major program (IIM), newly established in 2016/17, is forming its advisory board and planning a review in 2021/2022.

Undergraduate Common Core: Quality assurance activities for the undergraduate common core program were agreed in 2013, including the establishment of an Advisory Board for the Undergraduate Common Core Program (ABCCP). ABCCP reports are considered by the Committee on Undergraduate Core Education (CUCE), which agrees an action plan to take forward the Board’s recommendations. 

Taught postgraduate programs are reviewed every five years following a standard model, including: internal self-evaluation; review of documents and a visit by a qualified external panel; preparation of a report to the relevant Dean; and arrangements for follow-up on action plans developed through the review process. Details are provided below:

Taught Postgraduate Program Review Reports and Schedule: 2014-2023