NEW PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL PROCEDURE
1.0 DEFINITIONS SPECIFIC TO THIS DOCUMENT
1.1 Capitalized words and phrases used in this Procedure document and not otherwise defined here have the meanings assigned to them in the New Program Development and Approval Policy (PL-AC-17).
1.2 The following words and expressions are specific to this document and shall have the meanings hereby assigned to them:
1.2.1 Admission Requirements: The requirements for eligibility into a University Program.
1.2.2 Certification: Official recognition that a Program or Course has met the established standards of quality set by a Certifying Body.
1.2.3 Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs): The knowledge, skills, and competencies a Student can demonstrate immediately upon completion of a Course.
1.2.4 Credit Hour: The assigned value of a Learning Session’s hours, granted upon a Student's completion of a Course, as maintained by the University’s official transcripts or records, in accordance with the value assignment standards set in the Qatar National Qualifications Framework.
1.2.5 Curriculum Enhancement: An improvement made to a Course or Program to enhance Student learning, align with University Strategic Priorities, or meet Accreditation and industry standards.
1.2.6 Curriculum Map: A visual representation of a Program that maps Course Learning Outcomes against Graduate Attributes, Program Educational Objectives, Student Learning Outcomes, Qatar National Qualifications Framework, Accrediting Body Requirements, and Professional Body Requirements.
1.2.7 External Reviewer: An independent subject-matter expert, unaffiliated with the University, who is appointed to evaluate an academic Program proposal to ensure the Program aligns with academic standards, industry requirements, and Accreditation criteria.
1.2.8 Program Development Team: A team of Academic Staff Members that are tasked with the development of a new academic Program and consists of at least one (1) faculty member from the college, one (1) specialist from Program Development and Accreditation Department, and one (1) technical writer/copy editor.
1.2.9 Program Educational Objectives (PEOs): The knowledge, skills, and competencies a graduate can demonstrate within 2-3 years of graduation.
1.3 Where a word or phrase is given a particular meaning, other parts of speech and grammatical forms of that word or phrase have corresponding meanings.
1.4 Where the context requires, words importing the singular shall include the plural and vice versa.
2.0 Procedure Purpose
2.1 This procedure supports the implementation of the New Program Development and Approval Policy (PL-AC-17) by providing a systematic, transparent, and evidence-based process for the development and approval of new academic Programs.
3.0 Procedure Statements
3.1 There are three (3) stages to the development of a new Program. Each stage must be completed, and the resulting endorsements obtained before proceeding to the subsequent stage (see Annex A). Where a proposal is not endorsed to proceed to the next stage, it is returned for review as per the new Program development and approval workflow.
3.2 Once a Program has been approved for implementation, all courses must be delivered at least once before further Curriculum Enhancements may be processed, unless otherwise required by Accrediting/Certifying Bodies.
3.3 Stage One: Initial Program Proposal
3.3.1 The Dean initiates an Initial Program Proposal that must include:
3.3.1.1 Tentative Program title.
3.3.1.2 Rationale for the Program.
3.3.1.3 Target learner groups.
3.3.1.4 Occupational fields or disciplines aligned with the Program.
3.3.1.5 Tentative implementation date.
3.3.2 The Vice-President, Academics reviews the Initial Program Proposal. If endorsed, it is submitted to the President for further review. If not endorsed, the decision to terminate the proposal is supported by a written rationale and archived with Program Development and Accreditation Department.
3.3.3 The President reviews the Initial Program Proposal. If endorsed, the President requests a Labor Market Analysis from the Institutional Excellence Directorate. If not endorsed, the proposal is terminated with the decision supported by a written rationale.
3.3.4 Institutional Excellence Directorate prepares a Labor Market Analysis to assess the current and projected demand for the Program. This analysis is sent to the Dean, with a copy to the Program Development and Accreditation Department, which also retains a copy. The analysis is added as an annex to the Preliminary Program Proposal.
3.3.5 The Dean determines whether to proceed to the Preliminary Program Proposal stage or to terminate development. If terminated, the Dean notifies the Vice-President, Academics.
3.4 Stage Two: Preliminary Program Proposal
3.4.1 The Program Development and Accreditation Department identifies and secures External Reviewers based on the criteria outline in the external review nomination form (Annex B), for Dean’s endorsement and the Vice-President, Academics’ approval.
3.4.2 The Program Development Team develops a Preliminary Program Proposal v.1 in consultation with Stakeholders.
3.4.3 The Preliminary Program Proposal must include:
3.4.3.1 Tentative Program title
3.4.3.2 General Program description
3.4.3.3 Program rationale.
3.4.3.4 Occupational outlook and trends.
3.4.3.5 Competitor analysis.
3.4.3.6 Program distinctive features.
3.4.3.7 Alignment to Qatar National Vision 2030.
3.4.3.8 Alignment to Ministry of Education and Higher Education’s 2024-30 Strategy.
3.4.3.9 Alignment to University Strategic Priorities.
3.4.3.10 Alignment to University mission and mandate.
3.4.3.11 Proposed study plan alignment with Academic Programs Development Framework.
3.4.3.12 Proposed accrediting and certifying bodies.
3.4.3.13 Tentative implementation date.
3.4.3.14 References.
3.4.3.15 Appendix A – Labor Market Analysis.
3.4.3.16 Appendix B – minutes of Stakeholder consultations.
3.4.4 In cases where an Accrediting/Certifying Body cannot be identified during the Program development stage, the Program may proceed under institutional approval, provided that:
3.4.4.1 The absence of an Accrediting/Certifying Body is justified on the basis of emerging disciplinary scope, pending regulatory clarity, or other documented considerations.
3.4.4.2 The responsible Academic Unit will monitor developments in the Accreditation landscape and periodically review the availability of appropriate Accrediting/Certifying Bodies.
3.4.4.3 Once an appropriate Accrediting/Certifying Body is established or identified, the Program will initiate the process to seek Accreditation or Certification as per the Program Accreditation and Certification Procedure (PR-AC-16).
3.4.5 The Program Curriculum Committee reviews Preliminary Program Proposal v.1 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the College Curriculum Committee. The review specifically ensures that:
3.4.5.1 All components of the Preliminary Program Proposal are included.
3.4.5.2 The breadth and depth of the occupational outlook and trends are sufficient to support the Program.
3.4.6 The College Curriculum Committee reviews the Preliminary Program Proposal v.2 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the University Curriculum and Program Development Committee. The review specifically ensures that:
3.4.6.1 The Labor Market Analysis is sufficient to support the long-term viability of the Program.
3.4.6.2 The components of the proposal are aligned with college priorities and meet college requirements.
3.4.6.3 The Stakeholder consultations and recommendations have been considered.
3.4.7 The University Curriculum and Program Development Committee reviews the Preliminary Program Proposal v.3 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the Academic Council. The review specifically ensures that:
3.4.7.1 The Program aligns with the QNV2030, Ministry of Education and Higher Education’s 2024-2030 Strategy, Qatar National Qualifications Framework, University Strategic Priorities, University mission and mandate, and Academic Programs Development Framework.
3.4.7.2 Interpersonal or interdisciplinary opportunities have been considered.
3.4.7.3 The competitor analysis has been reviewed and areas of duplication or overlap with other Programs both at the University and other universities in Qatar has been minimized.
3.4.8 Academic Council reviews the Preliminary Program Proposal v.4 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the President. The review specifically ensures that:
3.4.8.1 The Program aligns with the QNV2030, Ministry of Education and Higher Education’s 2024-2030 Strategy, Qatar National Qualifications Framework, University Strategic Priorities, University mission and mandate, and Academic Programs Development Framework.
3.4.8.2 The President endorses the Preliminary Program Proposal v.5 and submits for consideration by the Executive Committee of the Board.
3.4.9 The Executive Committee of the Board reviews the Preliminary Program Proposal v.5 and approves the college to move to stage three.
3.5 Stage Three: Comprehensive Program Proposal
3.5.1 The Program Development Team develops a Comprehensive Program Proposal v.1 in consultation with Stakeholders.
3.5.2 The Comprehensive Program Proposal must include:
3.5.2.1 Executive summary.
3.5.2.2 Program title and title rationale.
3.5.2.3 Program aim and general description.
3.5.2.4 Rationale for the Program.
3.5.2.5 Competitor analysis.
3.5.2.6 Program distinctive features.
3.5.2.7 Alignment to Qatar National Vision 2030.
3.5.2.8 Alignment to Ministry of Education and Higher Education’s 2024-30 Strategy.
3.5.2.9 Alignment to University Strategic Priorities.
3.5.2.10 Alignment to University mission and mandate.
3.5.2.11 Study plan alignment with Academic Programs Development Framework.
3.5.2.12 Academic catalog entry (Program title, Program description, Program duration, Admission Requirements, additional Admission Requirements, Program Educational Objectives, Student Learning Outcomes, study plan, graduate future pathways, graduate career opportunities).
3.5.2.13 Accreditation and Certifying bodies.
3.5.2.14 Five-year enrollment projections.
3.5.2.15 Quality assurance, learning, teaching, and assessment.
3.5.2.16 Resource requirements (human capital, facilities, financial, support services).
3.5.2.17 References.
3.5.2.18 Appendix A: Master curriculum mapping matrix.
3.5.2.19 Appendix B: Course master syllabi.
3.5.2.20 Appendix C: Stakeholder consultations and minutes of meetings.
3.5.3 The Program Curriculum Committee reviews the Comprehensive Program Proposal v.1 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the College Curriculum Committee. The review specifically ensures that:
3.5.3.1 Depth and breadth of benchmarking are sufficient to support the proposal.
3.5.3.2 Depth and breadth of stakeholder consultations are sufficient to ensure it meets local industrial needs.
3.5.3.3 Evidence of long-term viability.
3.5.3.4 The study plan is sound with all pre- and co-requisites appropriate to support progression.
3.5.3.5 Sufficient human capital and financial resources have been indicated.
3.5.3.6 The master curriculum mapping matrix is complete.
3.5.3.7 Course master syllabi are complete.
3.5.4 The College Curriculum Committee reviews the Comprehensive Program Proposal v.2 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the University Curriculum and Program Development Committee. The review specifically ensures that:
3.5.4.1 The proposal aligns with college priorities and requirements.
3.5.4.2 Human capital and financial resources have been identified and are available.
3.5.4.3 Stakeholder consultations were broad and recommendations have been considered.
3.5.4.4 Program educational outcomes and Student Learning Outcomes are aligned and appropriately scaffolded.
3.5.4.5 Master curriculum mapping matrix minimizes over- and under-coverage of outcomes.
3.5.4.6 Credit Hours are appropriately assigned and consistent with college requirements.
3.5.5 The Program Development and Accreditation Department sends v.3 of the Comprehensive Program Proposal to the approved External Reviewers.
3.5.6 Upon receipt of the External Reviewer responses, the Program Development and Accreditation Department sends the response to the Dean of the college/Academic Manager and the Program Development Team, and, in the case of a graduate Program, to the Director of the Graduate Studies Unit.
3.5.7 The Dean of the college/Academic Manager will synthesize the External Reviewers' feedback, incorporate relevant changes into the Program, and present the External Reviewer feedback and resulting changes to University Curriculum and Program Development Committee and Academic Council as part of the Program approval process.
3.5.8 In the event of significant disagreement between curriculum committees or External Reviewers, the issue will be referred to the Office of the Vice-President, Academics for resolution, in consultation with the Dean/Academic Manager and the Program Development and Accreditation Department.
3.5.9 The University Curriculum and Program Development Committee reviews the Comprehensive Program Proposal v.4 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the Academic Council. The review specifically ensures that:
3.5.9.1 The Program aligns with the QNV2030, Ministry of Education and Higher Education’s 2024-2030 Strategy, Qatar National Qualifications Framework, University Strategic Priorities, University mission and mandate, and Academic Programs Development Framework.
3.5.9.2 Interdisciplinary opportunities have been considered.
3.5.9.3 Areas of duplication or overlap with other Programs have been minimized.
3.5.9.4 Admission Requirements are aligned with the University requirements and facilitate Program success.
3.5.10 Academic Council reviews the Comprehensive Program Proposal v.5 and provides feedback to the Program Development Team, with a copy to the President. The review specifically ensures:
3.5.10.1 The Program aligns with the QNV2030, Ministry of Education and Higher Education’s 2024-2030 Strategy, Qatar National Qualifications Framework, University Strategic Priorities, University mission and mandate, and Academic Programs Development Framework.
3.5.11 The President endorses the Comprehensive Program Proposal v.6 and submits for consideration by the Executive Committee of the Board.
3.5.12 The Executive Committee of the Board reviews the Comprehensive Program Proposal v.6 and endorses it for submission to the Board.
3.5.13 The Board reviews the Comprehensive Program Proposal v.6 and approves the Program for implementation.
3.5.14 If the Program is not implemented within two calendar years of the proposed implementation date, it must undergo Program Review prior to future implementation.
3.5.15 An Annual Program Review must be conducted each year following implementation, as per the Program Review Policy (PL-AC-18).
3.5.16 A Cyclical Program Review is conducted within five (5) years following implementation, and at least once every five (5) years following, as per the Program Review Policy (PL-AC-18).
4.0 Related Documents
4.1 PL-AC-17: New Program Development and Approval Policy.
4.2 PL-AC-18: Program Review Policy.
4.3 PR-AC-16: Program Accreditation and Certification Procedure.
4.4 PR-AC-18: Program Review Procedure.
4.5 PR-AC-19: Curriculum Enhancement Procedure.
4.6 PR-AC-26: Credit Hour Procedure.
4.7 PR-AC-29: Learning Outcomes Assessment Procedure.
4.8 Academic Programs Development Framework.