Programme Committee (PC): Procedures and Improvement Policy

Programme Committee: Role and Composition 

The Programme Committee acts as a permanent advisory body with regard to education policy and the organisation of education. The Programme Committee is led by the Programme Committee Chair. 

Ghent University’s Education and Examination Code (in Dutch: OER) determines the modalities according to which the Programme Committee must be composed and determines the broad outline of its duties. Depending on the composition of the Programme Committee and with a smooth operation as its focus, study programmes are free to formulate additional rules in internal regulations. In any case, the Programme Committee has both lecturers and students among its members. This composition can be expanded with alumni and/or representatives of the professional field. 

The Programme Committee is responsible for determining study programme competencies and for designing and implementing the curriculum. An important task of the Programme Committee is the permanent monitoring and improvement of the quality of education. 

Study Programme Vision on Programme Committee Procedures and Improvement Policy 

Study programmes stand to profit from developing a clear vision on their own Programme Committee's role and procedures. It is a must to formulate this vision within the Programme Committee and to make it widely known in the study programme. This vision then becomes part of the Education Monitor. 

Said vision can include how the Programme Committee relates to (other) programme-specific and consultative bodies at a faculty level, task forces and/or committees. It is also possible to make explicit how the Programme Committee fulfills its core responsibilities. 

Core responsibilities are e.g.: 

  • education organisation; 
  • managing the study programme’s financial resources; 
  • mamaging the curriculum;
  • developing, implementing and following up the programme's assessment policy; 
  • maintaining contacts with stakeholders; 
  • participation in partnerships; 
  • etc. 

We advise that PCs describe their improvement policy and how they implement it explicity, using the following elements as a guideline when working with the Education Monitor: 

  • specific processes/procedures that allow the Programme Committee to follow up surveys and other quality measurements. Possibly indicate here which quality measurements/results are structurally monitored and discussed at study programme level (study programme feedback, course unit feedback, alumni survey, professional field survey, survey of work placement mentors etc.). Also mention any efforts made by a study programme to obtain the highest possible response rate for surveys (e.g. mobilisation of students (in class) by lecturers/by student representatives etc.);
  • the way in which the PC co-ordinates its improvement policy with the faculty's Educational Quality Assurance Unit; 
  • the way in which the PC carries out the self-reflection process in the Education Monitor (i.e. rating the 39 objectives); 
  • the way in which this self-reflection leads to a set of ‘acts’ or improvement actions, and the way in which the PC decides which actions are needed and what are the priorities; 
  • the way in which the PC sets up timelines and assigns actors to (improvement) actions; 
  • the way in which the PC ensures that improvement actions are followed up; 
  • the channels the PC uses to communicate with its stakeholders on the planned improvement actions, as well as their results.

Last modified Oct. 11, 2023, 1:31 p.m.