Contacts
Curriculum and Policy Team,
Division of the Academic Registrar,
DVC (Education and Students)
This page sets out resources and tools to help and guide completion of course reviews, including timelines, forums, forms and checklists.
The Course Review and Professional Accreditation Key Dates represent the last date opportunity for completing specific actions required for course reviews and professional accreditation. These deadlines ensure accurate reporting and support forward planning.
They have been carefully aligned with all internal requirements, including those impacting the course review schedule and reporting obligations to University governance and Senate, where applicable.
| Course Review Timelines | Decision Paper | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Faculty or University School Board |
Curriculum and Quality Team, Division of Academic Registrar |
Academic Quality Committee |
Submit an amendment to course review schedule (defer or bring forward a review) |
By UGO due date, absolute latest by 03 August 2026 |
N/A |
Paper due: Mtg: 11 August 2026 |
Submit a request to amend and/or create a course review bundle |
By UGO due date, absolute latest by 03 August 2026
|
N/A |
Paper due: Mtg: 11 August 2026 |
Submit a request to align course review to professional/external processes NB: Professional mapping matrix to be submitted as part of request |
By UGO due date, absolute latest by 03 August 2026 |
N/A |
Paper due: Mtg: 11 August 2026 |
Submit request to delay course reviews and to receive conditional course accreditation |
End April – early May 2026 |
The C&Q team (DAR) will refer the request to the DVC (Education and Students) and chairs the AB And AQC for review and recommendation |
Faculty submit paper to next available AQC meeting |
| Course Reviews and Professional Accreditation Reporting | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Faculty or University School Board |
Curriculum and Quality Team, Division of Academic Registrar |
Academic Quality Committee |
UE |
Provide professional (re)-accreditation report and outcome documentation |
Next available meeting |
On reception |
Next available meeting (for noting) |
N/A unless escalated by AQC |
Yearly finalisation of updates to course review recommendations status and narrative updates; Obtain Dean’s approval for Closed recommendation NB: Updates should be made regularly throughout the year |
N/A |
20 March 2026 |
Report compiled by C&Q (DAR) Team and submitted to 05 May 2026 meeting |
N/A |
Bi-annual finalisation of updates to the professional accreditation status and milestones meeting accreditation conditions NB: Updates should be made regularly throughout the year |
N/A |
20 March 2026 and |
Paper due: Paper due: |
Reports compiled by C&Q (DAR) Team and submitted to 07 May 2026 meeting; and 13 October 2026 meeting |
Program Directors who are leading comprehensive and/or combined reviews are invited to a Zoom information session with the Chair of the University's Academic Quality Committee about the course review process.
This session will explain the expectations of course review Chairs, how to form a panel, considerations for external benchmarking and including students, and tips for writing recommendations. It will also provide opportunities to answer questions about the process.
There will be two sessions, as below, both covering the same content.
Date |
Time |
Venue |
Monday, 30 March 2026 |
2pm-3pm |
Zoom event |
Monday, 13 April 2026 (Repeat) |
2pm-3pm |
Zoom event |
If you are a Program Director, and would like to attend the AQC Chair's Roadshow, please contact [email protected]
The Quality Community of Practice (QCoP) brings together professional staff to share insights, challenges, and best practices in coordinating and supporting course reviews across the University of Sydney.
During its two annual meetings, members engage in collaborative discussions on improving review processes, aligning with institutional standards, and leveraging tools and data for quality assurance.
These sessions foster peer learning, problem-solving, and the development of practical strategies that enhance consistency and impact across programs.
Date |
Time |
Venue |
Monday, 06 July 2026 |
10am – 12pm |
F23, Michael Spence Building Function Room 501 |
Thursday, 12 November 2026 |
10am-12pm |
F23, Michael Spence Building Function Room 501 |
If you would like to attend the Quality Community of Practice meetings or suggest topics for discussion, please contact [email protected]
This information is intended as a guide/checklist for faculties Curriculum and Quality teams to ensure that all course reviews include all relevant attachments, evaluate alignment with regulatory frameworks and meet HESF standards. The checklist should be used to guide the review of the report prior to submission to governance committees.
Faculties are also encouraged to email draft and finalised review reports to the Curriculum and Quality Team for feedback and advice prior to submission to governance committees.
**Note that this document is modelled on the Comprehensive Course Review Form, however, some aspects are also applicable to Combined Course Reviews and Suspended and Discontinued Course Review.
| Item/Select | Checklist |
|---|---|
| AQC Coversheet | □ Check the listed courses against the Course Review schedule to ensure that they have all been captured. □ Ensure that the listed next review date is within 5-year allowable cycle. Calculate this by adding 5 years to the AQC approval date (e.g. May 2025 – next cycle 2030). |
| Comprehensive Course Review Form | □ Check that the most recent version of the Comprehensive Course Review Form is used. □ Note that faculties can use the previous version of the template if they had significantly progressed their review by the time the new version was released. Faculty to check with Curriculum and Policy Team, DAR if needed. □ Ensure that the responsible faculty Curriculum Managers (or delegate) details are listed. □ Ensure that the responsible Program Director/s details are listed. |
| Part 1 Course Details |
|---|
1.1 Course Names and 1.2 Course codes |
□ Check the listed courses against the Course Review schedule to ensure that they have all been captured. |
1.3. Credit point value |
□ Check credit point value against latest course resolutions and UoS table |
1.4 CRICOS Course Code |
□ Check CRICOS course code against CRICOS register |
1.5 Combined degree type |
□ If the degree in question is a combined degree, faculties may choose to use the combined degree course review form. If using this form ensure that the full CCRs from both degrees are included as part of your submission. □ Check that one of the 3 options are selected. |
1.6 Honours type |
□ Check that one of the 3 options are selected. |
1.7 Course AQF Level |
□ Check if the right AQF level was nominated. □ Check against AQF Framework Document. |
1.8 List of admission requirements for the course |
□ Check against course resolutions. □ Check against Academic Board admission standards and guidelines (e.g. Admission Prerequisite Standards, Course Prerequisites, Assumed Knowledge, Recommended Studies and Special Entry Requirements, English Language Proficiency Tables etc). |
1.9 Study mode |
□ Check that one of the 3 options are selected and cross checked against Sydney Courses. |
1.10 Mode of Delivery |
□ If online 100% selected, ensure that it’s not open to international student visa holders. □ Check with Sydney Courses info for accuracy. |
1.11 Does the course require work-integrated learning or internships? |
□ If Yes, refer to CRICOS register and check:
Refer to section 5.4 and 5.6 of the review template to see if there are mentions of this in the review. Are more (or less) hours being taught in practice? Note: if the course is open to international students and if work-based WIL is not a mandatory part of the course (and listed as mandatory in CRICOS) then, any hours of work-based WIL completed during semester sessions will count towards their 48 hour per fortnight work cap. |
1.12a & 1.12b Does the course require/allow for overseas study? |
□ If Yes, ensure that: · Refer to section 5.4 and 5.6 of the review template to see if there are mentions of this in the review. |
1.13 Does the course provide entry to a profession i.e. need professional accreditation |
□ If Yes, ensure that:
It is noted in the review what has been accredited and what has not been accredited - refer to section 4.2(b) of the review template. |
1.14 Is this course a joint award delivered with partner/s? |
□ If Yes, ensure that:
|
1.15 Is this course delivered with articulation agreements/pathways |
□ If Yes, ensure that:
|
| Part 2: Review Details |
|---|
2.1 Review Panel membership |
□ Ensure that course review panels are composed of at least six members as per clause 2.9 of the Academic Quality Assurance Procedures 2026. □ Note: For all professionally accredited courses for which the accreditation or reaccreditation has been granted by the professional body within the last 12 months, external panel membership requirement can be waived, provided that the details and credentials of the expert(s) consulted are submitted within this report. Check if report was submitted along with this CCR. |
2.2 Summary of Consultation |
□ Ensure that all review panel meetings are noted. □ Ensure that all relevant teams were consulted as part of the drafting and finalisation of the recommendations and that these are logged. |
| Part 3: Recommendations and Implementation |
|---|
3.1 Recommendations |
□ List no more than 10 recommendations (fewer is acceptable). □ Recommendations should adhere to the following principles.
□ Recommendations should be based on the data in the report. □ Recommendations should not focus on student recruitment but more on the teaching and pedagogical quality of the course. □ Ensure that in section 2.2 of the review template there is a note of when relevant teams were consulted as part of the drafting and finalisation of the recommendations. □ Recommendations relating to Curriculum Management and Quality need to be reasonable and within governance timelines (e.g. Curriculum Amendments, UoS development etc). |
3.2 Implementation Plan |
□ Recommendations numbered clearly with a relevant responsible delegate. Use position titles, do not use names to identify the responsible party. □ Implementation date – faculties have 12-36 months to implement approved recommendations. □ Do not list any recommendations with an ongoing/BAU Implementation date. All due dates must be repented as the final date of implementation (ie. dd Month yyyy) |
3.3 Summary of Previous Review |
□ If the course was previously reviewed, refer to the course review recommendations spreadsheet to complete this question. |
| Part 4: Academic Quality |
|---|
□ Throughout this section ensure that the course is benchmarked against at least 3-5 comparable degrees and that the Graduate Qualities, Course Learning Outcomes, Admissions criteria, methods of assessments etc. of the course in question are compared and evaluated against the chosen competitor/institutions. Other benchmarking measures might also be Professional Accreditation Reports, informal benchmarking by program directors, Unit of Study Survey, Student Experience Survey, Teaching Quality Scale & Graduate Outcomes Survey. |
4.1 Academic objectives and Course Learning Outcomes |
□ A list of CLOs and mapping to AQF level provided. □ Check to see if it has been appropriately mapped to AQF or if CLOs need further refinements. Use AQF Framework Document □ Crosscheck volume of learning of course against AQF Framework Document. □ Refer to Handbook resolutions/UoS table for Volume of Learning. |
4.2 Course Structure/Design |
□ Check if course structure is compliant with Coursework Policy 2021 and AQF Framework Document.
□ Does the course structure meet required volume of learning for AQF as per AQF Framework Document? □ Note: Generally, the maximum number of student hours per year for a full time (24cp) student is 600hrs. Approx. 25hrs per 1cp (150hrs per 6cp). □ Where professionally accredited, ensure that:
|
4.4 Assessment procedures, Volume of Learning and Learning outcomes |
□ Check if assessment plan is compliant with principles in Coursework Policy 2021. □ Check volume of learning and learning outcomes are compliant against AQF requirements using AQF Framework Document and Coursework Policy 2021. □ Check if assessment framework and use of generative AI is compliant with Assessment Procedures 2024 framework. |
4.5 Admission pathways |
□ Faculty to provide admission criteria for course. □ Check admissions criteria listed is most up to date by referring to Sydney Courses and Handbook. □ Check suitability of admissions criteria against AQF requirements using AQF Framework Document and Coursework Policy 2021. |
| Part 5: Staffing, facilities and infrastructure |
|---|
| □ Check whether the staffing levels and qualifications of teaching staff and teachers are in alignment with Section 3.2 of the Higher Education Standards Framework (threshold Standards) 2021 and appropriate for the course level and discipline. |
Part 6: Course re-accreditation outcome |
|
|---|---|
6.1 Faculty Board Recommendation |
□ Ensure that you complete a table for each course included in this comprehensive course review. E.g. if reviewing a Master’s program with embedded degrees, complete a separate table for each degree. |
6.2 Dean's Approval |
□ Dean’s signature obtained and dated. |
Curriculum and Policy Team,
Division of the Academic Registrar,
DVC (Education and Students)
Curriculum and Policy Team,
Division of the Academic Registrar,
DVC (Education and Students)