- Studying in New Zealand
- Qualifications and standards
Providers and partners
- About education organisations
- NZQA's quality assurance system for tertiary education organisations
- Quick links to NZQF documents
- Approval, accreditation and registration
- Consistency of graduate outcomes
- External evaluation and review
- Assessment and moderation
- Development of assessment standards
- Submitting results and awarding qualifications
- The Education (Pastoral Care of International Students) Code of Practice
- Offshore use of qualifications and programmes
- Guidelines and forms
- About us
Under Rule 12.2 e (ii) of the NZQF Programme Approval and Accreditation Rules 2013, self- monitoring (in accordance with any conditions imposed by NZQA) can be considered for degrees or related qualifications at levels 7-10.
NZQA will also consider applications for institutions to self-monitor diplomas at level 7.
When is self-monitoring considered?
This occurs when the NZQA monitor considers that a programme and its delivery are stable, and that all conditions for changing the institution’s monitoring status are met. This could be after the first cohort has graduated.
It is expected that an institution will continue to use an external monitor as part of the self- monitoring process. Where NZQA approves self-monitoring, other registration bodies may continue to monitor the programme.
Self-monitoring involves the provision of an Annual Programme Evaluation Report (APER) to NZQA. This arrangement must be approved by NZQA.
If serious concerns regarding the programme(s) are identified, NZQA may revoke the institution’s approval to self-monitor.
Conditions for requesting self-monitoring
Conditions for the transfer to self-monitoring include confirmation from all parties that the institution is managing the programme appropriately and in particular that:
- The programme is being implemented as planned and presented at the time of approval, subject to modifications and enhancements broadly consistent with the intent of the programme and the natural evolution of a quality programme.
- Recommendations made during the programme approval and accreditation and by the monitor have been appropriately addressed.
- Mechanisms are in place at an institutional level to ensure independent, external academic input during reviews and consideration of proposed programme enhancements.
- That NZQA will gain sufficient awareness of any issues with the programme or its delivery from the APER.
Request for self-monitoring
Institutions meeting the above conditions must request a transfer to self-monitoring status by formally writing to NZQA.
Approval for transferring the responsibility for monitoring to the institution will be granted by the Deputy Chief Executive, Quality Assurance Division.
Monitoring by Annual Programme Evaluation Report (APER)
NZQA would expect the institution to appoint an external monitor. The external monitor's report should be included in or attached to the APER.
An APER includes the following information:
- enrolment information
- learner retention and achievement
- graduate destination information
- internal and external moderation activities
- feedback from learners, teaching staff and external stakeholders
- consultation with external stakeholders
- how the institution has addressed any recommendations from:
- the initial evaluation report and/or
- the most recent monitor's report
- changes to the programme and/or its delivery since the last report
- staffing changes since the last report
- current resources to maintain delivery of the programme
- staff professional development activities
- research activities of staff
- significant issues and challenges and proposed actions.
The institution is responsible for carrying out a review process each year and sending a copy of the APER to NZQA by 30 June.
The review will be carried out according to the institution’s quality management system.
No specific report format is required.
The purpose of the report is to provide evidence that:
- the programme continues to be implemented as approved
- there has been ongoing consultation with stakeholders
- minor changes and developments have been approved by the institution’s board.
It is important to clearly identify any issues or problems that may have arisen during the year, the way these matters have been or will be addressed, and the possible need to make an application for a major change (type 2 change) to a programme.