QA of New Programmes/Programme Development
QA of Existing Programmes
Academic Consultation Panel (ACP) Visits
Annual Reporting of Academic Programmes
Departmental Academic Advisor (DAA) Scheme
University Language Policy
University Calendar / University Student Handbook
(By Programme Title / Area of Study)
QA of Existing Programmes
Academic Consultation Panel (ACP) Visits
Scope and Objective
As responsibility for quality assurance processes has been devolved to the academic units, the Academic Consultation Panel (ACP) visits have been implemented in the University to replace re-accreditation of programmes. The objective of the ACP is to make an integrated, holistic assessment of all aspects of the academic units, namely, academic, research and management, so as to ascertain their overall standard of the academic units. The academic units are entrusted with the responsibility to monitor and improve the quality of the programmes they offer. The process involves critical self-evaluation and peer review by academics and professionals within and outside the University.
Terms of Reference for Academic Consultation Panels (ACP)
To review the academic activities within a unit as designated by the University with particular attention given to the following:
mission, goals and objectives of the academic unit;
summary of how the recommendations of the previous ACP and the Departmental Academic Advisor (DAA) have been addressed;
how the academic unit maintains its academic standards;
potentials and directions for future developments of the academic unit;
transparency, efficiency and effectiveness of the unit's management and decision-making processes;
interaction and relationship of the academic unit with the industry/profession, the community and its advisory committees;
availability of academic expertise;
the soundness of the curriculum design currently in use;
the quality of teaching and learning of the programme(s) being offered;
assessment procedures and practices of student course work, examinations and projects;
the quality of students enrolled and the availability of learning opportunities on their respective programmes;
internal quality assurance practices and quality enhancement for existing quality assurance system, with a particular focus on: (1) enhancing the student learning experience, and (2) global engagements: strategies and current developments;
the collegiality and interchange among staff, among students, and between staff and students;
the delivery of taught postgraduate programmes and the support for research postgraduate students;
the level, quality and appropriateness of the research/scholarship being undertaken within the academic unit, and the strength of any external alliances in support of these activities;
arrangements for the management of off-campus provision of academic programmes (if applicable); and
the suitability of environment and other resource provisions to the academic unit.
Frequency and Duration
Academic Consultation Panel (ACP) visits of each academic unit take place once every six years. The duration of the panel visit would depend on the complexity of the unit under review. Generally it would last for three to four days (see
for typical schedule for the visit). Please click
for the schedule for third round of ACP visits.
Process of the Academic Consultation Panel (ACP) Visit
for the flow chart of the process involved and
for the typical timeline)
A Self-evaluation Document (SED) would need to be prepared and submitted to the Faculty/School/Academy of Visual Arts (AVA) Board for endorsement. Following the endorsement and modifications of the documentation, if any, the final SED and other supplementary information, duly endorsed by the Faculty/School/AVA Board, would need to be submitted to the Academic Quality Support Section (AQSS) of Academic Registry at least six to eight weeks before the scheduled visit date. The SED will then be forwarded to the ACP for consideration.
Following the visit, an ACP Report will be prepared and forwarded to the academic unit for a written response. The Report, together with the academic unit's response, would be submitted to the Faculty/School/AVA Board for deliberation. The Faculty/School/AVA Board would then make recommendations to the Senate via the Quality Assurance Committee (QAC).
i. Composition of the Panel
The size of the panel is based on the particular needs of the academic unit under review. The Chair of QAC shall decide on the composition of the panel, in consultation with the Dean/Director of AVA involved.
The panel shall include external members only. The panel members should be academics, professionals or practitioners at a senior level (usually at the rank of Associate Professor or above), with substantial relevant scholarly experience and, preferably, some knowledge of the academic unit being reviewed.
With regard to the size of the panel, it shall comprise a minimum of four to a maximum of six members (for Faculty-based reviews, the number of panel members should increase according to the complexity of operation and "size" of the academic unit under review).
ii. Chair of the Panel
The Chair should preferably be a senior academic from another institution, and is appointed by the Chair of QAC in consultation with the Dean/Director of AVA concerned.
iii. Appointment Procedures
The academic unit to be reviewed shall nominate names for panel membership, including the Chair and members, to the Chair of QAC for approval. Panel members should be carefully selected, who should not have close affiliation with the academic unit under review in the last three years. CV would be collected to ensure appropriateness of the nominees to serve on the panel. The DAA would not be invited to serve on the ACP Panel.
Following approval of the panel membership, the AQSS will issue the appointment letters.
Self-evaluation Document (SED)
The SED shall include the following information on the teaching, research, service functions and administration of the academic unit:
mission, goals and objectives of the academic unit
administration and organization of the academic unit
information on existing programmes (i.e.
) and proposed curriculum changes, if any
report on follow-up work on the recommendations of the previous ACP review
follow-up actions in response to the recommendations of the DAA
teaching and learning
design of curriculum
design of teaching and learning processes
design of student assessment and use of assessment results
commitment of resources to teaching and learning
implementation of Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning (OBTL)
graduate profile and satisfaction level
quality assurance processes
infrastructure and resources
academic staff profile (CVs of not more than two pages for each staff to be included as an Appendix) - with information on staff name, academic qualifications, discipline, research, selected publications of the last three years, links with industry or the professional community
The above is by no means exhaustive. Depending on their nature and complexity, the academic units are encouraged to add extra information as they deem fit.
To ensure compliance of the Programme Document(s) (of the SED) with the University's requirements on outcomes-based teaching and learning (OBTL), the academic unit(s) under review should approach the Centre for Holistic Teaching and Learning (CHTL) for advice on the presentation and arrangement of OBTL-related elements in the Programme Document(s), and have the recommended changes/enhancements incorporated in the documents prior to submission of them to the ACP (via AQSS) for review.
Academic units are also required to include in the relevant section of the SED an acknowledgement of input from CHTL on OBTL-related matters.
Last updated in August 2018
Intranet (AR Staff Only)
Copyright © 2019 Hong Kong Baptist University. All rights reserved.
This website is best viewed with Windows Internet Explorer 7.0+ or Mozilla Firefox 3.0+ with a screen resolution of 1024x768 or above.