Jointly Conferred Academic Awards Policy

Overview

The University has power to confer academic awards jointly with another university or a registered training organisation under ss.6(1a)[1] of the University of Adelaide Act 1971. The University encourages collaborative academic programs that lead to jointly conferred awards as a means of developing its education portfolio, enhancing the experience of its students and staff, expanding the career opportunities of its students, broadening its international outlook and stimulating collaborative research links. In doing so, it must also ensure that its academic standards, reputation and assets are protected. This policy specifies the principles and processes for establishing, managing and administering jointly conferred programs.

Scope and Application

This policy applies to all collaborative academic programs that lead to jointly conferred awards, both coursework and higher degree by research. It must be followed by all staff engaged in the development, delivery and administration of such programs.

Policy Principles

1. Standards

1.1 The academic standards of jointly conferred awards must be equivalent to those of comparable awards offered solely by the University.

1.2 Partner institutions must have the academic standing to deliver jointly conferred programs to the required academic standards, the financial standing to sustain them, the reputation to complement the University, and the legal standing to contract to their delivery.

1.3 The student learning experience in jointly conferred programs must be comparable to those of students in sole University programs and enable students to achieve the required academic standards.

1.4 Except in special circumstances approved by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic), the University will not partner with more than two other institutions in any one jointly conferred coursework award; and with not more than one institution for any one jointly conferred higher degree by research.

1.5 (a) For coursework programs, each partner's contribution to the coursework component of the program must be approximately equal. Where the research component of a coursework program is 30% or greater, the research component must be supervised jointly by each partner institution.

(b) For higher degree by research programs, the period of residency to be spent by candidates at each partner institution must be of at least 12 months' duration.

2. Administration

2.1 Arrangements for establishing, delivering, monitoring, obtaining student feedback and reviewing jointly conferred awards must be specified in a legally binding agreement and address the matters listed in the Jointly Conferred Awards Checklist.

2.2 University Policies may have their application modified to suit the needs of partnership arrangements, but all variations from standard University Policies must be brought to the attention of, and approved by, the relevant Policy Custodian; and must not compromise the University's standards, reputation or assets.

2.3 The University's name and coat of arms must be placed equally with the partner institution's name and badge (emblem, logo, coat of arms etc) on the award testamur; and all promotional and marketing material related to the jointly conferred award must reflect equally all partner institutions.

3. Authorities

3.1 The following authorities are delegated under this policy

Approve a variation to the number of partnering institutions involved in a jointly conferred academic award

Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic)

Principle 1.4

Approve variations of application of University Policies to meet needs of Jointly Conferred Program

Relevant Policy Custodian

Principle 2.2

Approve Partner Institutions for Jointly Conferred Academic Awards

Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic)

Procedure 1.3

Approve Jointly Conferred Academic Programs

Vice-Chancellor and President on recommendation of Academic Board

Procedure 2.3 and Program Approval Process

Approve fees to be charged (if any) for Jointly Conferred Academic Programs

Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic)

Fees Policy

Sign legal agreements with Partner Institutions for Jointly Conferred Awards

Vice-Chancellor & President (or delegate) on advice of Prudential Services

Procedure 4.2

Approve testamur designs for Jointly Conferred Awards

Vice-Chancellor and President, on advice of Director, Marketing and Strategic Communications

Procedure 5

Approve changes to Guidelines, Templates and Checklists under the Jointly Conferred Academic Programs Policy, as required

Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic) for coursework programs; Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Research) for HDR programs

Procedures

These procedures recognise that the primary responsibility for identifying partner institutions and developing suitable programs resides within the Faculties, in the same way as responsibility for developing and revising academic programs offered solely by the University. Faculties are expected to use their own processes for developing and evaluating jointly conferred programs before completing the process set out below.

1. Selecting a Partner Institution

1.1 Concept proposal

Responsibility: Schools/Faculties through Faculty Executive Dean

a) Prepare concept proposal and risk assessment, and submit to Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic) for in-principle approval, using Partner Institution Selection (Jointly Conferred Award) Guidelines.

b) Approval must be obtained before detailed planning and negotiations about collaboration arrangements with the potential partner institution/s occur and before any binding commitment is made.

1.2 Institutional Partnership Committee

Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic)

a) Establish an ad hoc Institutional Partnership Committee of at least 3 members with relevant expertise as soon as practicable after receipt of the proposal.

Responsibility: Institutional Partnership Committee

a) Evaluate and assess proposal.

b) Before making a recommendation to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic) to approve the partnership, the committee must be satisfied that the Partner Institution:

i. is one with which the University has legal power to confer a jointly conferred award (ie it is a university or registered training organisation or is an institution specified in a regulation[2])

ii. has legal authority itself to confer a jointly conferred award

iii. has an overall academic standing comparable to that of the University; or that the relevant area of its activities has a comparable academic standing

iv. is compatible with the University's values

v. has robust academic quality assurance procedures

vi. has sound overall management and administration

vii. has adequate teaching and learning infrastructure and academic and pastoral support

viii. is experienced at or capable of delivering comparable programs at the appropriate level

ix. is financially stable

x. has the capacity to address cultural differences, where relevant

xi. provides a safe environment for students.

[Depending on the proposed partner institution, and/or the business model proposed, a rigorous financial and due diligence process may be required.]

1.3 Decision

Responsibility: Deputy Vice-Chancellor & Vice-President (Academic)

a) Consider and decide whether to approve the proposed partner institution, or part of the institution, taking into account the recommendation of the Institutional Partnerships Committee.

b) Arrange for approval to be logged on Register of Approved Partner Institutions for Jointly Conferred Programs.

2. Jointly Conferred Coursework Program

2.1 Program Proposal

Responsibility: Schools/Faculties through Faculty Executive Dean

a) Prepare and submit program proposal, in accord with the Program Approval Process, to the Program Approval Committee, together with the information specified in the Jointly Conferred Coursework Programs template.

2.2 Program Approval Committee (PAC)

Responsibility: Committee

a) Evaluate and assess proposal

b) Before making a recommendation that Academic Board recommend the Jointly Conferred Program to the Vice-Chancellor and President for approval, the committee must be satisfied that the program meets the relevant standards required of any new academic program, and that the program:

i. has transparent and comparable criteria for selection and, where applicable, for the award of scholarships

ii. is intellectually coherent, with an integrated curriculum based on common program objectives

iii. provides for each partner's contribution to be approximately equal, and that there are not more than 2 partners plus the University

iv. specifies program delivery modes, and course units and weightings to be delivered by each partner institution

v. specifies the language of instruction

vi. has clear assessment principles and practices, including moderation, and has clear processes for reviewing or appealing against assessment outcomes

vii. specifies process for review of students' academic progress

viii. has adequate number of qualified academic staff available in all partner institutions who can complement and work with each other

ix. provides for individual course grades to be translated acceptably into an agreed GPA.

2.3 Approval

Responsibility: Academic Board

a) Assess Jointly Conferred Program Proposal and decide whether to recommend it to the Vice-Chancellor and President for approval.

3. Jointly Conferred Higher Degree by Research Program

3.1 Proposal

Responsibility: Schools/Faculties through Faculty Executive Dean

a) Prepare and submit Jointly Conferred Program proposal, in accord with the Program Approval Process, to the Program Approval Committee, together with the information specified in the Jointly Conferred Higher Degrees by Research template to the Research Education & Development Committee and the Program Approval Committee.

3.2 Research Education & Development Committee (REDC) and Program Approval Committee (PAC)

Responsibility: REDC

a) Evaluate and decide whether to recommend the proposal to the Program Approval Committee.

Responsibility: PAC

a) Taking into account the REDC's advice, evaluate and decide whether to recommend that Academic Board recommend that the Vice-Chancellor and President approve the proposal.

b) Before making a recommendation, the REDC and PAC must be satisfied that the proposed arrangement:

i. has transparent and comparable criteria for selection and, where applicable, for the award of scholarships

ii. is intellectually coherent, with sound justification of the educational and research merits of a jointly supervised research program

iii. provides for the contribution to the research component to be approximately equal

iv. specifies the process for review of academic progress

v. makes satisfactory arrangements for joint supervisors

vi. makes satisfactory provision for the appointment and role of external examiners/moderators

vii. makes satisfactory provision for the language of examiners' reports

viii. is consistent with existing program rules for Higher Degrees by Research.

3.3 Approval

Responsibility: Academic Board

a) Assess Jointly Conferred Program Proposal in light of REDC and PAC advice and decide whether to recommend the proposal to the Vice-Chancellor and President for approval.

4. Legal Agreement

The legal agreement is, in effect, the implementation plan specifying how the jointly conferred program is to be delivered, administered, completed and reviewed. It documents the understandings and obligations of all parties, to ensure that the academic aspirations embodied in the Jointly Conferred Program are met.

Development of the legal agreement can occur in parallel with the Program Approval process, but the formal legal agreement cannot be signed until the program itself has been approved by the Vice-Chancellor and President.

4.1 Preparatory Work

Responsibility: Faculty Executive Dean or delegate

a) Using the relevant Legal Checklist, provide information on the matters specified, to be used as the basis for the formal legal agreement between the University and the partner institutions.

b) Submit the completed Checklist to Prudential Services.

4.2 Agreement

Responsibility: Chief Prudential Officer or delegate

a) Draft a legal agreement, or advise on a draft prepared by a partner institution, taking into account the Checklist, with consultation as appropriate.

b) Arrange for appropriate record-keeping, including Legal Documents Register in Records Management Office, and International Agreements Register (where relevant).

4.3 Implementation and Monitoring

Responsibility: Faculty Executive Dean or delegate

a) Ensure the legal agreement is signed by the relevant signatories from each institution.

b) Develop and implement Implementation Plan for new Jointly Conferred Program. The plan must take into account requirements for collaboration with Partner Institution, and requirements for monitoring and review of the program.

c) Regularly monitor compliance with obligations under the legal agreement.

5. Testamur Design

Responsibility: Director, Marketing and Strategic Communications

a) Liaise with partner institutions on jointly conferred testamur design to ensure it is in accord with Principle 2.3 of this Policy and the Trademarks and Brand Asset Policy[3] before obtaining approval of Vice-Chancellor and President.


[1] The University also has power to confer academic awards jointly with "another body specified in regulations" made under ss6(4) of the Act, but on [date of approval of policy] there were no regulations.

[2] See footnote 1, above.

[3] At the time of approval of this policy, the Trademarks and Brand Asset Policy was under review. If its name is changed, this policy can be amended accordingly, and this footnote deleted.

[4] See footnote 3 above.

Date uploaded 7 August 2008


This document is a component of Jointly Conferred Coursework Awards Policy

Policy Control Information

RMO File No. 2022/7850
Policy custodian Deputy Vice-Chancellor and Vice-President (Academic)
Responsible policy officer Pro Vice-Chancellor (Student Learning)
Endorsed by Academic Board
Approved by Vice-Chancellor and President
Related legislation University of Adelaide Act (SA) 1971, s6
Superceded Policies Policy for the Administration and Award of Double Badged Doctoral Degrees
Effective from 6 October 2023
Review Date 31 December 2025
Contact for queries about the policy epc@adelaide.edu.au

Please refer to the Policy Directory for the latest version.