Academic Program Review and Modification Policy

To ensure the content and delivery of academic programs at Seneca Polytechnic are responsive, current and relevant to Seneca Polytechnic’s strategic priorities, ministry, regulatory and external quality assurance requirements and the current and anticipated needs of students, industry, employers and the community.

This policy applies to Seneca employees participating in program reviews and modifications.

The comprehensive review of a degree program that occurs every five to seven years, in accordance with the Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act (2000).

An annual review completed by the academic area to evaluate program health, curricular currency and relevancy, student satisfaction, retention, pathways and graduate outcomes, supported by data. Where available, trends are observed and benchmarks are used to gauge program strengths and opportunities for improvement that inform the Recommended Action Plan (RAP).

A program change that impacts the overall program intent, outcomes or focus that may require the approval of the Board of Governors, Ministry of Colleges, Universities, Research Excellence and Security (“the ministry”) and a provincial quality assurance agency or regulatory body.

A program change that does not impact the overall program intent, outcomes or focus and does not require approval of the Board of Governors or the ministry.

It may require approval from a provincial quality assurance agency.

The evaluation of a program’s performance at a point in time, including applications and enrolment, student satisfaction, retention, graduation rates and financial health.

Changes to an academic program guided by feedback from industry and/or community stakeholders, industry trends and curricular review that may include:

• program title
• admission requirements
• curriculum
• delivery
• hours
• work-integrated learning

Program modifications can be minor or major and are integral to quality programming, promoting currency and relevancy, and ensuring strong student experiences.

Vocational learning outcomes established by the ministry that outline the knowledge and skills possessed by graduates that apply to similar programs of instruction.

Updates to a program standard facilitated by Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board and communicated and approved by the ministry to the polytechnic/college delivering the program, along with the timelines for implementation of the update and notification of response.

The comprehensive review of non-degree programs that occurs every five to seven years. 

The process involves an analysis of curriculum, delivery, program health, student experience and industry relevancy, supported by primary and secondary data and results in the development of the RAP.

1. ​Program health reviews will take place annually, in alignment with the program review processes, and may be completed separately as needed.
2. ​​Program reviews and consent renewals will align with the requirements of provincial quality assurance agencies and the ministry.
3. ​Seneca may utilize external accreditation or program recognition processes to support program reviews.
   
4. ​Programs that are not Ontario College credentials will follow a program review process that is appropriately structured to meet the quality assurance needs of the particular credential.

1. ​​Program modifications will be informed by data, including feedback from industry, internal and external partners and Seneca’s program reviews or renewals.
2. ​​​Program modifications will take place in accordance with applicable legislation and requirements of provincial quality assurance agencies.
   
3. ​​Program modifications will align with requirements identified by accreditation and industry regulatory bodies.
   
4. ​Program modifications will require consultation with the appropriate Program Advisory Committee (PAC).
5. ​Minor program modifications will require the approval of the appropriate chair and dean, and are reported to the Vice-President, Academic.
6. ​Major program modifications will require the endorsement of the Enrolment Management Committee and the Senior Executive Committee and the approval of the Board of Governors.
7. ​Program modifications may require the approval of one or more of the following parties: the ministry, provincial quality assurance agencies and/or regulatory bodies.
8. ​Program standard updates will be completed in accordance with ministry timelines and processes, and these updates may lead to program modifications.

• Appendix A: Program review procedures
• Appendix B: Program modification procedures

• Academic Program Development Policy
• Academic Program Suspension and Cancellation Policy
• Program Advisory Committees Policy

• Framework for programs of instruction for colleges of applied arts and technology
• Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 8, Sched. F
• Ontario College Quality Assurance Service (OCQAS)
• Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, 2000, S.O. 2000, c. 36, Sched.
• Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board Manuals and Guidelines

1. ​The academic chair of the program/program cluster will be responsible for the completion of annual formative reviews, in alignment with the program health review.
2. ​​Where appropriate, program clusters will be reviewed together.
3. ​PQ will provide an annual orientation to academic areas on the requirements, data analysis, procedures/guidelines and timelines for performing annual formative reviews.
   
4. ​The annual formative review is an evidence-informed process supported by primary and/or secondary data (student, institutional and labour market/industry). Trends are reviewed year-over-year to inform actions and outcomes.
5. The stages of the annual formative review include:
   • Pulse check:
     • Program demand - applications and enrolment for both domestic and international students
     • Program performance - program health, curricular relevancy, curriculum integration, contribution margins, student satisfaction, graduate outcomes, labour market, retention, pathways, Program Advisory Committees (PACs), web presence
   • Dean/chair consultation
   • In-depth review, as required 
   • A review and/or update of the Recommended Action Plan (RAP)
6. The academic chair will coordinate the involvement of students, faculty, and/or support staff, alumni and PAC members in annual formative reviews, as appropriate.
7. Annual formative reviews will be discussed with, and approved by, the appropriate academic dean during the dean/chair consultation and reported annually to the Vice-President, Academic.
8. Approved annual formative review reports and RAPs will be kept on file and made available by Program Quality (PQ).
9. Annually, an aggregate report of annual formative reviews and their recommended actions will be shared with the Academic Planning and Student Affairs committee of the Board of Governors. 
10. The annual formative review may lead to program modifications. If needed, the academic chair will be responsible for completing the requirements to facilitate approval of program changes in line with the Academic Program Review and Modification Policy and Academic Program Modification Procedures (Appendix B).
11. Annual formative reviews will be used year-over-year to track progress on the RAP. A status update and report on outcomes will be required for prior year RAP action items as part of the annual formative review.
12. An annual formative review may prompt a program health review or advance a summative review when program indicators suggest that a deeper review and analysis is required to maintain the quality of a program.
13. Programs that are not Ontario College credentials will follow an annual formative review process, particular to the program, that is informed by available data relating to program’s performance and demand.

1. ​The summative program review or consent renewal (credential dependent) will consist of a comprehensive program evaluation by an academic program review team, guided by PQ, involving in-depth reflection and analysis of curricular currency/relevancy, program performance and demand and program health over a five-to-seven-year period.
2. ​​Summative program review and consent renewal are evidence-informed processes supported by qualitative and quantitative (primary and/or secondary) data (institutional, labour market/industry, student and competitive landscape); trends are reviewed longitudinally over a five-to-seven-year period to inform actions and outcomes.
3. ​Summative program reviews/consent renewals will be conducted over a timeframe consistent with the identified processes to allow for in-depth reflection and collaboration with internal and external partners; there will be an expectation for regular meetings for the program review team throughout the process.
   
4. ​PQ will guide the summative program review/consent renewal process and provide training and an orientation for program review teams.
5. Data for program reviews/consent renewals will be provided by PQ and C-IDEA.
6. Additional data and input from partners (e.g., students, faculty, support staff, administrators, PACs, alumni) will be collected and analysed by PQ to contribute to recommendations from the review process.
7. Academic learning, student support and other academic services (e.g., Academic Pathways, Counselling and Accessibility, Libraries, ITS, Marketing & Communications, Seneca Innovation, Seneca Works) will be included in summative program reviews/consent renewals, as appropriate.
8. Academic programs are required to collect and compile required documentation and/or data for consent renewals including:
   • student work samples along with assessment overviews and rubrics
   • faculty CVs
   • consent forms signed by faculty
   • letters of support from industry partners
   • course outlines and schedules
   • PAC meeting minutes
   • other supporting documentation, as required
9. Program review teams will be responsible for preparing a final report of the findings from the program summative review/consent renewal and the RAP.
10. The appropriate academic chair will be responsible for reviewing the report and recommendations with the dean.
11. Program modifications (major or minor) resulting from the summative program review/consent renewal will be actioned by the academic program team, led by the chair, and supported by PQ.
12. For summative program reviews, the chair and dean will present the final report and recommendations for approval and resource allocation to the Vice-President, Academic or delegate.
13. For consent renewals, an external review, led by PQ and the appropriate academic area, will be facilitated consistent with the requirements of Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board, which consists of a site visit and an evaluation by an external review panel. 
14. Following the external evaluation, the consent application, consisting of the self-study, external panel report, and Seneca’s response to the external panel report, along with all supporting documentation, will be submitted to the ministry for approval and the renewal of consent by the minister.
15. PQ will communicate the approval of the consent application to relevant academic program and service areas.
16. The academic chair will be responsible for sharing the outcomes of the final report and the RAP with internal and external partners, as appropriate. 
17. Approved summative program review/consent renewal reports and RAPs will be kept on file and made available by PQ.
18. The chair will be responsible for implementing the RAP and providing regular progress reports during subsequent annual formative reviews to the dean, Vice-President, Academic, PQ and partners.
19. Where applicable, external validations and reporting to external partners and/or provincial quality assurance bodies will be completed by the responsible academic area, in consultation with PQ.

1. ​The scope of minor program modifications includes:
   • Changes to program narrative information (e.g., program description or student/employment opportunities), provided there is continued alignment with program learning outcomes
   • Minor updates to program learning outcomes or objectives that do not impact the program’s overall intent or focus
   • Changes to program curriculum (e.g., adding or deleting courses)
   • Program level changes to delivery mode for non-degree programs (e.g., shifting a program to fully online)
   • Changes to instructional settings (e.g., lab to lecture) that constitute less than 25 per cent of the total program hours
   • Changes to course titles, codes, prerequisites, corequisites, equivalencies, descriptions or sequencing changes to program titles to comply with ministry program standards
   • Changes to program hours that constitute less than 25 per cent of the total program hours
   • Changes to transfer pathways or agreements
   • Changes to program level admission requirements
   • Changes to delivery campus for non-degree programs
   • Introduction or deletion of optional work-integrated-learning experiences for non-degree programs
2. Minor program modifications will result from a program review (e.g., annual, summative or consent renewal) or other academic or external processes (e.g., PAC feedback, formal student feedback, program health review, accreditation review, program alignment activities).
3. Requests for minor program modifications may be provided to the chair by faculty, support staff or administrators.
4. Proposed minor program modifications that are not directly an outcome of program review will require additional documented evidence or consultation to proceed with the proposed changes.
5. Additional justification may be required for multiple minor program modifications in one semester or across consecutive semesters.
6. The program team initiating the modification will be responsible for the following considerations:
   • Changes in curriculum or delivery will not impact students’ achievement of the program’s objectives or learning outcomes; for proposed modifications to curriculum, a re-mapping of the course outcomes and assessments to program outcomes will be required
   • Changes that impact other academic and service areas, or those that affect internal or external transfer agreements, will be consulted on with the appropriate academic or service area before submitting a request for a minor program modification
   • Changes that impact course prerequisites will be reviewed for progression of learning and clearly documented
7. Under the guidance of the chair, a faculty member, support staff or administrator will complete a request for a minor program modification and submit it to PQ for feedback, ensuring that essential evidence, mapping, supplemental documentation or consultations (internal or external, domestic and/or international) are completed and 1.4 is considered.
8. PQ will provide feedback and a revised minor program modification request will be submitted to the chair and dean for approval.
9. Minor program modifications will be tracked and archived by PQ and reported periodically to the Vice-President, Academic.
10. Minor program modifications will be completed and submitted according to the timelines defined by Seneca’s academic and service areas to allow for timely communication and implementation of program changes.
11. Minor program modification requests submitted outside of the defined timelines may not be implemented until the following academic term or year.
12. PQ will communicate approval of the modification to the academic program and service areas. 
13. Academic program areas will communicate implications of the modification to academic and service areas seven business days after receiving approval from PQ.  
14. Academic program areas will perform the necessary updating of content for an approved modification on the following channels:
    • course catalogue forms
    • program webpage
    • program map
    • advising and pathway-related information sources
    • other channels, as identified
15. Minor program modifications will be completed by March 15 for changes to be applied for the beginning of the following academic year.

1. ​The scope of major program modifications includes:
   • Revising program learning outcomes that alters the program’s overall intent or focus
   • Revising the program to align with a different ministry funding code
   • Change to the program title that is not ministry initiated
   • Changes to program curriculum that alter the intent or focus of the program
   • Significant changes to the delivery of a degree program (e.g., shift to fully online delivery)
   • Adding or removing a mandatory work-integrated learning experience 
   • Changes to program hours that constitute more than 25 per cent of the total program hours
   • Changes to instructional settings (e.g., lab to lecture) that constitute more than 25 per cent of the total program hours
   • Changes in program duration/length (e.g., shift from two to three semesters)
   • Changes to system level admission requirements
   • Changes to or addition of a delivery campus for degree programs
2. Major program modifications will result from a program review, or other academic or external processes (e.g., PAC feedback, formal student feedback, program health review, accreditation review, program alignment activities).
3. Requests for major program modifications may be provided to the chair by faculty, support staff or administrators and will be led by the chair and PQ.
4. Documented evidence or consultation with domestic and/or international partners supporting the proposed changes will be required before a request for a major program modification is reviewed; the program area is responsible for completing the required forms/documentation for the major program modification, in collaboration with PQ.
5. Program areas will complete the request for a major program modification and submit to PQ for feedback.
6. Requests for major program modifications will be approved by the appropriate dean and are added to Seneca’s five-year program development plan. 
7. PQ will provide feedback to the academic program area for consideration, and the completed major program modification form will then be submitted to the academic chair and dean for approval.
8. Major program modifications will be presented to the PAC for endorsement followed by endorsement from the Enrolment Management Committee, the Senior Executive Committee and approval from the Board of Governors, the ministry and/or quality assurance or regulatory bodies.
9. Major program modifications will be implemented in accordance with the critical path identified in the five-year program development plan.
10. Major program modifications approved outside of the defined timelines may not be implemented until the following academic semester or year.
11. PQ will communicate the approval of the major program modification to relevant academic program and service areas.
12. Academic program areas will communicate implications of the major program modification to academic and service areas seven business days after receiving approval from the ministry. 
13. Academic program areas will perform the necessary updating of content for an approved major program modification on the following channels:
    • course catalogue forms
    • program webpage
    • program map
    • advising and pathway-related information sources
    • external partners
    • other channels, as identified

1. ​Course-level curriculum modifications that do not impact the overall program will not need to undergo the modification process and may be approved by the academic chair (e.g., changes to course outcomes that still align with program outcomes, teaching topics, required texts or assessment strategies).

Approval Date: November 2017

Last Revision:  July 2026