Accessibility Skip to Global Navigation Skip to Local Navigation Skip to Content Skip to Search Skip to Site Map Menu

Health Sciences Workflow for Academic Proposal Development

Workflow for new (or substantially revised) academic paper or programme proposals in Health Sciences

The following workflow steps have been established to improve consultation in the development of new and substantially revised paper, programme, and regulation proposals. These steps also introduce the requirement to include more detailed information on paper/programme sustainability, alongside a strengthened emphasis on ensuring new developments are strategic and in the best interests of the Division.

Stage 1: Concept development

If you are considering developing a new paper, endorsement, or qualification, it is important to formally outline your proposal to the relevant board(s) through the pre-paper or indicative proposal forms:

Pre-paper or indicative forms

The first step is to clearly formulate the idea you are proposing so you can provide enough detail on the forms and during the consultation stage. A one-page summary document is recommended for preliminary consultation.

Preliminary discussion should occur within your department and school/faculty to ensure there is broad support from your internal colleagues and leadership.

Key things to consider during the concept phase include:

  • How would this proposal benefit the department/school/faculty?
  • Are there any opportunities for collaboration with other staff/departments/campuses?
  • Would this proposal be duplicating content covered in other papers or qualifications offered in the Division (on any campus)?
  • Does your department/school/faculty have the resources and demand to sustain this? (Evidence of sustainability will be required at a later stage)

New ideas need to clearly show how they align with the strategic direction of the department, school/faculty, Division and the wider University.

Division of Health Sciences Strategic Plan
University Strategic Direction

The strategic alignment section should also provide a brief analysis of national/international competitor demand to show how the proposed initiative will make a unique contribution within New Zealand's tertiary sector.

Where appropriate, proposals should also state how they contribute to meeting the needs of New Zealand's health workforce.

Consideration of how the proposed paper or qualification aligns with the Division's Māori and Pacific Island Strategic Plans and fulfils the intent of the Treaty of Waitangi should also be outlined. It will also be important to discuss how Māori and Pacific-related content is incorporated into the curriculum. Connection with research and acceptability to relevant professional bodies should also be covered.

If you have sufficient support to proceed with your proposal, you will be required to complete a new paper/programme Sustainability Assessment Form (refer Appendix 1), alongside a pre-paper or indicative proposal form.

The Sustainability Assessment will help you to provide an assessment of strategic fit and financial sustainability, including staff availability, student demand, financial and resource implications etc. All proposals will need to show that they will be sustainable now and into the future.

Stage 1 checklist

  1. Concept endorsed
  2. Pre-paper proposal or indicative proposal form prepared
  3. Sustainability assessment completed

The next stage is to undertake formal consultation.

Stage 2: Consultation

It is important to ensure that you make an effort to seek feedback from all relevant internal and external stakeholders who may be impacted by your proposal, within and outside of your own area. In most cases, all Schools and Faculties will be invited to identify relevant stakeholders. The Academic Network will then ensure that nominated people are consulted.

When consulting, key considerations should include:

  • Does the idea fit within your school/faculty and Divisional Strategic Plans?
  • Is there already a similar paper or qualification being taught within the school/faculty, or elsewhere within the Division or University?
  • What resourcing will be required to develop and deliver this new paper, endorsement or qualification?
  • What are the key benefits to the Division and/or profession?
  • What are potential barriers to success?
  • What activities, if any, will be reduced as a result of this new initiative (e.g. would this just shift EFTS from one area to another)?
  • Comments from key stakeholders such as professional organisations, regulatory bodies, government and health agencies, criteria set out by external funding agencies, along with alignment with any internal University strategy.

Key people to consult include:

  • Head of Department/Dean
  • Department Financial Manager/Administrator
  • Undergraduate or Postgraduate Associate Dean
  • Undergraduate or Postgraduate Curriculum or Research Committees
  • Local Academic Network contact (refer Appendix 2)
  • Divisional Associate Dean (Academic) or Divisional Associate Dean (Postgraduate) (strategic alignment)
  • Academic Manager (process)
  • Planning and Funding Office (funding implications and institutional strategic fit)
  • Academic Services Project Office for potential impact on the Student Management System (eVision)
  • Professional associations, health boards, community organisations and other relevant external stakeholders
  • The Academic Network may also identify additional key stakeholders that you will need to consult

You will be required to submit a Consultation Record listing all those consulted and documenting issues raised (refer Appendix 3).

Stage 2 checklist

  1. Consultation undertaken
  2. Consultation feedback incorporated
  3. Consultation Record completed

The next stage is to formally submit your proposal to the relevant boards for consideration.

Stage 3: Internal approval

All proposal forms need to be approved by your department/subject area board, then by the school or faculty board, before proceeding for final consideration by the Academic Board of the Division of Health Sciences. If approved by the Division, then the proposal would be submitted to either the University's Board of Undergraduate Studies, or to the Board of Graduate Studies and then to the Senate.

At each step of the process feedback may be provided and will need to be incorporated before the proposal is submitted to the next Board.

Stage 3 checklist

  1. Where relevant, Department/Synergy Board approval (feedback incorporated)
  2. School/Faculty Board approval (feedback incorporated)
  3. Academic Board of the Division of Health Sciences (feedback incorporated)
  4. University Board of Undergraduate Studies (BUGS) or Board of Graduate Studies (BOGS)
  5. Senate

Stage 4: External approval

Once approved by the Senate and Council, proposals for new programmes and major regulation changes (refer Appendix 4) proceed to the Committee on University Academic Proposals (CUAP) for final academic approval in July or November. They then proceed to the Tertiary Education Commission for final funding approval.

The new programme will be included in the University Calendar and will normally be offered to students in the following year. Any advertising of the new programme cannot occur until after CUAP approval unless it is accompanied by the clause "Subject to CUAP approval".

Note: Proposals for new papers do not normally require CUAP approval.

Stage 4 checklist

  1. Proposals submitted to CUAP by the Academic Committees Office following Senate approval
  2. Once approved, Academic Services includes in University Calendar and formally adds programme to the Student Management System

For assistance

The first point of contact is your local Academic Network representative or the Division's Academic Manager:

Email hs.divisional.board@otago.ac.nz

^ Top of Page

Minor amendments to regulations

Proposals for minor amendments to programmes and programme regulations follow a similar (more condensed) process.

Stage 1: Concept development

The first step is to clearly formulate the idea that you are proposing so you will be able to provide enough detail on the forms and/or during consultation.

You should ensure that your department and school/faculty support the proposal.

Minor amendments still need to align with the strategic direction of the department, school/faculty, Division, and the wider University.

Most minor amendments do not require a sustainability assessment. However, any financial/resource implications resulting from the amendment will need to be identified and considered.

Stage 1 checklist

  1. Concept endorsed
  2. Relevant form prepared
  3. Sustainability considered

Stage 2: Consultation

It is important to ensure that you make an effort to seek feedback from all relevant internal and external stakeholders who may be impacted by your proposal, within and outside of your own direct area (e.g. implications for other related qualifications).

You will be required to submit a consultation record summarising all those consulted and documenting issues raised (refer Appendix 3).

Stage 2 checklist

  1. Consultation undertaken
  2. Consultation feedback incorporated
  3. Consultation Record completed

The next stage is to formally submit your proposal to the Academic Network for consideration.

Stage 3: Internal approval

It is proposed that minor amendments will be approved by the Academic Network and be submitted for expedited consultation with relevant Boards (usually by email) before submission to approving Boards. The Academic Network has the discretion to submit a proposal to boards for formal consideration if deemed necessary.

Stage 3 checklist

  1. Academic Network approval
  2. If approved, noted at relevant boards

^ Top of Page

Appendix 1: Sustainability assessment

The Division of Health Sciences is currently developing a sustainability template. The Sustainability Assessment will help you to provide an assessment of strategic fit and financial sustainability, including staff availability, student demand, financial and resource implications, etc. Specifically, the Sustainability Assessment includes:

  • Strategic opportunities
  • Opportunities for EFTS generation
  • Risks
  • Impacts and dependencies
  • Estimated student demand
  • Estimated fee and government funding
  • Programme development costs
  • Ongoing delivery costs
  • Overall financial review

Divisional Office and central University staff (e.g. Planning and Funding, ITS, etc.) can assist you to complete the Sustainability Assessment. Campus financial analysts and business managers should also be consulted.

^ Top of Page

Appendix 2: Health Sciences Academic Network

What is the Academic Network?

The Academic Network is a cluster of experts available to provide advice and assistance on a range of academic matters.

These include:

  • Development of new programmes (i.e. new degrees, major subjects, endorsements, or minor subjects [where no existing major subject]); deletion of such programmes
  • Amendment of regulations
  • Development of new papers, including special topic and summer school papers
  • Amendments to titles of existing papers, prescriptions, prerequisites, restrictions or point values; teaching periods or teaching modes of a paper; deletion of papers; reinstatement of suspended papers
  • Alignment with strategic direction of the Division
  • Sustainability Assessment of new programmes and new papers
  • Academic administration advice for programmes in the Division of Health Sciences
  • Delegated approval for PVC variation clause of programme regulations
  • Delegated PVC approval for non standard academic admissions
  • Assistance with postgraduate procedures

The Academic Network is led by the Divisional Associate Dean (Academic) and the Divisional Associate Dean (Postgraduate Studies).

Divisional Associate Dean (Academic)
Divisional Associate Dean (Postgraduate Studies)

How do I contact the Academic Network?

The first point of contact for the Academic Network is the Division's Academic Manager.

Divisional Academic Manager

Academic Network Structure

The Academic Network has three layers: Divisional; Campus; and Faculty/School.

Key contacts are:

How can the Academic Network help?

The Academic Network is available to provide advice and assistance on any academic issue small or large.

The Academic Manager will be able to direct you to the most appropriate contact.

Academic Network Advice on:

Divisional

  • University and Divisional Strategy
  • Funding
  • Sustainability Assessment
  • Māori teaching, research, and development
  • Divisional Pacific Strategic Plan
  • University/Programmes Regulations
  • Internal approval processes (BUGS/BoGS)
  • External approval process (CUAP)
  • Consultation requirements
  • Advice/support for devolved responsibilities
  • Promapp processes
  • Advice on programme regulations
  • Support for seeking Divisional approvals
  • Support for completing BUGS/BoGS forms
  • PVC variation clause of regulations
  • Advice on non-standard admissions
  • Quality control
  • Division-wide postgraduate procedures

Campus

  • Campus strategy
  • Funding
  • Programmes Regulations
  • Consultation requirements
  • Advice/Support for devolved responsibilities
  • Regulations advice
  • Communication across schools

School/Faculty

  • School/Faculty strategy
  • Funding
  • Sustainability Assessment
  • Student matters
  • Standard admissions decisions
  • Research proposals
  • Examinations processes

Department

  • School/Faculty strategy
  • Funding
  • Student administration
  • Standard admissions decisions

^ Top of Page

Appendix 3: Division of Health Sciences – Academic Proposal Consultation Record

Download the Academic Proposal Consultation Record (PDF 180 KB)

^ Top of Page

Appendix 4: Proposals requiring Committee on University Academic Programmes (CUAP) approval

Proposals requiring CUAP approval fall into the following nine categories:

  1. The introduction of a new academic qualification.
  2. The introduction of a new subject.
  3. The introduction of a minor subject when there is no established major in the subject.
  4. The introduction of an endorsement when the concentration of study is 40% or greater and the endorsement is stated on the graduation certificate.
  5. The introduction of a new conjoint programme.
  6. Changes in the structure of a qualification.
  7. Changes to the entry requirements for a programme or to regulations relating to admission to the university (e.g. for school leavers, holders of non-university qualifications or for work experience).
  8.  A change in the name of a qualification or subject.
  9. Transfer of credit, cross-crediting, or exemption arrangements falling outside arrangements that are currently in place.

For further information

CUAP Handbook

^ Top of Page