committees:curriculum:dates
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |||
| committees:curriculum:dates [2015/01/28 15:31] – judi | committees:curriculum:dates [2015/01/28 16:04] (current) – judi | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| * could launch major early but won't be in recruiting information (soft launch) | * could launch major early but won't be in recruiting information (soft launch) | ||
| * Calendar for 2016/2017 window is passed... but could be added with exceptions if we were through approvals fall 2015 | * Calendar for 2016/2017 window is passed... but could be added with exceptions if we were through approvals fall 2015 | ||
| - | * bugs | + | * Approval from provost |
| - | * senate- last step internally | + | * draft proposal to provost |
| + | * external reviewer names (may contact them to see if they are available and willing) 3 names | ||
| + | * don't have to finish all of the consultation | ||
| + | * 4-6 weeks minimum time at provosts office | ||
| + | * bugs- dean sits on bugs (minimum 4 weeks prior to bugs) | ||
| + | * someone from the department comes to bugs | ||
| + | *support of unit | ||
| + | *student consultation | ||
| + | *consultation with other units | ||
| + | *market study from coop | ||
| + | *consult with admission services | ||
| + | *potential revision... somewhat unlikely only for big holes | ||
| + | *new factor learning outcomes for each new course, | ||
| + | * mtcu document needs to be created prior to senate | ||
| + | * senate- last step internally- that by fall 2015 | ||
| * after senate goes to mtcu for funding approval | * after senate goes to mtcu for funding approval | ||
| + | * just because it is in the SMA doesn' | ||
| + | * very interested in labour market... looking to stats can information even though it is doing less research | ||
| + | * expedited review for things in the SMA (4 months time) | ||
| * computing is in non-core | * computing is in non-core | ||
| * must submit to government to funding | * must submit to government to funding | ||
| Line 23: | Line 40: | ||
| * quality council can reject the program | * quality council can reject the program | ||
| - | * new courses | + | * new courses |
| + | * bcomp program committee April after good friday submit to AVPA.. all curriculum change, schedule of studies | ||
| + | * library review for new course... order of operations depends on Joe | ||
| + | * if the library assessment is pending can still go to BUGS | ||
| + | * trial offering can go through Patricia' | ||
| * course revisions | * course revisions | ||
| * library | * library | ||
| * general timelines | * general timelines | ||
| * colisting courses | * colisting courses | ||
| + | *crosslisting- | ||
| + | *require Patricia' | ||
| + | *two separate course outlines and assessed separately | ||
| + | *outcomes can be similar | ||
| + | *can make your graduate program look weak if you aren' | ||
| * 1500 early | * 1500 early | ||
committees/curriculum/dates.1422459077.txt.gz · Last modified: 2015/01/28 15:31 by judi