A Quick Guide for AQ Staff : Using the C-CAP Administration Dashboard - C-CAP Embedding Phase

Tools

Macgregor, George (2012) A Quick Guide for AQ Staff : Using the C-CAP Administration Dashboard - C-CAP Embedding Phase. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.

[thumbnail of Macgregor-2013-quick-guide-for-AQ-staff-using-the-c-cap-administration-dashboard]
Preview
 Text. Filename: Macgregor_2013_quick_guide_for_AQ_staff_using_the_c_cap_administration_dashboard.pdf
Final Published Version
License: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 logo
Download (1MB)| Preview

Abstract

Whilst academics are at the centre of the curriculum design process, faculty academic quality (AQ) teams are at the centre of - and are critically important to - the approval process. AQ teams are singularly responsible for administrating and managing the curriculum approval process and therefore have responsibility for tracking, providing on-going feedback, controlling the status of proposals, assigning proposals for academic review, etc. Administering this functionality exposes AQ teams to an extra layer of C-CAP functionality. The back-end administration of the curriculum approval process via C-CAP is therefore mediated at a faculty level by AQ staff and is best understood, not through process diagrams, but by a star-shaped interpretation of faculty level approval processes. AQ teams govern or mediate key decision points during the approval process. Their centrality to the approval process and their influence on curriculum design (via academics) is such that they are the stakeholders above all others who interact with C-CAP the most and are the most exposed to its functionality and benefits. AQ teams are therefore at the centre of the star in Figure 1, which is part of the wider process surrounding curriculum design and approval. AQ teams were always central to faculty level approval processes but this centrality was never formalised in the previous state (i.e. before C-CAP) and, as a consequence, the approval process remained mysterious to many stakeholders. The development of C-CAP has changed this by making explicit a curriculum approval process that was hitherto mythic and plagued by tacit practice. This document provides guidance on using the C-CAP administration dashboard, the underlying approval workflows and also makes recommendations on how best to use C-CAP during the approval process and during Academic Committee. It should also be remembered that C-CAP covers only the curriculum design and approval process; there are a great many “off-line” processes and activities that AQ and faculty officers must undertake to ensure the successful delivery of a new class or course.

ORCID iDs

Macgregor, George ORCID logoORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8482-3973;
CORE (COnnecting REpositories)