Academic Consultation Panel (ACP) Visits

(Click here for the terms of reference of an ACP)

ACP Visits are major exercises to ensure that the standard of our programmes is on par with recognized higher education institutions worldwide.  The objective of the ACP Visits is to make an integrated, holistic assessment of all aspects of the academic unit(s), namely academic, research and management, so as to ascertain their overall standard.

The process involves a critical self-evaluation of the academic unit(s) concerned and peer review by a panel formed of academics and professionals outside the University.

(Click here for the flow chart of the process involved and the typical timeline)

A Self-evaluation Document (SED), with information on the teaching, research, service functions and administration of the academic unit(s) under review, will be prepared and submitted to the Panel for review along with other supplementary information at least six weeks before the scheduled visit dates.

Following the visit, an ACP Report will be prepared and endorsed by the Panel, which will be forwarded to the academic unit(s) for a written response and follow-up.  The Report, together with the academic unit(s)’ response with improvement action plan(s), will be submitted to the University's Quality Assurance Committee (QAC) for recommendation to the Senate for final approval.

The ACP Visit of each academic unit shall take place once every six years.  The duration of the panel visit will depend on the complexity of the unit under review.  Generally, it will last for three days (click here for a typical visit programme).  The schedule for the fourth round of ACP visits is posted here for reference.

1. The size of the panel is based on the particular needs of the academic unit under review.
2. The panel shall include external members only.  They should be academics (usually at the rank of Associate Professor or above), professionals or practitioners at a senior level, with substantial relevant scholarly background or experience and, preferably, some knowledge of the academic unit being reviewed.
3. The panel shall comprise a minimum of four to a maximum of six members (for Faculty-/School-based reviews, the number of panel members should increase according to the complexity of operation and "size" of the academic unit under review).
4.  
5. To ensure compliance of the programme(s) concerned with Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning (OBTL) requirements, the Director of Centre for Holistic Teaching and Learning will be co-opted on the Panel by default to provide written input to OBTL elements of the programme curricula to ensure compliance with the necessary requirements.

1. The Panel Chair should preferably be at the rank of Professor, and is appointed by the QAC Chairman.

1. The academic unit under review should recommend panel membership to the QAC Chairman for approval.  CVs should be collected to ensure appropriateness of the nominees to serve on the panel.  Nominees should not have close affiliation with the academic unit in the past three years.  Endorsement of the Dean concerned is required prior to submission of the panel membership nomination.
2. Following the approval of panel membership, the QAC Secretariat will issue the appointment letters.

It is encouraged that the SED reference/adopt the Approach-Deployment-Results-Improvement (ADRI) reflective format to assist the academic unit to review and report on its teaching, research, service functions and administration in the document. The following information should be included in the SED:

1. mission, goals and objectives
2. administration and organization
3. information on existing programmes and proposed curriculum changes, if any
4. report on follow-up work on the recommendations of the previous ACP review*
5. 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
     ．      implementation quality
     ．      commitment of resources to teaching and learning

implementation of Outcomes-Based Teaching and Learning (OBTL)

student profile

graduate profile and satisfaction level

research/scholarly activities

quality assurance processes

infrastructure and resources

consultancy/professional/community services

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

* To be prepared using the ADRI approach

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.