GUIDELINES FOR EXTERNAL CREDIT-RATING
May 2012
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
2
THE PROCESS OF CREDIT-RATING OF EXTERNAL PROVISION
3
1. Initial Contact and Preliminary Discussions
2. University Authorisation to Proceed
3. Submission Documents
4. The Credit-Rating Group
5. Distribution of the Document
6. The Credit-Rating Event
7. The Credit-Rating Process
8. Report
9. Quality Assurance
10. Review and Renewal
11. Certification
12. Record Keeping
ANNEXES
A
Documentation for credit-rating proposals
7
B
Letter of confirmation of credit-rating (exemplar)
8
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 1
INTRODUCTION
External credit-rating is the process by which the University makes a judgment about the volume and level
of academic credit which can be awarded for courses or training programmes offered by other institutions
or agencies. Students who successfully complete these courses are entitled to claim that amount of
academic credit through the process referred to as the Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL). There is a
regulatory limit (normally 50%) on the extent to which such provision can contribute to an award of the
University (see Academic Regulations for Taught Awards for details).
The credit tariffs for some long-established external courses are already recognized across the HE sector.
However, other less well-known providers may apply to the University for the external credit-rating of their
provision. This credit-rating is undertaken by a Faculty Credit-Rating Group which reports to the Faculty
Academic Quality and Standards Committee.
These external courses are awarded credit at a particular level on the national Framework for Higher
Education Qualifications (i.e. levels 4, 5, 6 or 7). The maximum volume of credit allowed per course is
capped at 60 credits for Levels 4, 5 and 6, and at 30 credits for Level 7. When students register for one of
the University’s awards, they may be able to be admitted to a later stage in the programme on the basis of
academic credit gained from successful completion of an externally credit-rated course. This reduces the
total number of credit points they need to complete their University programme – they may granted
‘general’ credit towards a programme, or ‘specific’ credit giving them exemption from named courses
within a programme. The amount actually awarded to a student is always at the discretion of the relevant
Faculty, and normally the external credit must have been gained no more than five years prior to
registration on the University programme.
These Guidelines outline the University of Greenwich’s procedures for the formal credit-rating of external
provision, and explain how the University makes its judgement about the level and volume of credit which
can be allocated to such structured learning.
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 2
THE PROCESS of CREDIT-RATING EXTERNAL PROVISION
From the outset, a proposal for credit-rating of an external course must be linked to the Faculty within the
University which has the most appropriate subject expertise. The process of credit-rating is normally
undertaken by a Faculty Credit-Rating Group that reports to the Faculty Academic Quality and Standards
Committee.
1. Initial Contact and Preliminary Discussions
The initial approach is likely to come from an external provider, which could be an employer, a professional
body, another educational institution, or some other external agency. Preliminary discussions will be held
with the Faculty- based External Credit-Rating (ECR) Coordinator who will explore in particular whether the
proposal has one or more of the following features:

The course is generally available to clearly identifiable groups of students.

The provider has a clear objective in wishing to gain a credit-rating from the University of
Greenwich.

There is a desire to establish a higher education norm for a professional body award, or an incompany training course or programme.
If the proposal seems worth developing further, the ECR Coordinator may involve colleagues with
appropriate subject expertise to work with the client to:

brief the client on the nature, purpose and cost of credit-rating (see Annex to QAH Appendix
NPP7, Proposal Form for ECR activity, for the University’s schedule of baseline fees);

explain or advise on the credit-rating procedure and required documentation.
2. University Authorisation to Proceed
The Faculty prepares a proposal (NPP7 plus a bespoke Business Plan if fees are lower or higher than the
baseline figures envisaged) seeking authorization to proceed from the Academic Planning Committee. If
authorized, the proposal goes forward for consideration by the Faculty External Credit-Rating Group
In some cases, the client may request assistance from the Faculty with further developmental work, for
which charges will apply.
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 3
3. Submission Documents
The University specifies the information about the activity which the client is expected to provide (see
Annex A). This documentation should be available for distribution at least three weeks before the date of
the credit-rating event. The Faculty Coordinator (or an appropriate colleague) works with the client in the
preparation of the submission documents, and the client will be advised on the number of copies required.
4. The Credit-Rating Group
The proposal is considered by the Faculty Credit-Rating Group with membership as follows:

Chair, approved by the appropriate Faculty Academic Quality and Standards Committee(s);

Up to a maximum of six persons with knowledge and experience of the subject area and/or of
credit-rating, including at least one representative from another Faculty and external specialists
where appropriate;

A member of the Academic Quality Unit;

An Officer from the host Faculty, to record the proceedings.
5. Distribution of the Document
The ECR Officer is responsible for receiving and distributing the document and associated papers at least
ten days before the date of the meeting. The supporting papers, prepared by the ECR Officer, should
include a proposed timetable for the meeting and an indication of possible areas of debate, and normally
should invite preliminary comments which can be passed to the client organisation before the meeting.
6. The Credit-Rating Event
The exact structure of the meeting will be determined by the nature of the proposal. Normally it will
involve:




a preliminary meeting of the Credit-Rating Group
a meeting with the client and appropriate supporting ECR Coordinator
a private meeting of the Group to agree the outcome
A meeting with the client to communicate the outcome.
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 4
7. The Credit-Rating Process
NOTE: The maximum volume of credit allowed per course is capped at 60 credits for Levels 4, 5, and 6,
and at 30 credits for Level 7.
The Group judges the submission for credit against the University agreed criteria for levels and volume of
credit and may decide:

to approve a particular level and volume of credit unconditionally, or subject to conditions, or

to request additional information, or

to reject the claim completely.
The Group will specify the form of words which should appear on the letter or certificate that the provider
issues to students who successfully complete the course (see para 11).
The Group will state the period or number of cohorts for which the credit-rating will apply (normally three
years maximum), and will confirm that the host Faculty is responsible for the quality assurance of the
activity (see para 9).
The decision is final and the credit achieved will be recognised by the University, and considered for
general or for specific credit, as appropriate.
8. Reporting
Within ten working days a summary report /minutes of the credit-rating meeting is prepared by the ECR
Officer, approved by the Chair and members, sent to the client and to the Faculty Academic Quality and
Standards Committee. Where conditions are imposed, the Group and also the Faculty Academic Quality
and Standards Committee should be informed when these have been satisfactorily met.
The client is responsible for notifying the Faculty of any changes or variations to the course which has been
credit-rated. If the changes are significant, another credit-rating exercise may be required.
9. Quality Assurance
As part of the documentation supporting any application for credit, there must be a clear indication of how
the client and the University will ensure that quality will be maintained. An appropriate member of
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 5
University staff should be appointed to moderate the students’ work, and for credit-rating at levels 5, 6, or
7, there should also be the appointment of an External Examiner approved by the University.
Each occurrence of the credit-rated course should be evaluated by the students using the University’s
Course Monitoring Report Form (QAH Appendix M2). The Faculty Academic Quality and Standards
Committee must monitor the quality of provision on an annual basis.
The client is responsible for maintaining accurate records of the number of students and appropriate
information on their progress and assessment outcomes.
10.
Review and Renewal
The client may return to the University for review and re-evaluation of the credit-rating at any time within
the period of approval, or for review and renewal of the credit-rating at the end of the period of approval.
If the client decides not to undertake a review, then the credit-rating agreement will lapse at the end of
the period of approval.
11.
Certification
The University and the client must agree how information on completing students is to be recorded. The
client should be advised to write formally or send a certificate to each student confirming satisfactory
completion and the amount and volume of credit gained (see Annex B for exemplar letter to clients, which
includes a paragraph advising on a standard form of words for the client to use when writing to students).
NOTE: Although ECR partners’ marketing materials may state that a course has been credit-rated by the
University, they are NOT permitted to use the University logo on their letter-heading, website or
other publicity material.
12.
Record Keeping
The Faculty must maintain a record of all credit-rated provision, showing details of the external agency,
title of the course, volume and level of credit, date of credit-rating and the period of approval.
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 6
Annex A:
DOCUMENTATION FOR CREDIT-RATING PROPOSALS
Preliminary details
(I)
Agency or institution making proposal
(ii)
Named contact with address, tell/fax etc.
Contents
1.
Institutional context (brief statement, including details of the overall programme
if the course proposed is part of a larger package)
2.
Title of course(s) for credit-rating
3.
Level of credit and number of credit points proposed
4.
Mode of delivery (full-time, part-time etc)
5.
Rationale for the course(s)
6.
Aims
7.
Learning outcomes, i.e. statement about what learners can do, know and understand
as a result of successfully completing the course(s)
8.
Entry requirements/pre-requisites
9.
Indicative content
10.
Learning materials (books, videos, websites, other resources).
11.
Teaching and learning activities
12.
Assessment details (including arrangements for external moderation)
13.
Arrangements for management, evaluation and monitoring
14.
CVs for staff involved in the teaching (please use QAH Appendix D10, the proforma for
for staff at partner institutions)
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 7
Annex B:
FACULTY CONFIRMATION OF EXTERNAL CREDIT-RATING
Sample Letter (on University letter-heading)
Dear Colleague,
Agency/Institution ………………………………………………………………
Course Title …………………………………………………………………………
Ref No ……………………………….
We are pleased to confirm that your recent submission for credit-rating of the above course has been
successful, and has been recognized as X points at Level Y by the Credit-Rating Group of the Faculty of
.......................................
This credit-rating approval is valid for three years only, but may be renewed upon re-submission. A
condition of credit-rating approval is that you should inform us if, during this period, there are any
significant changes to the course as written.
All students who successfully complete the course as described and wish to progress to a programme of
study at this or another higher education institution, may claim recognition of this volume and level of
academic credit, quoting the above reference number. For our records, it would be helpful to have
details of all these students, but it is also important that you issue a letter or certificate of satisfactory
completion which students can use as documentary evidence of credit earned. Your letter/certificate
should incorporate wording such as:
“This course has been given a credit-rating of X points at level Y by the University of Greenwich. Students
who wish to continue their studies can submit their credits to the University of Greenwich for advanced
standing towards one of its awards, or to any other higher education institution which recognises such
credit.”
You will shortly receive from the University Finance Office an invoice for £..........., which is a single
payment in respect of the approval event confirming approval of this credit-rating activity for ……….
years from (insert month and year). You will also be charged an annual fee for on-going quality support,
monitoring and external examining in respect of the students who enrol on this credit-rated course.
We wish you well with student recruitment to this course, and we look forward to working with you.
With best wishes,
Quality Assurance Handbook, Appendix C4 (December 2013)
page 8