Curriculum Change Procedures

---

Explanatory Note: The University’s Institutional Quality Assurance Process is guided by several policy instruments. The Institutional Quality Assurance Process Policy establishes the overall authorities involved in the development, modification, review and closure of programs.

It is supported by detailed procedures setting out the process for:

• Planning and establishing a new program 
• Modifying an existing program 
• Reviewing and auditing programs on a regular basis 
• Closing a program 

The University’s Centre for Institutional Quality Enhancement provides support, templates and additional resources regarding the institutional quality assurance process.

---

 

Purpose

The purpose of these Procedures is to establish a consistent process for defining and documenting changes to courses and programs that will facilitate their review and approval under the provincial quality assurance framework.

Definitions

For the purposes of these Procedures the definitions in the Policy apply.

Scope and authority

These procedures apply to the full range of for-academic-credit[1] curricular, that is, leading to credit toward degree and diploma programs, and programmatic endeavours at both the graduate and undergraduate levels, including Micro-credentials,  whether offered in full, in part, or conjointly by any institutions federated or affiliated with the University. It also applies to Programs offered in partnership, collaboration, or other such arrangement with other post-secondary institutions including colleges, universities, or other institutes.

The Provost and Vice-President, Academic, or successor thereof, is the Policy Owner and is responsible for overseeing the implementation, administration, and interpretation of these Procedures.

Procedures

Modifications to existing Programs range from changes to individual courses and curricular offerings, through minor adjustments to programs and regulations, to major modifications, such as the introduction of new specializations and fields. The Centre for Institutional Quality Enhancement will provide access to an electronic workflow tracking system and repository for curricular changes. Individuals may use the templates provided at www.ontariotechu.ca/ciqe as a guide to assist in the planning of the changes prior to creating formal electronic proposals for approval in the electronic system.

Minor Curricular Changes

1. The following Minor Curricular Changes fall under the purview of the relevant Faculty(ies) and will be approved at the Faculty Council (s). Approved changes must be reported to the appropriate standing committee of Academic Council (USC or GSC) for information using the appropriate electronic proposal by the end of January each year for implementation in the upcoming Academic Calendar.

   • The creation and closure of for-academic-credit courses

   • Changes to for-academic-credit courses, including:

     • course titles, course descriptions, course numbers, credit hours, grade mode, total contact hours, prerequisites, co-requisites, cross-listed courses, credit restrictions and/or credit exclusions, course learning outcomes, core competencies, and teaching and assessment methods

   • The addition or deletion of a lecture, lab, tutorial or other course component

2. Consultation with other Faculty Councils is required if the course being modified is core to another program. Consultation, in accordance with the current procedures for Indigenous consultation, is required if the new course or course being modified has or will contain Indigenous content.

3. Minor Curricular Changes not listed in Section 5.1 are the responsibility of the Faculty Council(s) in accordance with any relevant policies and procedures.

   1. Changes or additions to the mode of delivery (in-person, online, hybrid)  of a course must be submitted using the appropriate electronic proposal to update the official course record.

Minor Program Adjustments

1. Minor Program Adjustments will include a full electronic proposal brief and are submitted to the appropriate standing committee of Academic Council for approval. Minor Program Adjustments include:

   • Editorial changes to degree requirements, program learning outcomes, or core competencies which may include those completed as a result of a cyclical review

   • New academic requirements or changes to existing requirements, including the addition or deletion of required courses

   • The introduction of the option to complete a portion or portions of an existing program to receive a for-academic-credit Micro-credential

   • The creation of a new, stand-alone, for-academic-credit Micro-credential related to the Program

   • The creation of a new Minor program where an existing Major already exists

   • A change in the name of a Diploma, Major, or Program Component (e.g. Minor, Specialization, or Field) that does not result in a change to the degree designation or the Program Learning Outcomes

   • For clarity, changes to degree requirements will be defined as Minor Program Adjustments when the introduction, deletion, or modification of courses or requirements equals no more than one-third of the total course credit hours of the Program.

2. Minor Program Adjustments must be presented directly to the USC or GSC for consideration and approval following their recommendation by Faculty Council. Any changes must receive USC or GSC approval prior to their implementation and inclusion in the academic calendars.  The outcome is subsequently reported to Academic Council for information.  

   1. To be included in the academic calendars for the subsequent academic year, proposals must be received by USC or GSC no later than the end of January. 

   2. Proposals that include the creation or introduction of a Micro-credential will also be reported to the appropriate micro-credential committee. Approved Micro-credentials will be submitted to the Ministry for designation as eligible for Ontario Student Assistance Program funding, if applicable.

3. Minor Program Adjustment proposal briefs must minimally include the following information:

   1. A summary of the proposed change, setting out the rationale and context for it, including any consideration of the principles of equity, diversity, inclusion, and decolonization.

   2. A description of the ways in which the proposed change will enhance the academic opportunities for students, or the issues or challenges that the proposed change are intended to address.

   3. An account of the process of consultation with other units and measures taken to minimize the impact of the change on students if the proposed change involves students/faculty from other programs or courses. An account of the process of consultation related to Indigenous content is required if the proposed change has or will contain Indigenous content.

   4. A timeline for the implementation of the proposed change and transition plan for current students if applicable.

   5. An analysis of the resource and enrolment implications, including support for any proposed online or hybrid delivery.

   6. Calendar copy and program maps for the proposed change that clearly highlight the revisions to be made to the existing curriculum.

   7. Completed proposals for all new courses and changes to existing courses that result from the change.

Major Program Modifications

1. The Quality Council defines Major Program Modifications as “significant changes” to existing academic programs where “the impact on the quality of the program and degree of significance can be measured qualitatively and/or quantitatively.” These include:

   • Requirements that differ significantly from those existing at the time of the previous cyclical program review or at the time the program was first approved

   • Significant changes to the learning outcomes

   • Significant changes to the faculty engaged in delivering the program and/or to the essential physical resources as may occur, for example, where there have been changes to the existing mode(s) of delivery (e.g., different campus, online delivery, inter-institutional collaboration)
     
     Examples from the Quality Council are provided in the Quality Assurance Guide.
     
     For greater clarity, in the Ontario Tech context, the following examples illustrate changes that normally constitute a significant change and would therefore be considered a Major Program Modification:
     

   • Significant changes to the academic requirements and program content, including the introduction, deletion, or permanent modification of courses or requirements that equals more than one-third of the total credit hours of the Program, but that do not meet the threshold for a new Program

   • Significant changes to one or more of the program learning outcomes that alter the meaning of the learning outcome(s) that do not, however, meet the threshold of a ‘new Program’; changes to the course configuration that impact the learning outcomes (e.g. a course that meets a learning outcome is moved to the list of electives)

   • The merger of two related Programs in the absence of any other significant changes (e.g., no changes to the degree designation, learning outcomes, etc. that may meet the threshold for a New Program)

   • New formal pathways options, i.e. bridging or advanced entry, to or from another college or university

   • Significant change in the laboratory time of an undergraduate Program

   • The introduction or deletion of an undergraduate thesis or capstone project

   • The introduction or deletion of a Program-level work experience, cooperative education, internship, practicum, or portfolio

   • At the master’s level, the introduction or deletion of a research project, research essay or thesis option, course-only option, co-operative education, internship, or practicum option

   • The creation or deletion of a Type 1 Graduate Diploma

   • The addition of a single new field to an existing graduate program. Note that universities are not required to declare fields for either master’s or doctoral programs. Note also that the creation of more than one field at one point in time or over subsequent years may need to go through the New Program Expedited Protocol

   • The creation or deletion of a minor where no corresponding Major exists

   • Any change to or the addition or deletion of requirements for graduate program candidacy examinations, field studies, residency requirements, and/or comprehensive examinations

   • Significant changes to the Program’s delivery, including:

     • Changes to the Faculty delivering the Program that alter the areas of research and teaching interests (e.g. a large proportion of the faculty retires; new hires)

     • A change in the language of Program delivery

     • The introduction of inter-institutional collaboration or the establishment of an existing Program at another institution or location, including new dual Degree options

     • To the mode of delivery of the Program (e.g. offering an existing Program substantially online where it had previously been offered in face-to-face mode, or vice versa; the creation of multi-modal options) that meaningfully affects the student experience

     • Change to, or add, full- or part-time program options where one did not previously exist

     • Changes to the essential resources, where these changes impair the delivery of the Program

     • Change in the degree designation; change in the name of a Major or Program Component (e.g. Specialization, Minor, or Field), when this results in a change in learning outcomes
       
       Modifications that will result in a more substantial change to the Program’s nature and content will require review and approval in accordance with the New Program Procedure. The final determination of whether a Program modification constitutes a significant change or a new Program will rest with the Provost. The Quality Council has final authority to decide if a Major Program Modification constitutes a new program and, therefore, must follow the New Program Procedures.

2. Major Program Modifications will include full electronic proposals and must include evidence that appropriate consultation has taken place. Once proposals are approved by Faculty Council, they will be subject to review by the appropriate standing committee of Academic Council (USC or GSC). The standing committee will submit its recommendation for approval to the Academic Council for final review and approval. Major Program Modifications are reported annually to the Quality Council.

   1. To be included in the academic calendars for the subsequent academic year, Major Program Modifications must be received by USC/GSC no later than the last working day in December. 

3. Major Program Modification electronic proposals must minimally include the following:

   1. A brief background on the existing program and rationale for the modification, including any consideration of the principles of equity, diversity, inclusion, and decolonization.

   2. Overview of the modification, indicating the opportunities for graduates and evidence of fit with the mission, mandate and strategic plans of the University and the Faculty Description of how the new program component fits into the broader array of Program offerings, particularly areas of teaching and research strengths and complementary areas of study.

   3. A fully developed section outlining: any new or modified program learning outcomes; the alignment of the change with the program learning outcomes and the provincial degree level expectations and universal competencies; new or modified admission requirements; program structure Calendar copy and program maps, where relevant, for the new program component showing courses and/or research components offered each semester and indicating courses currently offered, new courses, and required courses provided by other units; the impact the modification/new component has on students and how it will improve the student experience; any experiential or other applied learning opportunities that are part of the new program component; and program content including course outlines, descriptions, modes of delivery and teaching methods, and assessment with a linkage between the course learning outcomes and the program learning outcomes.

   4. A list of required faculty members, including current core faculty and required new faculty; additional academic and non-academic human resources that may be required to launch and maintain the modifications; physical resource requirements, with how current facilities will be used and what, if any, new resources may be required; and for graduate Programs, any student support (funding) requirements.

   5. An outline of areas consulted, which must include an account of mandatory feedback from students and recent graduates, and the process of consultation regarding Indigenous content, where appropriate.

   6. A summary statement of funding required to support the Program and a statement of current resource availability.

   7. When changing the mode of delivery to online/hybrid for all or a significant portion of a Program, the following must also be addressed:

   8. Describe the adequacy of the technological platform to be used for online delivery

      • Describe how the quality of education will be maintained

      • Describe how the program objectives will be met

      • Describe how the program learning outcomes will be met

      • Describe the support services and training for teaching staff that will be made available

      • Describe the sufficiency and type of supports that will be available to students

Admissions Changes

1. Changes made exclusively to admission requirements in the absence of other program changes will proceed through the governance structure to various levels of approval based on the nature and impact of the change.

   1. Changes to admission requirements at the University level require final approval by Academic Council following recommendation by the USC/GSC. Changes of this nature are normally completed as a change to the relevant policy instrument.

   2. Changes to admission requirements at the Faculty level require approval by the USC/GSC and are reported for information to Academic Council; this update is generally completed as a Minor Program Adjustment.

   3. Changes to admission requirements at the individual program level are reported to the USC/GSC for information following approval by Faculty Council(s).
      
      All decisions concerning admissions made within the scope of existing requirements are considered administrative decisions and can be approved by the Registrar or designate in consultation with the Dean.

Quality Council Cyclical Audit

In accordance with the Quality Assurance Framework, curricular changes as outlined in these Procedures are not normally subject to the University’s Cyclical Audit.

Monitoring and review

This procedure will be reviewed as necessary and at least every three years. The Office of the Provost, through the Center for Institutional Quality Enhancement coordinates the day to day management of the quality assurance process, and works in collaboration with Deans and units to implement the procedures for developing and accessing academic programs. The Provost or successor thereof, is responsible to monitor and review this Policy.

Relevant legislation

This section intentionally left blank.

Related policies, procedures & documents

Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance - Quality Assurance Framework

Institutional Quality Assurance Policy

Program Nomenclature Directives

Protocols associated with consultation/development of Indigenous curriculum

Protocols associated with the development of Micro-credentials

 

 

[1] For-Academic-Credit is defined in the Policy on Micro-credentials and Continuous Learning Offerings.