Course accreditation and conditions on registration

Report on accreditation of one higher education course of study offered by Kent Institute Australia Pty Ltd (formerly The Centre of Academic Excellence Pty Ltd)

TEQSA has agreed to orders made by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) under which the Bachelor of Information Technology higher education course of study, under section 49 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Act 2011 (the TEQSA Act), be accredited to be offered by Kent Institute Australia Pty Ltd ('Kent Institute') until 1 June 2021:

These orders also involve the imposition of conditions on the registration of Kent Institute under subsection 32(1) of the TEQSA Act. A copy of the conditions is available at Attachment 1. The course accreditation covers delivery at all Australian sites.

Background to Decision

Kent Institute applied to TEQSA for accreditation of its Bachelor of Information Technology higher education course of study under Section 46 of the TEQSA Act.

A TEQSA delegate considered Kent Institute's application and made a decision to reject the application for accreditation, sending Kent Institute a Statement of Reasons setting out details of why the TEQSA delegate decided to reject the application for accreditation of the course of study.

The TEQSA delegate made this decision on the basis that they were not satisfied that the course met the following Provider Course Accreditation Standards (PCAS):

• PCAS 1.2, in relation to course development, including development and assessment of English Language Proficiency (ELP);
• PCAS 2.1 and 2.3, in relation to the adequacy of resources available to support students, taking into account expected growth; and
• PCAS 4.4, in relation to effective mechanisms to identify and support students at risk of not progressing academically.

The TEQSA delegate also determined that Kent was at risk of not meeting the following PCAS in relation to the course of study: 1.7, 2.2, 4.1, 4.2, 5.3 and 5.4.

Kent Institute applied for an internal review of the decision to reject the application for accreditation of the course of study. No decision was made by TEQSA prior to the required date for internal review under subsection 186(2) of the TEQSA Act, meaning that TEQSA had taken to have affirmed the decision to reject the application for internal review.

Kent Institute applied for a review of TEQSA's deemed affirmation of the rejection of its application for accreditation at the AAT.

Main Reasons for Decision

After reviewing the material submitted by Kent Institute and participating in mediation with Kent Institute, TEQSA was satisfied that Kent Institute's Bachelor of Information Technology course of study meets the Threshold Standards. However TEQSA considered that there were risks in relation to:

1. Development of the requisite levels of English language proficiency (PCAS 1.2), on the basis of concerns about Kent Institute's student perform;
2. Engagement in intellectual inquiry consistent with the nature, level and expected learning outcomes of the course (PCAS 1.7), on the basis of an "ad hoc" approach to the presentation of theory and current controversies;
3. Adequacy of the existing facilities to meet student demand (PCAS 2.1);
4. Adequacy of library facilities (PCAS 2.2);
5. Adequacy of staffing (PCAS 4.1);
6. Staff scholarship (PCAS 4.2);
7. Inconsistency in student outcomes between Melbourne and Sydney (PCAS 5.3);
8. Monitoring and acting on student performance (PCAS 5.4).

On this basis, TEQSA agreed that it was appropriate to substitute TEQSA's initial decision to not grant the application with the decision to accredit the Bachelor of Information Technology until 1 June 2021 and to impose a number of conditions on Kent Institute's provider registration (see Attachment 1).

The conditions on registration are designed to address risks against the same Provider Course Accreditation Standards listed above in relation to TEQSA's reasons for initially deciding not to grant Kent Institute's application for accreditation of the Bachelor of Information Technology course of study.

TEQSA proposed to the AAT that the risks identified in the course accreditation be addressed by the imposition of conditions on registration. The AAT subsequently made orders in accordance with an agreement between TEQSA and Kent Institute to impose these conditions on registration.

Attachment 1

Conditions imposed on the registration of Kent Institute pursuant to subsection 32(1) of the TEQSA Act:

Condition 1:

Kent Institute must arrange for an independent and external review of the library and learning resources provided by Kent Institute for students of Kent Institute's higher education courses delivered in Sydney and Melbourne. Kent Institute must:

a) obtain TEQSA's approval of the identity of the reviewer before making an appointment.

b) provide TEQSA with the report arising from the review no later than 30 June 2017.

c) provide TEQSA with an implementation plan dealing with any recommendations from the review, together with evidence that the implementation plan has been discussed, considered and approved by Kent Institute's Academic Board by 31 July 2017.

Condition 2:

Within three months of the date of the imposition of this condition, Kent Institute is required to provide TEQSA with a revised workforce plan for its higher education operations. The workforce plan must identify recruitment strategies, discipline needs, academic and career development strategies incorporating scholarly activity, appropriate full-time to casual staffing ratios and key implementation dates for the plan. Casual staffing ratios must be calculated based on the methodology set out on page 19 of the TEQSA Risk Assessment Framework (Version 2.1) document.

Condition 3:

Within three months of the date of the imposition of this condition, Kent Institute must:

a) ensure that its course development and review policies explicitly provide for the development of a structured approach to engaging students in intellectual inquiry into theoretical developments and controversies consistent with the level and discipline of the course of study.

b) provide TEQSA with evidence of the application of this development of a structured approach in the context of at least one of Kent Institute's accredited courses of study. This evidence must include, but is not limited to, evidence that the approach has been considered, discussed and approved at a meeting of Kent Institute's Academic Board.

Renewal of course accreditation

Report on renewal of accreditation of four higher education courses of study offered by Harvest Bible College

TEQSA has renewed, under section 56 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Act 2011 (the TEQSA Act), the accreditation of the following higher education courses of study offered by Harvest for a period of four years until 23 November 2021:

• Associate Degree of Ministry
• Bachelor of Arts (Ministry)
• Graduate Certificate in Theology
• Graduate Diploma in Theology

TEQSA has imposed, under section 53 of the TEQSA Act, five conditions on the accreditation of the courses

Condition 1:

Within six months of receiving the Notice of Decision, HBC must:

1. undertake a review of graduate attributes for the courses and revise those attributes to ensure that each one is focused on academic knowledge that can be assessed within the courses,
2. ensure that the review and revisions are considered and reviewed by the Academic Board, and
3. provide TEQSA with evidence of the review and revisions, as well as evidence of consideration and approval by the Academic Board.

Condition 2:

HBC's total student enrolments for the courses must not exceed official census figures as at 30 October 2017.

Condition 3:

HBC must not enrol any commencing online students in the courses until TEQSA notifies HBC that TEQSA is satisfied that the following issue has been resolved:

1. all students completing the courses online must have access to all the reading materials that are required to achieve the learning outcomes of the courses.

Condition 4:

On 31 December each year (commencing in 2018), HBC must provide to TEQSA:

1. a report on its online delivery of the courses for the past calendar year, which includes:
   
   1. online delivery framework
   2. student feedback
   3. course performance data (including student progression, attrition and course completion data), and
   4. benchmarking of data against other cohorts and other higher education providers.
2. evidence of the Academic Board's consideration of, and response to, the report.

Condition 5:

HBC must provide TEQSA

1. with a report, not later than 2 weeks prior to the commencement of each teaching period for the courses, which, in relation to each staff member at each location proposed to teach one or more units in one of the provider's higher education courses, describes:
   
   1. the highest qualification in the discipline of the course being taught
   2. the unit(s) proposed to be taught and/or assessed
   3. the professional experience held
   4. a summary of how the provider's "Guidelines for Determining the Equivalence of Professional Experience to Australian Qualifications Framework Levels" has been applied to that staff member.
   5. the professional development and training undertaken by that staff member in the previous 6 months.
2. Where a report ('report b') shows a substantial change in staffing compared with the previous report ('report a'), the provider must provide with 'report b' evidence of analysis, and action taken, in relation to the staffing profile.

Main reasons for the decision

The issues which led TEQSA to impose the conditions are:

a) graduate attributes are not focused on academic knowledge that can be assessed within the courses

b) students do not have access to the appropriate resources to enable them to achieve the expected learning outcomes, and staff have limited expertise in the design and delivery of online education

c) poor course performance data and minimal evidence that the provider monitors and acts upon this data.

TEQSA's assessment considered Harvest Bible College's arrangements for delivery at all Australian sites.

Revocation of accreditation condition

Report on revocation of condition imposed on accreditation of one higher education course of study offered by the Melbourne Institute of Technology

On 26 March 2018 a delegate of TEQSA revoked, under section 53 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act), the condition imposed on the accreditation of the following course offered by Melbourne Institute of Technology Pty Ltd (refer public report of 25 September 2014):

• Master of Networking

Main reasons for the decision

TEQSA made this decision on the basis that it was satisfied that the condition has been met.

Course accreditation

Report on accreditation of a higher education course of study offered by Technical and Further Education Commission (TAFE NSW Higher Education)

A delegate of TEQSA has accredited, under section 49 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (the TEQSA Act), the following higher education course of study offered by Technical and Further Education Commission (TAFE NSW Higher Education) for a period of seven years until 19 February 2025:

• Bachelor of Aged Services

TEQSA has imposed, under section 53 of the TEQSA Act, one condition on the accreditation of the Bachelor of Aged Services.

Condition 1:

That by 30 March, for three years following the completion of the first full year of course delivery, TAFE NSW Higher Education provides to TEQSA copies of the annual course reports submitted to its relevant academic governance body. The reports are to include the scholarly activities undertaken by the academic staff teaching in the course in the discipline/field of Aged Services in the previous year; and information on meeting the requirements for continuing scholarship, including both disciplinary scholarship and scholarship in contemporary teaching, learning and assessment principles relevant to the discipline, evidencing that academic governance body's analysis and any action arising from that analysis (Standard 3.2.2b, c).

Main reasons for the decision

The issues which led TEQSA to impose the condition are:

a) Assurance of relevant teaching staff's knowledge of contemporary developments in the discipline or field, which is informed by continuing scholarship or research or advances in practice; and skills in contemporary teaching, learning and assessment principles relevant to the discipline, their role, modes of delivery and the needs of particular student cohorts.

Extension of accreditation period

Report on extension of accreditation of one higher education course of study offered by Christian Heritage College

On 28 October 2017 TEQSA extended, under section 57A of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act), the accreditation of the following course offered by Christian Heritage College (refer Public Report of 24 November 2016), for a period of one year until 31 December 2018:

• Graduate Diploma in Education (Secondary)

Main reasons for the decision

TEQSA made the decision to extend the accreditation period to ensure no disadvantage to continuing students in graduating.

Revocation of accreditation conditions

Report on revocation of conditions imposed on accreditation of four higher education courses of study offered by Christian Heritage College

On 28 October 2017 the TEQSA Commission revoked, under section 53 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act), Condition 1 and 2 imposed on the accreditation of the following courses offered by Christian Heritage College (refer public report of 24 November 2016):

• Bachelor of Education (Primary)
• Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Graduate Diploma in Education (Secondary)

Main reasons for the decision

TEQSA made this decision on the basis that it was satisfied that Conditions 1 and 2 had been met.

Revocation of accreditation conditions

Report on revocation of conditions imposed on accreditation of four higher education courses of study offered by Christian Heritage College

On 28 October 2017 the TEQSA Commission revoked, under section 53 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act), Condition 1 and 2 imposed on the accreditation of the following courses offered by Christian Heritage College (refer public report of 24 November 2016):

• Bachelor of Education (Primary)
• Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Graduate Diploma in Education (Secondary)

Main reasons for the decision

TEQSA made this decision on the basis that it was satisfied that Conditions 1 and 2 had been met.

Revocation of accreditation conditions

Report on revocation of conditions imposed on accreditation of four higher education courses of study offered by Christian Heritage College

On 28 October 2017 the TEQSA Commission revoked, under section 53 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act), Condition 1 and 2 imposed on the accreditation of the following courses offered by Christian Heritage College (refer public report of 24 November 2016):

• Bachelor of Education (Primary)
• Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Graduate Diploma in Education (Secondary)

Main reasons for the decision

TEQSA made this decision on the basis that it was satisfied that Conditions 1 and 2 had been met.

Revocation of accreditation conditions

Report on revocation of conditions imposed on accreditation of four higher education courses of study offered by Christian Heritage College

On 28 October 2017 the TEQSA Commission revoked, under section 53 of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act), Condition 1 and 2 imposed on the accreditation of the following courses offered by Christian Heritage College (refer public report of 24 November 2016):

• Bachelor of Education (Primary)
• Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Education (Secondary)
• Graduate Diploma in Education (Secondary)

Main reasons for the decision

TEQSA made this decision on the basis that it was satisfied that Conditions 1 and 2 had been met.