This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication (communication) reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held

responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

CMAster Project Deliverable 6.1:

Quality assurance framework

1 Version History

Version Date Change Author(s)

1.0 19 April 2013 Initial draft Richard Baker

1.1 24 April 2013 Good draft for consultation Richard Baker

2.0 10 Sept 2014 Final draft for approval Richard Baker

2 Content

1 Version History ................................................................................................................................ 1

2 Content ........................................................................................................................................... 1

3 Purpose and Background ................................................................................................................ 2

4 Quality assurance at the University of Salford ............................................................................... 3

4.1 National framework ................................................................................................................ 3

4.2 Academic governance ............................................................................................................. 3

4.3 Characteristics of master’s degree progammes ..................................................................... 4

4.4 Special provisions for collaborative programmes ................................................................... 5

5 Quality assurance at VU Amsterdam .............................................................................................. 6

5.1 National framework ................................................................................................................ 6

5.2 Academic governance ............................................................................................................. 6

5.3 Characteristics of masters’s degree programmes .................................................................. 8

5.4 Special provision for collaborative programmes .................................................................... 8

6 Quality assurance at KU Leuven ...................................................................................................... 9

6.1 National framework ................................................................................................................ 9

6.2 Academic governance ............................................................................................................. 9

6.3 Characteristics of masters’s degree programmes ................................................................ 10

6.4 Special provision for collaborative programmes .................................................................. 11

7 Quality assurance for CMAster ..................................................................................................... 12

7.1 Quality assurance of parallel programmes ........................................................................... 12

7.2 Quality assurance of Joint degree ......................................................................................... 13

2 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

3 Purpose and Background

As specified in the original proposal this document:

”outlines how quality will be assured in the delivery of the Masters course. Wherever possible it will specify the use of existing policies and procedures of the different partners but there will have to be specific measures to prevent undue duplication of work”.

Quality assurance of academic programmes is a responsibility of the university awarding the diploma. Across Europe there are various mechanisms by which university is held to account for this responsibility.

The original proposal envisaged a single joint master’s degree programme that would require a single quality assurance framework. Establishing this is one of the administrative challenges that imposes a barrier to rapid progress with this project and which has resulted in a request to modify the aim of the CMAster project. If accepted the aim of the project will be to establish parallel master’s degree programmes at the three partner universities by the end of the project with a plan to move to a full joint programme for students enrolling in September 2017. Under this framework quality assurance for the parallel programmes will clearly be a separate responsibility of the different universities. Three sections of this report will document these. A fourth section will propose a plan for developing a quality assurance framework for a full joint programme. At present this section is limited to a discussion of the issues. As work progresses later drafts will document a more and more definitive plan.

3 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

4 Quality assurance at the University of Salford

4.1 National framework

In the UK each Higher Education Institute (HEI) is an independent and self-governing body with responsibility for the academic standards and quality of the UK higher education that they provide. They award their own degrees and manage the quality and standards of those degrees. Quality and standards are ensured by internal policies, procedures and guidance and, at the programme level, by the involvement of external examiners.

The role of safeguarding quality and standards within UK higher education is that of the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). This is an independent body, registered charity and company limited by guarantee. About one third of its funding comes from subscriptions for UK HEIs and the other two thirds form public sector contracts with higher education funding bodies and government departments. It published the UK Quality Code for Higher Education (Quality Code) in 2012. The QAA also conducts reviews of higher education institutes against the criteria of the Quality Code. The review is a rolling programme ensuring that any HEI is reviewed approximately once every six years.

4.2 Academic governance

The Governance Services Unit of the University of Salford produces the Academic Regulations for Taught Programmes (referred to in the document as the Regulations). The policies and procedures mentions in the regulations are included in Academic Handbook . The Regulations are reviewed and approved annually for the following academic year by the Learning, Teaching and Enhancement Committee and the Senate. At any given time the Regulations in force are those for that academic year (not the year in which the student enrolled). Individual Schools may operate guidelines and procedures which supplement the Regulations. Conflicts with the Regulations should not occur but if they do it is the Regulations that take precedence. A procedure for approving exceptions to the Regulations is outlined within the Regulations themselves.

Qualifications which may be awarded by the University to students on completion of a taught programme of study are approved by the Learning , Teaching and Enhancement Committee and by Senate before a programme of study learning to the qualification is approved. Qualification descriptors are taken from the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland1 and defined in Qualification nomenclature: Descriptors for qualifications awarded by the University of Salford .

All taught programmes are subject to a two stage application process:

a. Business Case Approval by the Academic Programmes and Partnerships Committee on the recommendation of the relevant College Partnerships and Programme Approval and Review Committee;

1 These The frameworks for higher education qualifications throughout the UK are designed to meet the Expectations of the Bologna Declaration and thus align with The Framework for Qualifications of the European higher education area (FQ-EHEA) which formally accept the Dublin Descriptors .

4 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

b. Academic Approval of a programme by the relevant College Partnerships and Programme Approval and Review Committee (which shall be reported to the Academic Programmes and Partnerships Committee).

Such approval is based on information contained in a programme specification and a number of module specifications. Business case approval typically occurs in October of November and Academic Approval in January or February for a programme beginning in September. The programme is reviewed annually as described in the Annual Programme Monitoring and Enhancement procedure and “reviewed and re-approved in detail” normally every five years and no more than every six years as described in Programme Design, Approval, Amendment, Review and Withdrawal. This document also includes the process required for approval of amendments to programme or module specifications.

4.3 Characteristics of master’s degree progammes

Master’s degree programmes are taught at level 7 as defined in the following paragraph.

“Much of the study undertaken for Masters degrees will have been at, or informed by, the forefront of an academic or professional discipline. Students will have shown originality in the application of knowledge, and they will understand how the boundaries of knowledge are advanced through research. They will be able to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, and they will show originality in tackling and solving problems. They will have the qualities needed for employment in circumstances requiring sound judgement, personal responsibility and initiative, in complex and unpredictable professional environments.”

A master’s degree programme comprises 90 level 7 ECTS credits2 and can be divided either into:

a. a stage of 60 ECTS credits followed by a stage of 30 ECTS credits or b. three stages of 30 ECTS credits.

The final stage is always the master’s project stage.

The stages are comprised of modules of either 15 or 30 ECTS credits. (There is provision for 5 or 10 ECTS credit modules where part of a programme is being delivered jointly with another institution). The most common model is for a master’s degree programme to comprise of a first stage of four 15 ECTS credit taught modules and a second stage of a single 30 ECTS credit project module.

A student is awarded a module mark for each module. At level 7 this is based on no more than two assessments per module. At this level the pass mark is 50% and credits are only awarded if this has been achieved (i.e. it is not possible to pass the programme unless all modules have been passed). A programme mark is awarded which is the average of the module marks weighted by the number of credits per module. Given that all modules must have been passed (marked higher than50%) then the minimum programme mark is 50%. A merit may be awarded for students with a programme mark higher than 60% and a distinction for a programme mark higher than 70% (in both cases the

2 Universities in the UK use a credit which is equivalent to 10 hours learning time. For comparison with Leuven and Amsterdam these will be converted to European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) credits. The University of Salford specifies that one ECTS credit value is equivalent of 1ECTS to 2 University of Salford credits. The logic of this is not clear as an ECTS elsewhere in Europe an ECTS is equivalent to 25-30 hours whereas this would make it equivalent to 20 hours.

5 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

project stage mark must also exceed 60% and 70% respectively). Procedures for assessment are set out in Assessment and Feedback for Taught Awards.

4.4 Special provisions for collaborative programmes

When the University, through a school or college, enters into an arrangement with a partner in a specific and defined subject area for the delivery of one or a small number of programmes leading to a credit or qualification then the partner must be affiliated to the University. (Accreditation is required where a strategic relationship with a partner at institutional level spans a range of programmes). Rules governing this are laid out in the Collaborative Provision Procedures.

The University has one current example of EU programme development European Masters in Ludic Interfaces. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission. "Ludic Interfaces" is a Masters programme development on a European level. It is also the title of a European collaboration in creating a network of Academic Institutions and of world leading Media Centres to investigate, design and test publicly shared digital content. The programme development is a joint project by the University of Potsdam, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, Universität für künstlerische und industrielle Gestaltung in Linz, and by the University of Salford. The end result was of a single degree awarded by the University or Slaford that recognizes ECTS gained in partner universities in Europe.

If a genuine Joint Award (an award issued jointly by all Institutions under legal powers they possess in their home countries) is developed the University of Salford would need to be satisfied that due diligence had been carried out and they would need to establish the legal position of the partner institutions.

6 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

5 Quality assurance at VU Amsterdam

5.1 National framework

Higher education in the Netherlands is offered at two types of institutions: universities of applied sciences (hogescholen, HBO) and research universities (universiteiten, WO). The former comprises general institutions and institutions specialising in a particular field, such as agriculture, fine and performing arts, or teacher training; the latter comprises general universities and universities specialising in engineering and agriculture. Since September 2002, the higher education system in the Netherlands has been organised around a three-cycle system consisting of bachelor's, master's and PhD degrees, to conform and standardize the teaching in both the HBO and the WO according to the Bologna process.[citation needed] At the same time, the ECTS credit system was adopted as an way of quantifying a student's workload (both contact hours, and hours spent studying and preparing assignments).

The Ministry of Education, Culture and Science is responsible for legislation pertaining to education. A system of accreditation was introduced in 2002. Since then, the new Accreditation Organization of the Netherlands and Flanders (NVAO) has been responsible for accreditation at both an institutional and programme level. The quality assurance and accreditation system serves a twofold purpose: it is intended to help improve the quality of university education, and the universities are required to account for the way in which they address quality and quality assurance in the context of a programme.

According to the section of the Dutch Higher Education Act that deals with the accreditation of higher education (2002), degree programmes offered by research universities and universities of professional education will be evaluated according to established criteria, and programmes that meet those criteria will be accredited, that is, recognised for a period of six years. Only accredited programmes are eligible for government funding, and students receive financial aid only when enrolled in an accredited programme. Only accredited programmes issue legally recognised degrees. Accredited programmes are listed in the publicly accessible Central Register of Higher Education Study Programmes (CROHO).

5.2 Academic governance

Accreditation of programmes is performed by NVAO. VU Amsterdam is accredited as an institution and thus its programmes are accredited with a programme level framework with “limited assessment criteria for the accreditation of institutions whose institutional quality assurance assessment produced a positive result” the so called limited programme assessment. Separate processes operate for new programmes and existing programmes.

Programme level accreditation is against three overall standards:

Standard 1: Intended learning outcomes. The intended learning outcomes of the programme have been concretised with regard to content, level and orientation; they meet international requirements.

Standard 2: Teaching-learning environment. The curriculum, staff and programme-specific services and facilities enable the incoming students to achieve the intended learning outcomes.

7 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

Standard 3: Assessment and achieved learning outcomes. The programme has an adequate assessment system in place and demonstrates that the intended learning outcomes are achieved.

Assessment against these standards is conducted by an assessment panel. For the initial accreditation this panel is appointed by NVAO, for subsequent accreditation it the institution proposes membership for NVAO to confirm. In either case the panel comprises at least four members of whom at least two must be authoritative domain experts and one a student who are supported by a panel secretary who has completed NVAO training to certification. The panel members must be independent of the institution (no ties for the last five years).

The limited initial accreditation follows the Assessment frameworks for the higher education accreditation system initial accreditation (limited/extensive) and has four stages:

Information dossier: The institution presents an information dossier describing the programme as specified in the. The dossier comprises a maximum of 20 pages excluding appendices.

Site visit: This is scheduled for a single day and the agenda is set by the panel on the basis of their preliminary opinion of the dossier. The panel will meet provisional programme management, member of examination board, committee, teachers and, where relevant, members of the professional field. Brief feedback is provided at the end of the visit by the panel chair.

Panel deliberation: The assessment panel presents its judgement regarding all the standards incorporated in the assessment framework which may be: unsatisfactory or satisfactory. The panel subsequently formulates a general, weighted and substantiated judgement regarding the quality of the programme. This judgement is also either unsatisfactory or satisfactory).

Advisory report: The assessment panel secretary draws up an advisory report comprising some 20 pages. The assessment report is preceded by a summary judgement regarding the quality of the programme comprising a maximum of two pages. Any measures for improvement will be presented in a separate paragraph.

The report is returned to the institution who have two weeks to respond to any factual inaccuracies. After final consideration by the panel it is returned to the NVAO. Either NVAO or the institution so desires then the NVAO may invite the panel for further consultation.

On the basis of the report the NVAO can take two decisions: a positive initial accreditation decision for a period of six years, or a negative accreditation decision.

Accreditation of existing programmes follows the Assessment frameworks for the higher education accreditation system - programme assessment limited/extensive . It is broadly similar to the initial accreditation. The institution prepares a critical reflection of the programme after which there is a site visit. In deliberating the panel uses a four point scale – unsatisfactory, satisfactory, good or excellent. The report is shown to the institution for comment and then forwarded to the NVAO.

The board of the institution applies to NVAO for accreditation based on the assessment report. NVAO may decide to accredit the programme, not accredit it or grant an improvement period. The Accreditation Decree of the Dutch Higher Education and Research Act stipulates how, on what grounds and under what circumstances NVAO may grant an improvement period.

A macro-efficiency check is also required to consider the issue of whether a proposed new programme should be funded by the national authorities. The following questions play an important

8 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

role during this procedure: Is the same or a similar programme already offered in the country, region or city? Is there a demand by the professional field to offer this programme? Is there a demand in the labour market for additional graduates from this programme? Several other elements are of course also taken into consideration. In the Netherlands, the macro-efficiency check is done by CDHO and takes place before the initial accreditation decision.

5.3 Characteristics of masters’s degree programmes

Under Dutch law, one credit represents 28 hours of work and 60 credits represents one year of full-time study. Master's programmes at the wo level mostly require the completion of 60 or 120 credits (1 or 2 years). Some programmes require 90 (1.5 years) or more than 120 credits.

For admission to all master's programmes, a bachelor's degree in one or more specified disciplines is required, in some cases in combination with other requirements. Graduates with an HBO bachelor's may have to complete additional requirements for admission to a WO master's programme. A pre-master programme may provide admission to a master's programme in a different discipline than that of the bachelor's degree.

5.4 Special provision for collaborative programmes

VUA will only award a diploma if at least 50% of the study had been completed at VUA (50% ECTS credits have been awarded by VUA.

The policy of VUA towards a joint degree scenario is that this is a possible end point and not a starting point. In this scenario, getting the program accredited is necessary. This means that the program has to meet the minimum standards of all participating universities. If, for example, the level of the program does not meet the minimum requirements of a Master program of the Netherlands, Belgium and England, the program cannot be accredited.

At VUA at least one Master’s programme includes joint degrees. This programme will stop because of a lack of students. VUA also has a multiple diploma programme: Neurasmus.

The experience of VUA is that the accrediting process in England is even more time consuming than in Belgium and the Netherlands. It will take at least two site visits (England separate and Belgium and the Netherlands combined).

VUA only allows Master programs with an influx of at least 20 students per year. Programmes with less than 20 students per year are forced to stop. NB: this means that 20 students per year must take courses of the program in Amsterdam, not that 20 students in whole participate in the program

9 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

6 Quality assurance at KU Leuven

6.1 National framework

Education in Belgium is regulated and for the larger part financed by one of the three communities: Flemish, French and German-speaking. All three communities have a unified school system with small differences from one community to another. The national government plays a very small role: it decides directly the age for mandatory schooling and indirectly the financing of the communities.

Leuven is in Flanders, the Dutch speaking region, and here the Higher Education Register (HOR) lists recognized higher education institutions and accredited programmes. Only degrees awarded by the programmes published in these lists are recognized by the authorities in the Netherlands and Flanders (and hence more broadly within the EU).

In 2003, the Higher Education Act introduced the system of programme accreditation by the NVAO for the Bachelor and Master programmes in Flanders. This is the same organization which accredits higher education in the Netherlands and thus processes are very similar. In the sections below the process will be summarized very briefly focusing on where differences do exist.

6.2 Academic governance

As in the Netherlands there are different processes for initial accreditation of a new programme and ongoing accreditation of existing programmes. The process for new programmes is described in Assessment framework for the initial accreditation of higher education programmes in Flanders.

Standards relate to:

Aims and objectives of the programme o level and orientation o domain specific requirements.

Curriculum o Requirements regarding academic and professional orientation o Correspondence between aims and objectives and curriculum o Cohesion of curriculum o Duration o Admission requirements o Number of credits o Master’s thesis

Staff commitments o Requirements regarding professional /academic orientation o Quantity of staff

Facilities o Material facilities o Tutoring

Internal quality assurance o Systematic approach o Involving staff, students, alumni and the professional field

Conditions for continuity o Graduation guarantee o Investments

10 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

o Financial facilities.

The process for initial accreditation is very similar to that in the Netherlands. The main differences in specific details of the procedure and how much is mandated in the framework documents and how much is left for interpretation (e.g. rule for membership of the assessment panel are much more specifically delineated in the Netherlands Framework). The Accreditation framework for existing higher education programmes in Flanders has similar parallels to the Netherlands equivalent described above.

In Flanders, the macro-efficiency check takes place before the initial accreditation procedure. Institutions that receive public funding should submit an application for a macro-efficiency check regarding a new programme to the Recognition Commission. Only after a positive macro-efficiency decision, institutions can submit applications for initial accreditation to NVAO.

The macro-efficiency check is not necessary for joint programmes that receive or will receive European funding (e.g. Erasmus Mundus, curriculum development, EIT). Additionally, new programmes offered by institutions that don't receive public funding do not need to undergo a macro-efficiency check and can immediately submit an application for initial accreditation to NVAO. To start the programme in a given academic year (e.g. 2014-2015), the application needs be submitted before 1 March of the preceding calendar year (in this case, 1 March 2013).

6.3 Characteristics of masters’s degree programmes

The characteristics of master’s level education are specified in the Assessment framework for the initial accreditation of higher education programmes in Flanders.

master general competencies at an advanced level, such as the ability to think and act in an academic fashion, the ability to deal with complex problems, the ability to reflect on their own thinking and working and being able to translate that reflection into the development of more adequate solutions, the ability to communicate their own research and problem solutions to peers and laymen and the ability to form a judgement in an uncertain context;

master general academic competencies at an advanced level, such as the ability to use research methods and techniques, the ability to design research, the ability to use paradigms in the domain of science or the arts and being able to identify the boundaries of paradigms, the ability to demonstrate originality and creativity with a view to the continuous expansion of knowledge and insights and the ability to work in concert in a multi-disciplinary environment;

an advanced understanding of and insight into the academic knowledge specific to a particular domain of science or the arts, insight into the latest knowledge of the field of study or components thereof, the ability to follow and interpret developments in the formation of theories, the ability to make an original contribution to the knowledge relevant to one or more components of the field of study and the possession of specific skills related to the field of study, such as designing, researching, analyzing and diagnosing;

either master the competencies required to independently conduct research or independently practise art at the level of a newly-qualified researcher or artist; or master the general and specific professional competencies required to independently apply academic or artistic knowledge at the level of a newly-qualified professional.

There are two levels of master’s degree programmes:

11 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

Master's programmes consist of at least 60 ECTS credits and take on average one academic year. Depending on the field of study programmes last longer. Master's programmes have an academic orientation but can in addition include a more professional orientation. These programmes aim at bringing the student to an advanced level of knowledge and competences in a specific field of study. Master's programmes are concluded with a master's dissertation. This takes a minimum of 15 ECTS credits and a maximum of 30 ECTS credits.

Advanced master's programmes are actually further studies and aim at deepening the knowledge and/or competences in a certain field of study. A student must already hold a master's degree to enrol. These programmes consist of at least 60 ECTS credits and take on average one academic year.

The curriculum for any degree programme is conceived as a set of courses each with a minimum of 3 ECTS credits. There is a maximum of 12 courses per 60ECTS. Exams are graded on a 20 point scale with students who obtain at least 10/20 being awarded the credit for that course. Three types of learning contract are available for bachelors and master’s diploma:

A diploma contract: the student wants to obtain the diploma.

A credit contract: the student wants to obtain credits for one or more courses.

An examinations contract: the student wants to obtain the diploma or independent credits, based exclusively on examination (without participation in class activities)

Students from outside the European Economic Region can only register for a full-time diploma contract.

6.4 Special provision for collaborative programmes

The KU Leuven has a long tradition in international cooperation. Currently, (September 2012) the KU Leuven has 37 international programmes, of which eight are Erasmus Mundus programmes.

For each type of cooperation, the KU Leuven concludes a formal agreement with its partners, allowing double or multiple degrees as well as joint degrees, depending on the circumstances. Seventeen international programmes award a double or multiple degree and nine confer a joint degree.

The Accreditation framework for existing higher education programmes in Flanders details specific guidance for “Accreditation of programmes based on accreditation abroad”. This stipulates that in the assessment of accreditation applications for programmes that have already been granted an international accreditation, the Accreditation Organisation must verify whether such international accreditation has been granted in accordance with a methodological approach that compares with the accreditations granted on the basis of an external review.

12 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

7 Quality assurance for CMAster

All three universities have detailed institution policies and procedures for quality assurance rooted in clear national frameworks. The biggest single difference is that responsibility for accreditation at the programme level rests at University level within the UK it is the responsibility of the NVAO in both the Netherlands and Flanders. Given this the actual documentation that is required is broadly similar.

Both the Netherlands and Flanders require new programmes to be subject to a macro-economic check before the initial accreditation can be started. This potentially increases the time required to accredit a new programme. The check is not required however for Joint Programmes that receive or will receive European funding.

Experience of developing joint programmes within the three Universities is limited. KU Leuven has most experience with 37 international programmes, of which eight are Erasmus Mundus programmes. Some but not all award joint degrees and it is the only one of the three universities with experience of delivering a full joint diploma. VU Amsterdam has one joint programme (Neurasmus), but awards a multiple diploma (not a joint diploma). The University of Salford has been involved in one Joint project (Ludic interfaces) but awards a single degree with recognition of ECTS credit awarded by partner institutions.

None of the universities have clear regulations for the initiation and maintenance of joint programmes. Progress seems to be more dependent on informal negotiation than on due process and is dependent on a project being championed by senior figures with influence.

A specific challenge for the CMAster project is that being aimed at a niche professional group the market for the programme is uncertain and this undermines the determination of institutions to progress with a specific process outside of normal regulations for this one programme.

Regulations within VU Amsterdam which stipulate that students must be awarded at least half their credits from VUA itself in order to qualify for a degree and this effectively prevents a programme of equal partners (where presumably students would gain only a third of their credits with any one university). The regulations also stipulate that at least 20 students should study in Amsterdam each year which will be difficult to guarantee if not all students attend Amsterdam.

Whilst there is reasonable good will to investigate ways to surmount these obstacles it is clear that waiting for to overcome these before developing the programme would lead to an unacceptable delay in the project and risk failure at other levels. Along with other factors that has led to a proposal that the aim of the project should be twofold:

To develop three parallel programmes (one based in each university) in Clinical Movement Analysis by the end of the funding period (October 2014).

To develop a plan for full integration into a Joint Programme by 2017.

7.1 Quality assurance of parallel programmes

Given that the programmes will lead to the award of a single degree from each institution responsibility for quality assurance clearly rests with that institution under its existing regulations.

The University of Salford will develop a completely new master’s degree programme to be delivered by part-time distance learning over a three year period.

VU Amsterdam are constrained by the requirement to have 20 students enroll on any new programme and will thus modify their current master’s programme in Human Movement

13 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

Science to allow students options to allow them to fully meet the competencies specified in the Key Competencies report.

KULeuven plan to develop a new (intial) master’s degree programme in Clinical Movement Anaysis. This will share some courses with other masters programmes delivered by the University. As CMAster is a lifelong learning Erasmus project, the macro-efficiency check is not necessary to start the initial master’s degree programme, if the programme starts in the academic year 2014-2015.

7.2 Quality assurance of Joint Programme

Although Joint Masters Programmes between European universities having been encouraged for over a decade it is only extremely recently that true joint programmes (as opposed to double degrees or other forms of collaborative position). There is now rapid expansion in this sector with Erasmus Mundus Joint Master’s Programme web-site now listing over 260 programmes with 27 of these in life sciences, medicine and health.

Neither the University or Salford nor VU Amsterdam has yet established a full joint master’s programme with a foreign university. Whilst general guidelines for the governance of collaborative learning are available, detailed guidance specific to such Master’s programmes is still being developed. It is hoped that this will be available to support delivery of the full joint programme until September 2017.

The Exploitation Plan (CMAster Deliverable 8.1) includes a two year development plan from September 2015 to September 2017 to prepare for delivery of the joint master’s programme. An important componet of the reflection phase will be reflection on institutional progress on the formalisation of joint programme requirements. If this has been clearly outlined then those requirements will be followed. If no then this programme will essentially serve as a pilot for both Universities.

This should be reasonably straightforward as all components of the programme are already being delivered as parts of the existing parallel programmes and have been through the full quality assurance programme at one University or the other. They will continue to be taught separately and thus the only requirement is that a mechanism is found such that the two universities can acknowledge each other’s existing quality assurance provisions.