A presentation is held each year to review the processes and the timelines for upcoming reviews.

Each submission will include three volumes (Volume I, II, III) using the cyclical review templates.

The submissions will include learning outcomes mapped to the GDLEs (graduate degree level expectations). The Centre for Teaching Excellence (CTE) has created PhD sample format and Masters sample format programs. For more information, please visit the CTE Program Review and Accreditation website, or contact Veronica Brown

A copy of the draft self-study report is e-mailed to the Quality Assurance Office and Faculty Associate Dean, Graduate Studies at the beginning of April, for review and comment.

Final copies of the self-study brief (Volume I), Faculty CVs (Volume II) and Proposed Reviewers (Volume III) (see templates) are sent electronically to the Quality Assurance Office by July 1. The QA Office will oversee the co-ordination of a two-day site visit. The external reviewers are selected from those suggested by the program in Volume III (see criteria for choosing arm’s length reviewers).

The internal faculty reviewer is selected by AVPGSPA, and he/she does not have to be a specialist in the field of the program review, but should be at arms’ length from the program in question. As a result, this individual will normally come from outside of the Faculty in which the program under review is located.

The external review team will write an External Reviewers' Report and submit a report two weeks after the site visit.

After the site-visit a report is received from the external review team it is forwarded to the department/school and they will have the opportunity to provide comments on factual errors in the External Reviewers' Report. Comments should be sent to the Quality Assurance Office within four weeks of receiving a copy of the Report. If no comments are received within that time period, unless other arrangements have been made, it will be concluded that the Program has no initial comments to make about the Report.

The Chair/Director, in consultation with the Faculty Associate Dean, Graduate Studies and Dean, will submit a report to the Quality Assurance Office within 10 weeks of the program receiving the copy of the External Reviewers' Report. This report details the response to the review, and the  Implementation Plan (i.e. timetable) for recommended changes.

The Quality Assurance Office will share a Final Assessment Report (FAR) with the department/school for their review and comment. Once the FAR has been approved by the AVPGSPA, it is sent to the Vice President Academic and Provost, and then presented to Senate Graduate and Research Council (SGRC) for approval.

The Final Assessment Report is then goes to Senate for information. The Quality Assurance Office will submit a copy of the Final Assessment Report (FAR) to the Quality Council.

The Chair/Director is responsible for a Two-year Progress Report which is presented two years after the date of the site visit to the Quality Assurance Office. The QA Office will take the report to Senate Graduate and Research Council (for approval) and Senate (for information), to inform them on steps taken to follow up on the recommended changes from the cyclical review.