The Preparation of University Documentation
relating to Academic Quality and Standards
Document Reference:
Identifier:
Version:
Quality and Standards Documentation
QH: A2
1 05
Date: Jul 15
Approved By:
Originator:
ULTAC
LEAP
Responsibilities:
All authors of University of Hull documentation
relating to quality and standards
Contacts:
quality@hull.ac.uk
Applications for exemptions to:
Report Exemptions to:
ULTAC
ULTAC
Summary/ Description:
To promote understanding, the University Learning Teaching and Assessment Committee has
issued the following code of practice on the format and language of University of Hull quality and
standards documentation. This must be followed for all revisions of existing documentation and all
new documentation. Documents are published as the University’s Quality Handbook.
Version 1 05 (Jul 15) introduced the following additions:

Updated to reflect changes from CDTE to LEAP
Version 1 04 (Sep 13) introduced the following additions:

Paragraph 20 provides guidance on identifying and detailing the changes that need to be
made

Paragraph 21 outlines the reporting mechanism for the proposed amended document

Replaces Quality Office with Curriculum Development and Teaching Enhancement, and
Academic Board with University Teaching, Learning and Assessment Committee.
Version 1 02 (Jan 09) introduces the following changes:

Reference to the approval requirements for each type of document (para. 6)

Removal of ‘Policy’ as a document classification to reflect established practice (para. 6)

Explicit recognition that for some documents the language convention is inappropriate (para.
7)

Removal of reference to the Marketing Toolkit (as that document has now been superseded)
(para. 9)

Introduction of advice on the use of Explanatory Notes (para. 10)

Removal of reference to ‘date for review’ (cover sheet) - review dates are now shown in the
QSC-approved five year rolling action plan rather than on the cover sheet of each document
(see QH:A2) (para. 13)

Explicit reference to application to collaborative provision (para. 15)

Removal of the advice on document summaries

New section on approval of documents

Explicit reference to the means of publication and notification to staff of publication through
Quality and Standards Updates
Version 1 01 (Sep 05) introduced minor amendments.
Further information
Quality and Standards Documentation
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice
Version 1 05 – Jul 15
QH:A2:1
This document should be read in the context of the University’s strategy for managing quality and
standards: Approach to Quality and Standards (A2Q) (published as QH:A1). Annexe 1 of A2Q
provides a five year rolling action plan for reviewing the contents of the Quality Handbook.
This document is available in alternative formats from
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice
Contents
Introduction....................................................................................................................... 3
Aims of university documentation ..................................................................................... 3
Document classification .................................................................................................... 3
Use of language ............................................................................................................... 3
Layout of documents ........................................................................................................ 4
Cover sheet ...................................................................................................................... 4
Application to collaborative provision ................................................................................ 5
Use of the footer ............................................................................................................... 5
Use of annexes................................................................................................................. 5
Proposed amendments to codes of practice and regulations ............................................ 6
Version control.................................................................................................................. 6
Approval of documents ..................................................................................................... 6
Publication ........................................................................................................................ 6
Quality and standards updates ......................................................................................... 6
Quality and Standards Documentation
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice
Version 1 05 – Jul 15
QH:A2:2
The Preparation of University Documentation
relating to Academic Quality and Standards
INTRODUCTION
1.
The following document aims to explain and demonstrate the template for
University documentation relating to the management of academic quality and
standards. This will promote usability and coherence of documents enabling them
to be better communicated across the University.
2.
This document reflects the University’s commitment set out in Approach to Quality
and Standards (QH:A1) to achieving a quality and standards framework which is
clear and accessible.
3.
The key factors are:






4.
a cover sheet
use of language
introduction of document summaries
use of the footer
layout of documents
use of annexes.
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice provides a template which meets the
criteria set out in this code of practice.
AIMS OF UNIVERSITY DOCUMENTATION
5.
Following QAA guidelines documentation should:






give clear definitions of responsibilities
be clear, explicit and applied consistently with proper regard to fairness,
equality of opportunity and public confidence
be up to date and accessible both physically and content wise
be monitored and reviewed on a regular basis
be clear about to whom they are directed
be clear about who is responsible for monitoring and review.
DOCUMENT CLASSIFICATION
6.
All documents should fall into one of two categories; Regulations or University
Codes of Practice (UCPs). The distinction between each is summarised below.
Regulation
A breach of a regulation may give rise to disciplinary action or
official sanction; they may confer rights and obligations.
Regulations require Senate approval.
Code of Practice Agreed procedures for undertaking action. Users should at
least demonstrate that consideration has been given to the
course of action outlined as it represents best practice. Codes
require approval from the University Learning, Teaching and
Assessment Committee.
USE OF LANGUAGE
7.
To ensure that individual documents and the requirements and guidance they set
out are clear the following language convention must be used in all new or revised
Quality and Standards Documentation
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice
Version 1 05 – Jul 15
QH:A2:3
documents (unless the convention is clearly inapplicable). This convention
recognises three specific terms:
8.
Mandatory
Denoted by the word must - there is no discretion whether to take
the action in question. Such a clause can be relied upon by others.
Failure to comply with such a clause leaves individuals/
departments/ faculties liable to sanction.
Advisable
Denoted by the word should - denotes good practice. A justification
will be required for not taking the action advised.
Desirable
Denoted by the word may - taking the action is discretionary but
evidence will be required to demonstrate that taking the action has
been considered.
Use of the incorrect term will lead to confusion and room for interpretation, therefore
phrases such as ‘it would be helpful if...’ ‘departments are requested to...’ must not
be used. A ‘must’ in a code of practice is just as ‘mandatory’ as a ‘must’ in a
regulation.
LAYOUT OF DOCUMENTS
9.
Arial 11 pt should be used for the main text in documents.
10.
Explanatory notes may be used. These do not form part of the regulations/code of
practice but help explain the rationale behind a provision, especially where a
change is being introduced. The note should indicate the date the note was
included.
11.
The following provides an example of an explanatory note:
Explanatory note (revised Sep 08):






Para 70: Approved by QSC and Academic Board for implementation in Sep 08 (QSC 7 Nov 07)
replacing paras 71-74 of version 2 00
Implementation – the new provision is applicable as follows from Sep 08
(1) applies with full effect to students registering for the first time Sep 08 onwards (Pre-Cert, Cert
and direct entry); departmental conventions superseded
(2) students who were on a stage in 07/08 which contributed to degree classification are entitled
to the best outcome of the new provision and the previous departmental convention
(3) any other case – if Programme Board identifies risk of unjust outcome, refer to SPC for
guidance
For Taught Masters degrees there is no concept of a borderline. Candidates who do not meet the
threshold for a distinction must not be awarded a distinction unless there are valid mitigating
circumstances which have not previously been considered (QH:B7, reg. 40).
COVER SHEET
12.
Initially conceived as a useful tool through the Committee process, the retention of
the cover sheet on any documentation once it enters general circulation will
enhance version control and transparency, provide useful and relevant further links
and contact details for users.
13.
The cover sheet must have:





the university logo along the top
the document title in full [Arial 14pt bold]
version number and date [mmm yy]
approved by [committee]
application to collaborative provision [see below]
Quality and Standards Documentation
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice
Version 1 05 – Jul 15
QH:A2:4







define authority to approve exemptions
originator [office/ title not an individual’s name]
brief summary /rationale of the document – to include a bullet point summary of
changes if the document is a revised version
contacts for further information
further reference information [if applicable]
any definitions or caveats
the ‘alternative formats’ declaration in 16pt Arial bold.
The details will be updated as the document passes through the approvals process
(and see version control below).
14.
The use of a contents page, immediately after the cover sheet, is advisable.
APPLICATION TO COLLABORATIVE PROVISION
15.
To ensure clarity for University and partner institution staff each set of regulations
and each code of practice must make clear their application to collaborative
provision. For quality and standards purposes, collaborative provision is defined as
provision delivered in whole or in part by a partner institution (see further QH:G1).
16.
In developing each document the author must give consideration to the appropriate
classification and ensure that appropriate consultation is conducted. Consultees
should include Collaborative Provision Forum. University Learning Teaching and
Assessment Committee will be responsible for advising Senate. The following
classifications must be used:
Mandatory
The regulations/code of practice must apply (minor modifications
may be appropriate, subject to ULTAC approval)
Advisable
The regulations/code of practice should be applied (clear
justification being required for not applying them)
Desirable
The regulations/code of practice may be applied
Information The regulations/code of practice are available for information
Not
applicable
The regulations/code of practice are not relevant or not appropriate
for application to collaborative provision.
USE OF THE FOOTER
17.
All documents must have the following information in the footer:




18.
title or document reference
originator/ author of the document [office and/ or title not name]
version number and date
page number.
The footer is used in order to allow committee section to use the header as the
document goes through the approvals process. The footer must be in Arial 9pt in
50% grey.
USE OF ANNEXES
19.
Forms, templates and examples of good practice should be annexed to the main
document and suitably referenced. Annexes must not be excessive. Any other
Quality and Standards Documentation
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice
Version 1 05 – Jul 15
QH:A2:5
documents referred to in the main body of the text should be referenced but not
annexed unless it is considered strictly necessary.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CODES OF PRACTICE AND REGULATIONS
20.
Codes and regulations proposed for amendment should make clear what the
proposed changes are using either grey highlighting for additional text/strikethrough
for deletions.
21.
Codes and regulations proposed for amendment, with the proposed changes
shown, must be submitted to the Regulations, Codes and Processes Committee for
consideration.
VERSION CONTROL
22.
Draft documents must be version 0 xx with the xx being the number of draft. On
first approval the document becomes version 1 00. Thereafter updates will be
indicated either by increasing the first number – 2 00 (to indicate a major revision),
or by increasing the second/third numbers – 1 01 (to indicate a minor revision).
23.
The current version number will be indicated in the footer of each page, and by
inclusion in the title of the file using the format:
Document number – Document title – version number – date (mmm yy) last
updated.
APPROVAL OF DOCUMENTS
24.
The University’s scheme of delegation provides that:



25.
Regulations require the approval of Senate
University Codes of Practice require the approval of ULTAC or UREC (for
those relating to research degree provision)
Amendments to Codes which constitute ‘housekeeping’ must be reported to
ULTAC/UREC; changes to annexes are normally deemed ‘housekeeping’.
Documents included in the Quality Handbook may also be approved by other
committees of equivalent level, following consultation with a Quality Manager.
PUBLICATION
26.
Documents relating to the management of academic quality and standards together
constitute the University’s quality and standards framework. They are published as
the University’s Quality Handbook. University Learning, Teaching and Assessment
Committee (on the advice of LEAP) is the arbiter of which documents will be
published in the Quality Handbook, including documents which may not meet the
standards requirements set out in this code. (For example, documents may be
produced for other purposes – e.g. to meet external requirements – but be deemed
appropriate for inclusion to facilitate communication).
27.
The
Quality
Handbook
is
only
published
electronically
at:
http://www2.hull.ac.uk/administration/policyregister/qualityhandbook.aspx and forms
part of the University’s Register of Regulations, Policies and Procedures. LEAP is
responsible for its publication.
QUALITY AND STANDARDS UPDATES
28.
Following approval of a new or revised document, staff will be informed of the
publication of an update through the Quality and Standards Updates published by
LEAP on the LEAP:Quality website (www.hull.ac.uk/quality).
Quality and Standards Documentation
Learning Enhancement & Academic Practice
Version 1 05 – Jul 15
QH:A2:6