New programs process

Please note: The new program process has changed. Statements of Interest are accepted twice per academic year. The next submission intake will open October 9th and close on November 13th.

  1. Draft a Statement of Interest (SOI).
  2. Obtain Dean's approval in principle.
  3. Submit SOI to AQuE office during the intake period.
  4. AQuE posts SOI for UW community feedback.
  5. APAC reviews the SOI and makes a recommendation to Provost.
  6. Receive provisional approval from Provost.
  1. Draft Volume I in collaboration with the AQuE office.
  2. Draft Volume II & III and calendar description.
  3. AQuE office submits Volume I for AVPA/AVPGSPA approval.
  4. Dean/FFO and IAP conduct Financial Viability Analysis (FVA).
  5. Receive approval from Provost.
  1. Undergraduate or Graduate Sub-Committee and Faculty Council approval.
  2. External reviewers site visit.
  3. Program and Dean response to reviewers recommendations.
  4. AQuE office submits to SUC/SGC and Senate for approval.
  5. AQuE office submits to Quality Council (academic) & MCURES (tuition, grant & OSAP eligibility) for approval.
  1. Program launches (first student intake).
  2. Update report for Quality Council (if applicable).
  3. Two-year progress report is conducted.
  4. Program enters regular cyclical review cycle.

Graduate diplomas - Concurrent (Type 2) & Direct-entry (Type 3)

Concurrent and Direct-entry graduate diplomas go through an expedited process and do not require:

  • Volumes II and III (faculty qualifications are included in Volume I).
  • An external site visit (after Faculty Council approval).

Ministry approval is required for Direct-entry (Type 3) GDips.

New joint programs (with other universities)

The following requirements apply to the development of new joint programs:

  • A single new program proposal will be drafted with clear documentation of how input was received from faculty, staff and students at each partner institution.
  • Selection of external reviewers will involve participation by each partner institution, including the appointment of an internal reviewer from each partner institution.
  • The external review will involve all partner institutions and preferably all sites, if the review is held in person. Reviewers will consult faculty, staff, and students at each partner institution.
  • Feedback on the reviewers’ report will be solicited from participating units at each partner institution, including the deans.
  • A single new program proposal package will be submitted jointly to the Quality Council (QC) by all partners.
  • All partner institutions will agree on the plan to monitor the new joint program and participate in this monitoring process.
  • If the Quality Council (QC) approves a new joint program to commence “with report,” each partner institution will sign off on the report before it is submitted to the QC.
  • Partner institutions will agree on a common review schedule for the new joint program.