CMAster Project Deliverable 6.

1:

Quality assurance framework

1

Version History

Version

Date

Change

Author(s)

1.0
1.1
2.0

19 April 2013
24 April 2013
10 Sept 2014

Initial draft
Good draft for consultation
Final draft for approval

Richard Baker
Richard Baker
Richard Baker

Content

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

Content ........................................................................................................................................... 1

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

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

4.1

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

4.2

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

4.3

Characteristics of masters degree progammes ..................................................................... 4

4.4

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

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

5.1

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

5.2

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

5.3

Characteristics of masterss degree programmes .................................................................. 8

5.4

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

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

6.1

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

6.2

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

6.3

Characteristics of masterss degree programmes ................................................................ 10

6.4

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

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

7.1

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

7.2

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

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.

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 masters 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
masters 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.

2 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

4
4.1

Quality assurance at the University of Salford

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;

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 .

3 | 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 masters degree progammes

Masters 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 masters 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 masters 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 masters 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.

4 | 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 Politcnica de Valencia, Universitt fr
knstlerische 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.

5 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

5
5.1

Quality assurance at VU Amsterdam

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.

6 | 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
7 | 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 masterss degree programmes

Under Dutch law, one credit represents 28 hours of work and 60 credits represents one year of fulltime 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 premaster 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 Masters 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

8 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

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 Masters 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
9 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

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 masterss degree programmes

The characteristics of masters 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 masters degree programmes:

10 | 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 masters 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.

11 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

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 masters 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 masters programme in Human Movement
12 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework

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

7.2

KULeuven plan to develop a new (intial) masters 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 masters degree programme, if the programme starts in the
academic year 2014-2015.

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 Masters 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 masters
programme with a foreign university. Whilst general guidelines for the governance of collaborative
learning are available, detailed guidance specific to such Masters 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 masters 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 others existing quality assurance provisions.

13 | D6.1 Quality Assurance Framework