Go to top of page

Bachelor of Design: Accreditation 9 June 2016

Imposing a condition on accreditation

Report on imposing one condition on the accreditation two higher education course of study offered by Raffles College Pty Ltd (t/a Raffles College of Design and Commerce ("RCDC"))

 

On 9 June 2016, a delegate of TEQSA imposed, under subsection 53(1) of the TEQSA Act, one condition on the accreditation of the following courses of study:

  • Bachelor of Design
  • Bachelor of Arts (Visual Communication)

Condition 1

RCDC must arrange for an independent and external review of the library and learning resources for students of RCDC's higher education courses in Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur. If a reviewer other than Ms Selena Griffith is to conduct the review RCDC must obtain TEQSA's approval for the reviewer before appointing the reviewer. The report arising from the review must be provided to TEQSA and RCDC simultaneously and not later than 24 June 2016.

Main Reasons for the Decision

TEQSA considers that the decision to apply a condition on the accreditation of the Bachelor of Design and Bachelor of Arts (Visual Communication) courses of study is consistent with the basic principles for regulation in Part 2 of the TEQSA Act, as it is a necessary and proportionate response to risks that RCDC is not complying with Provider Course Accreditation Standards (PCAS) 1.9, 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4.

TEQSA notes that RCDC agreed to the imposition of this condition.

On 10 March 2016, a delegate of TEQSA imposed, under subsection 53(1) of the TEQSA Act, one condition on the accreditation of the following courses of study:

  • Bachelor of Design
  • Bachelor of Arts (Visual Communication)

Condition 1

RCDC provide TEQSA by 30 April 2016, in respect of its Kuala Lumpur and Hong Kong associate college delivery sites, evidence of:

  1. the acquisition of appropriate on-line and physical library holdings and resources;
  2. a report from an independent discipline expert or librarian on the appropriateness of library resources at both sites; and
  3. access to appropriately qualified library support staff at both associate college delivery sites to support the delivery of the courses.

The independent expert report provided under paragraph b of this condition expressed concern about the functionality and adequacy of resourcing of the libraries in Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur.

While TEQSA considered further information provided by RCDC, TEQSA remained of the view that RCDC is at risk of not complying with the PCAS in respect of:

  • PCAS 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4 relating to the adequacy of course resourcing and of access to library and information services, and to the adequacy of IT resources; and
  • PCAS 1.9 in respect of the courses ensuring equivalent student learning outcomes regardless of a student's place or mode of study