Online Program Planning, Development Approval and Review Project WORKSHOP

1. Online Program Planning, Development Approval and Review ProjectWORKSHOP

2. Outline the background to the project Communicate the objectives, expected outcomes and the benefits of the project Discuss the format of the Full Program Proposal Discuss the design of the new web based system and supporting business processes Identify the impacts and changes resulting from this project and the new system Purpose of the Workshop

3. Structure of the Workshop

4. Outcomes from the Workshop • A shared understanding about the objectives and the scale of the OPPDAR Project • Preparedness to establish a dialogue within your school about the implications of the project, its advantages and some of the trade-offs. • Awareness of concerns, benefits, impacts for both Project members and stakeholders. • Readiness to consider how your school/section will utilise the new system and its involvement in the process of developing, reviewing & approving programs.

5. Background to the OPPDAR Project • What initiated this Project? • Phillips KPA Review • Recommendations • Reviews of business processes, forms and policies. • Project Objectives

6. Aims and Benefits • Focused on curriculum design, development & review • Provide a repository for all program curriculum and ensures one authoritative source of program information. • Facilitate knowledge management as comments and decisions can be recorded centrally against a proposal • Map courses to programs in a structured format to easily identify programs impacted by changes to courses. • Improved tracking and reporting of program approvals • More efficient communication as decisions communicated immediately • Reduced timeframes in publishing to the web

7. Full Program Proposal • Rationale behind the new design • Concept of the living document and curriculum design • Integration of all documents into a single definitive source • Improved structure of document to capture curriculum design ideals / improve academic rigor / assist with development

8. Full Program Proposal • Rationale continued… • Integration with university’s PIRI model of QA/QE • Greater efficiency of document handling • Creation of a data source for use in a range of follow-up QA/QE • Automatic cross-population of data to other processes/ systems

9. Full Program Proposal • Result • Amalgamation of the New Submission, Major change, Minor Change and Special Purpose Submission; Concept of the living document; New sections, deleted sections, changed sections etc …

10. Questions

11. Online Program Management System • Objective:To deliver a web based system that supports the business processes surrounding the initiation, development, approval, publication and quality assurance of program information while promoting effective and efficient communication.

12. Program Development and Approval Process • Changes include: • Tools used to develop proposals and carry out the process • The facilities for providing and recording feedback • How proposals are submitted • How decisions are recorded and communicated • How program proposal information is transferred to other systems

13. Online Program Management System • Key Components: • Web based program proposal templates facilitate data entry and consistency in format and information • Workflow enabled system triggers emails on the submission of a proposal and when recording an approval decision • Track and view proposals being developed by own team and teams from other Groups and schools • Automatic publication of program information to the Program Catalogue

14. Look of the Online Program Management System The Program Management system is a web based, workflow enabled system that will be accessible to staff via the Griffith Portal.

15. Afternoon Tea and Stretch

16. Discussion Group exercise Purpose • To gather feedback on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the new system and process Structure • Small group ‘brainstorming’ session. • Summary of small group feedback.

17. Allison Vial, PROJ Duncan Nulty, PROJ Sharon Clifford, SEC Dr Don Lebler (QCGU), AEL Dr Greg Reddan , HTH Assoc Prof Jayne Clapton , HTH Prof Nerida Smith , HTH Prof. Bharat Patel, SEET Assoc Prof Peter Bernus, SEET Rachel Kearins , BUS Helen Mierzwa , BUS Barbara Noller, HTH Rakiza Hussein , SEET Denise Emson, HTH Elizabeth Hewitt , SEET Robyn Rose, SEC Jill Misson, SEC Kim Cotterell, BUS Elisa Colebrook, UA Ross Shaw, ER Di Selzer, FLAS Barrie O'Connor, PROJ - AEL Susan McPaul, GGRS Karen van Haeringen, PROJ Kim Hillier, SEC Sally Borbasi, PROJ Prof Nick Buys, HTH Dr Dwight Zakus, BUS Ms Christine Randall , HTH Prof Denis Crane , SEET Dr Bruce Rowlands, SEET Dr Alison Ruth, BUS Naomi Gill , BUS Robyn Wells, BUS Jessica Wightley , BUS Robin Callander, HTH Regina Tucker, HTH Angela Dickson, SEET Kate Rees, SEC Michael Holder, GI Cathy McGrath, UA Emma Lord, UA Jenny Lock, GGRS Elizabeth O'Brien, SEC Bruce Callow , PROJ Discussion Groups

18. The next steps • Start to consider any changes to your current processes. • Seek the views of colleagues within your School. • Consultation meetings to work with trial participants. • Keep an eye on the OPPDAR project website http://www.griffith.edu.au/projects/online-program-development-project • Further feedback: Please provide further feedback on any aspect of the project to Allison by phone (ext 56440) or via email to <a.vial@griffith.edu.au>.

19. Thank you

20. Project Reference Group • Ms Elisa Colebrook • Ms Kim Cotterell • Mr Dave Edwards • Ms Emma Lord • Ms Cathy McGrath • Dr Duncan Nulty • Assoc Prof Barrie O’Connor • Professor Sally Borbasi • Karen van Haeringen • Mr Kevin Ashford-Rowe • Dr Mark Brimble • Ms Michele Britton • Mr Bruce Callow • Ms Sharon Clifford