2.8 Subsequent appraisal process

2.8.1     With report appraisal

When a university has been given approval to commence a program with report, the Appraisal Committee reviews the subsequently submitted report, conducts whatever consultation it requires, and then makes one of the following recommendations to the Council that the program be:

  1. Approved to continue without condition;
  2. Approved to continue, but the Council requires additional follow-up and report within a specified period, prior to the initial cyclical review; or
  3. Required to suspend admissions for a minimum of two years. The Quality Council will then specify the conditions to be met in the interim in order for admissions to the program to resume.

The university may request a reconsideration, to the Quality Council, of the decision to suspend admissions to the program, on the same terms as are set out in Framework Section 2.7.1 (i.e., the university will be providing new information; and/or there were errors of fact in the Appraisal Committee’s commentary; and/or there were errors of process).

2.8.2     Council hears with report appeal. Council decides

Having received and considered the Appraisal Committee’s recommendation, and the university’s appeal, if any, the Quality Council may decide either to:

  1. Approve the program without condition;
  2. Approve the program with a further report; or
  3. Require the program to suspend admissions for a minimum of two years. The Quality Assurance Secretariat conveys the decision to the university, and reports it to OCAV and to MCU for information.

Decisions of the Quality Council are final and binding.