Conestoga's established program review processes promote continuous quality improvement through evidence-based reflection and analysis. The processes require academic administration and academic teams to consider the Conestoga community's feedback and needs to meet professional bodies' and Ministry of Colleges and Universities (MCU) requirements.

Conestoga College maintains a glossary of terms specific to the institution. The terms in use for this document are defined below.

Academic Schools

• Collaborate with relevant departments to complete review processes according to institutional policies and procedures. 
• Collaborate with Program Planning and Pathways (PPP) to provide subject matter expertise that informs curriculum and program design changes.
• Collaborate and engage with academic service areas to ensure proposed changes resulting from program reviews are actionable.
• Collaborate across academic schools on the delivery of shared courses within programs, including but not limited to general education and degree breadth.
• Collaborate with Institutional Quality Management (IQM)/ Program Planning and Pathways (PPP) departments to confirm program clustering for reviews.
• Approve decisions and documentation related to program reviews and comprehensive reviews.
  
• Engage PAC in regular consultations as per PAC Policy; ensure that relevant PAC discussions are captured, and feedback is considered in program reviews.

Program Planning and Pathways Department (PPP)

• Works collaboratively with the academic school to provide guidance in ensuring program compliance with the Ministry of Colleges and Universities and associated arms-length quality assurance bodies such as the PEQAB and OCQAS, Minister's Binding Policy Directive: Framework for Programs of Instruction, Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board, including consideration of general education, EES requirements, or degree learning outcomes (DLOs) where applicable.
• Advises academic schools and IQM of MCU standards changes or scheduled revisions.
• Supports the alignment of program learning outcomes with the courses in the program design through program mapping activities during APR or comprehensive review.
• Recommends appropriate program standard and program description to use in the curriculum mapping process.
• Supports program design modifications, new course creation and course outline updates or proposed PEQAB outlines resulting from program review activities.
• Develops and delivers curriculum training relevant to program maps, EES guides, Degree Learning Outcomes (DLOs), etc. to support increased institutional initiatives and internal and external expectations in program delivery
• Supports the process of a program title change to Credential Validation Service (CVS) and Ministry of Colleges and Universities (MCU), to ensure all internal and external requirements are met.
  
• Assigns Consultants to support and direct program teams through APRs and MPRs.
• Develops, reviews, and revises degree program review documents and workflows in consultation with Conestoga stakeholders.
• Aligns program review requirements across degrees and determines opportunities for alignment with other external regulatory/accreditation bodies, where applicable.
• Leads Degree Consent Renewals, providing guidance for schools and departments to ensure successful degree consent renewals, including facilitating program-review related meetings, gathering appropriate evidence, and drafting program review documentation (self-study) on behalf of the academic school.
• Develops and/or supports initiatives across the institution related to the capacity, sustainability, and quality of degree delivery, faculty, and student experiences.

Institutional Research and Planning (IRP)

• Collaborates on the MPR data package development schedule to ensure that the MPR schedule is supported.
• Provides support in the collection, collation, analyses and reporting of data for program review processes.
• Provides data required to populate Program Quality Indicators page in the APR.
• As per the MPR schedule, prepares the comprehensive, longitudinal MPR data packages, including comparator CAAT data, to support data-driven planning and decision making. Present MPR Data packages to the IQM consultants for information review and consultation.
• Facilitates collection, analysis and reporting of feedback from key stakeholders including students, graduates, and employers.
• Prepares and disseminates BI dashboards such as, OCSES, NF Graduate Survey, Program Scorecards to keep college stakeholders informed on quality assurance aspects on an ongoing basis.
• Prepares Labour Market Reports to inform the Degree Consent Renewal initiatives.

Program Advisory Committee (PAC)

• Provides input for comprehensive program review.
• Stays informed through PAC reports of program status in relation to college and external reviews as appropriate.

Institutional Quality Committee

• Acts as an advisory group; consults on all institutional quality related, processes, solutions, systems, and policies and procedures.

Program Planning and Review Committee

• Acts as an advisory group for program development
• Receives and comments on results from Annual Program Reflection trends, Major Program Reviews and Degree Consent Renewal outcomes so that various stakeholders can plan for upcoming major program changes.

Institutional Quality Management (IQM)

• Creates and maintains program review framework and online systems supported by IT.
• Ensures that program learning outcomes are central to the program review frameworks. 
• Ensures that Ministry and external bodies compliance requirements are key aspects of the program review processes.
• Ensures that all stakeholders are engaged throughout the program review processes.
• Maintains a master major program review schedule for the institution, which includes program clusters.
• Provides an annual status report which includes completions and trend analysis to the Executive Dean/Dean of the program and Academic Administration.
• Maintains an archive of all institutional program review documentation based on the institution's retention policy.
• Liaises with the Institutional Quality Committee regarding all program review related issues, processes, solutions, systems, and policies and procedures.
• Aligns program review activities in consideration of degree, accreditation and major program review requirements.
• In collaboration with chairs, establishes the programs which can be reviewed separately or as a program cluster.
• Assigns Consultants to support and direct program teams through APRs and MPRs.
• Develops and/or supports initiatives across the institution related to the capacity, sustainability, and quality of program delivery, faculty, and student experiences.
  

Other Academic and Student Support Departments

• Participate in the program review process as appropriate. Services include, but are not limited to, Student Success, Corporate Services, and Academic Administration. 
  

1. Annual Program Reflection (APR)
1. The APR application is made available to academic teams on May 1^st and/or the first Monday in May.
1. Academic Teams are notified by IQM via email that the APR cycle and system are launched.   
2. The APR is completed by a team as assigned by the Academic Chair.
1. Academic Teams are required to complete all applicable sections of the APR application.
1. Program suspensions, adjusted program mapping, and program design changes are recommended to be proposed through the APR application. 
2. Academic Teams are required to meet the three-tier sign-off dates through the APR application to meet institutional deadlines.
1. The Program Lead(s) to complete and sign-off to the Academic Chair by June 30th.
2. The Academic Chair to review and sign-off to Executive Dean/Dean by July 31st.
3. The Executive Dean/Dean to review and approve the APR by August 31^st.
1. Executive Dean/Dean approval is recognized as approval for all program changes and action plans as specified in the APR including the Program Design Change Form or Suspension Form, if applicable.
3. Upon completion of the APR:
1. The IQM department reviews proposed changes to program components and provides them to the Program Planning and Pathways (PPP) department.
2. The PPP department implements changes to program components in accordance with the institutional policies, procedures, and design change deadlines.
3. The IQM department verifies the implementation of all changes to program components proposed through the APR.
4. The IQM department creates and provides APR action plans and briefing notes to each Academic Chair, Executive Dean/Dean and academic service area in Fall Semester.
1. The Academic Chair ensures action plan(s) are monitored and completed according to the established implementation plan and priorities.
2. Action plan results are integrated into Fall and/or Winter/Spring PAC reports to be shared with PAC.
5. The IQM department conducts analysis and prepares reports based on APR results for stakeholders to identify college-wide trends and inform strategic decision making.
4. The Major Program Review (MPR)
1. The IQM department manages the master Major Program Review (MPR) schedule.
1. The IQM department communicates the upcoming MPR schedule to all relevant stakeholders in the Summer ahead of upcoming academic year.
1. The IQM department confirms Fall or Winter launches with Academic Chairs of programs being reviewed.
2. The Academic Chair is responsible for MPR work assignments for the associated programs being reviewed.
3. The IQM department consults with the Academic Teams to ensure consideration of program fitness, program standard changes, accreditation, and new program development when setting the MPR schedule.
1. The IQM department monitors the status of a program's accreditation and schedules an MPR that aligns with reporting/renewal requirements, where applicable.  
1. In consultation with the Dean/Executive Dean and Academic Chair, IQM department reviews the external review process and requirements to determine if there is adequate alignment with the College's quality review procedure. If deemed appropriate, the program review process is modified to align with accreditation requirements. Program updates remain subject to internal processes and timelines.  
2. The IQM department facilitates the MPR process, guided by the MPR Meeting Framework, with support from the IRP and PPP departments.
1. In consultation with the Academic Team, the IQM department establishes critical meeting dates; the MPR is typically completed within one semester.
2. The MPR Data Packages are prepared by IRP, which include stakeholder (student, graduate, PAC, employer, faculty) feedback, and longitudinal information on the Conestoga and other comparator CAAT programs' applications, enrolments and retention, key performance indicators, graduate outcomes, and labour market outlooks. BI dashboards will be embedded throughout the data package.  The MPR Data Packages are shared with IQM team for information review and, if required, consultations.
3. The IQM department leads the Academic Team through the MPR. IQM guides the team through a strategic program assessment, ensures compliance with internal and external requirements; provides recommendations; and captures the rationale for changes and required information within MPR documentation.
1. Where modifications are proposed, the IQM will advise on compliance for the following:
1. Program Quality Appendix B: General Education Requirements.
2. Program Quality Appendix A: College/Credentials Documents Chart.
3. Appendix C: EL/WIL Typology
1. Where modifications are proposed to Experiential Learning and WIL components, the IQM department ensures that the Talent Hub and PPP are consulted to confirm appropriateness of change.
2. The IQM department prepares a summary of the key themes and proposed changes resulting from the strategic program assessment and program update and renewal plan, and jointly submits the documentation with Program Lead(s) and the Academic Chair to the Executive Dean/Dean for approval. 
3. The Executive Dean/Dean reviews and provides feedback regarding proposed adjustments and communicates approval of the MPR to the IQM department.
1. If the Executive Dean/Dean requests changes to the MPR documentation, the IQM department arranges for additional meetings with the Academic Team as required and resubmits a revised version to the Executive Dean/Dean for approval.
5. Upon completion of the MPR:
1. The IQM department assists the Academic Team to implement proposed program components changes.
1. The Academic Team completes required program component change requests and submits them to the appropriate departments.
2. The IQM Department verifies the implementation of all program component changes proposed through the MPR.
2. The IQM Department creates and provides MPR action plans and briefing notes to the Academic Chair, Executive Dean/Dean, academic service areas and internal committees, as applicable.
1. The Academic Chair(s) ensures action plan(s) are monitored and completed according to the established implementation plan and priorities.
2. Action plan results are integrated into Fall and/or Winter/Spring PAC reports to be shared with their respective PAC.
3. The IQM department prepares reports based on MPR results for stakeholders to inform strategic decision making.
4. IQM facilitates a check-in through the APR two years after completion of an MPR to reflect on impacts resulting from program changes.
6. Degree Consent Renewal
   A degree self-study is completed by the Academic Team. It supports Ministerial renewal of consent to deliver the program, accreditation/re-accreditation of the program, or both.
1. Program Planning & Pathways (PPP) initiates program review processes with all relevant stakeholders.
2. PPP leads an in-depth review of the degree in alignment with Ministry requirements. In the case of degrees with related regulatory, accrediting or professional association/bodies, PPP will work with the academic school to ensure those standards are considered.
3. PPP will arrange a site visit by an external program evaluation committee to evaluate the program based on the degree self-study in accordance with Ministry requirements. This will be done in consultation with the academic school. Where appropriate, PPP will work with the academic school to align with any related regulatory, accrediting, or professional association activities.
4. The program evaluation committee will complete a report to assess program quality and recommend any changes needed to strengthen the degree program.
5. PPP, the academic school, and any other department related to program quality recommendations will complete an action plan in response to the program evaluation committee report.
6. PPP will ensure results will be shared with Program Planning and Review Committee and Academic Forum for advice and approval, as required.
7. PPP will submit an application for consent renewal to the Ministry on behalf of the institution.
8. PPP will liaise with the Ministry, providing any additional information or evidence as required on behalf of the institution.
9. PPP will advise all involved stakeholders regarding the result of the application for consent renewal to the Ministry. Each office will be responsible for implementing any necessary changes or updates resulting from the consent renewal.
10. The academic school will work with Program Planning & Pathways and other internal stakeholders to ensure any updates to the program are captured in the system in accordance with standard work processes and timelines.  This may include, but is not limited to, program design changes, marketing changes, changes to admission, promotion or graduation requirements, and other elements recorded in the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System.
7. When program review results in the recommendation of a change in the number of degree breadth electives program chairs are required to:
1. With the support of PPP, consult with the leadership of Interdisciplinary Studies about the general elective requirements mandated by Conestoga and Ministry and verify that any change in the number of courses in a program meets or exceeds the minimum number of courses mandated.
8. When program review results in the recommendation of a change in the type, number, or duration of work integrated learning components program chairs are required to:
1. With the support of PPP, consult with the leadership of the Talent Hub about the work integrated learning requirements mandated by Conestoga and Ministry.
9. External Reviews/Accreditation
1. Applications for new accreditations and/or renewal of existing accreditations are facilitated by IQM for non-degree programs and PPP for degree programs.
2. IQM/PPP are typically informed of the request to pursue a new accreditation through one of the following avenues: Request for Approval to Proceed (RFAP), APR and MPR. Alternatively, IQM/PPP may inform the academic school about accreditation opportunities as they arise.
1. When necessary, Academic Chairs designate a team including at least one member with subject matter expertise to collaborate with IQM/PPP on the application/review process.
3. In collaboration with the program team, IQM/PPP assess the accreditation requirements, processes and scope in alignment with internal or external program quality / review requirements
4. IQM/PPP manages the review process and monitor progress to ensure all deliverables are completed by the established deadline.
1. PPP collaborates with the program team to complete competency mapping for the accreditation where required.
2. IQM/PPP prepare submissions for the accreditation review per the timelines required – annually or for a comprehensive review. They consolidate the contributions of the program team, relevant academic and support services departments, and external stakeholders, where required.
3. IQM/PPP support planning and preparations for site visits, in collaboration with the academic school
5. IQM/PPP supports the program team in monitoring reporting requirements for accreditation maintenance.
1. Centralized systems for program review including the APR/MPR applications, student work repository, SIS, and other internal data mechanisms are used for consistent reporting.
1. IQM/ PPP supports the program teams through systems maintenance and training, as required.  
6. Using internal quality mechanisms, the Academic Chair will ensure follow-through on the recommendations from an accreditation report.