Guidelines for Te Hono o Te Kahurangi evaluative quality assurance

Te manu ka kai i te miro, nōna te ngahere
Te manu ka kai i te mātauranga, nōna te ao

These guidelines summarise Te Hono o Te Kahurangi quality assurance processes for tertiary education organisations submitting applications relating to:

  • the registration of a private training establishment
  • the registration of assessment standards on the Directory of Assessment Standards
  • consent to assess against standards
  • approval to develop and list new qualifications at levels 1-10 on the New Zealand Qualification Framework
  • approval and accreditation of programmes of study (levels 1-6 and degrees at levels 7-10)
  • listing training schemes.
  • listing Legislated Wānanga qualifications and programmes.

They also include Te Hono o Te Kahurangi quality assurance processes for tertiary education organisations scheduled to carry out:

  • a degree monitoring visit or
  • an external evaluation and review.

These guidelines inform tertiary education organisations about how NZQA quality assures educational outcomes prioritising Mātauranga Māori and the acceleration of Māori learner success in the tertiary education context.

Download the pdf guidelines (PDF, 932KB).

Separate guidelines for assuring national consistency of graduate outcomes

The Te Hono o Te Kahurangi process for assuring national consistency of graduate outcomes has a separate set of guidelines.

2. Te Taura Here Tohu Mātauranga O Aotearoa

New Zealand Qualifications Framework

The New Zealand Qualifications Framework (NZQF) is designed to optimise the recognition of educational achievement and its contribution to New Zealand’s social, cultural, economic and environmental success.

The NZQF lists qualifications that:

  • convey the skills, knowledge and attributes a graduate has gained through completing a qualification
  • are integrated and coherent
  • enable and support the provision of high-quality education pathways
  • enhance confidence in the quality and international comparability of New Zealand qualifications
  • contribute to Māori success in education by recognising and advancing Mātauranga Māori
  • represent value, are sustainable and robust.

NZQA is responsible for ensuring the integrity of New Zealand qualifications listed on the NZQF and the quality assurance of programmes and education organisations that provide them.

3. Te Hono o Te Kahurangi

A Whare Ako Framework

whare ako

Te Hono o Te Kahurangi is the name of a unique whare ako framework and methodology used by NZQA to carry out quality assurance in the tertiary sector. The framework recognises ākonga Māori choosing to achieve educational success through Mātauranga Māori as relevant to their worldview, context and practices. Six dynamic and interconnected kaupapa are at the heart of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi. The kaupapa act as a common point of reference for education and evaluators to guide evaluative conversations and decisions about:

  • what quality looks like in the educational context of the organisation
  • how the organisation knows they are meeting the needs of ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi and other accountabilities
  • whether the organisation has sufficient capacity and capability to deliver and sustain educational outcomes
  • how well the organisation reflects upon its delivery to improve its overall educational performance.

Each education organisation is expected to demonstrate how their organisational priorities relate to each application type, or review type, through expressions of ngā kaupapa of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi. The six kaupapa are:

  • Rangatiratanga
  • Whanaungatanga
  • Manaakitanga
  • Pūkengatanga
  • Kaitiakitanga
  • Te Reo Māori

4. Ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi

Dynamic principles of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi

This table outlines definitions and translations of ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.

Ngā Kaupapa Whakamāramatanga
The Principles  Definitions Active translation
Rangatiratanga Ka hua te rangatiratanga mā te whakatīnana i tā te Māori titiro ki te ao i te wā e uruparetia ana ngā tūmanako me ngā whakahihiritanga o te ākonga, o te whānau, o te hapū, o te iwi, o te hapori Māori, o te hapori whānui. Autonomy realised through the enactment of a Māori world-view in response to the aspirations and driving motivators of ākonga, whanau, hapū, and where relevant, the Māori community and sector stakeholders.
Whanaungatanga Ka tuia, ka kumanutia hoki ngā whanaungatanga kia mau tonu ai ngā hononga i runga i te kauanuanu, i te pono me te māramatanga, hei painga mō te katoa. Connecting, fostering, and maintaining relationships based on respect, integrity and understanding for the benefit of all.
Manaakitanga Te whakaatu i te hāpaitanga o te mana mā roto i ngā whanonga me ngā mahi manaaki i te ākonga, i te whānau, i te hapū, i te iwi, i te hapori hoki. Manaakitanga realised by mana enhancing behaviour and practises for the care of ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and community.
Pūkengatanga E whakahua ana i te mātauranga me ngā pūkenga e mau tonu ai ngā mātāpono, ngā whakapono, ngā hiahia matua me ngā tūmanako o te iwi. Represents the knowledge and skills to ensure the principles, beliefs, needs and aspirations of the people are sustained.
Kaitiakitanga Te rokirokitanga, te kaitiakitanga, te hāpaitanga hoki o te ao me ōna taonga hei painga mō te katoa. Preservation, guardianship and enhancement of the world and its treasures for the benefit of all.
Te Reo Māori E ora ana, e momoho ana, e matomato ana hoki te tipu o te kākano o te reo Māori. The Māori language is alive, vibrant, and flourishing.

5. Ngā whao arotake o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi

The evaluative tools of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi

Ngā whao arotake o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi mobilise the evaluative methodology of the Te Hono o Te Kahurangi framework.

The evaluative methodology enables decisions about quality and value to be reached on a consistent, contextualized, culturally robust and reliable basis requiring NZQA to:

  • be clear about the information and evidence on which judgements are made as well as to the logic of the interpretation, and
  • write the outcome in a clear, concise report which explains the key factors and reasons for the final decision.

The evaluative tools of the Te Hono o Te Kahurangi framework are:

5.1. Ngā pātai arotake o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi – Evaluative questions

Ngā pātai arotake initiate the enquiry process as applicable to each application type.

5.2 Ngā paearu o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi – Evaluative rubrics

Ngā paearu define the minimum performance criteria as applicable to each application type and performance rating.

5.3 Ngā tūtohu kounga o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi – Quality indicators

Ngā tūtohu are quality indicators currently in development.

5.4 Ngā tūtohu taurite o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi – Alignment indicators

Ngā tūtohu taurite for level 7-10 qualifications utilise the New Zealand Qualification Framework Listing and Programme Approval and Accreditation criteria with some minor amendments to ensure they are supportive and conducive to the advancement of Mātauranga Māori, whilst also maintaining quality consistency across level 7-10 qualifications within the tertiary sector.

Ngā tūtohu taurite are organised against each kaupapa of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi. The kaupapa are the lens through which level 7–10 applications are evaluated to determine sufficiency of approval and accreditation requirements.

6. Te rēhitatanga i te whare ako hou (Registration of a private training establishment)

The decision to approve the registration of a Private Training Establishment is based on the quality and sufficiency of evidence provided with the application. The application should:

a) include a written statement setting out the kinds of education the establishment proposes to provide; and the outcomes it seeks to achieve through the provision of those kinds of education

b) demonstrate how the establishment intends to meet the requirements of sections 346(1), 347, and 348(1) and (b) of the Education and Training Act 2020

c) contain a statutory declaration from each governing member of the establishment in respect of any material conflicts of interest arising from the person’s role as a governing member of the establishment; and any interests that the person has in organisations in the education or immigration sector that provide goods or services to tertiary students

d) contain a statutory declaration from each governing member of the establishment in respect of the matters described in section 346(1)(a) of the Education and Training Act 2020

e) describe the arrangements that the establishment has in place to manage conflicts of interest that may arise; and be in a form and contain any other information that the Authority requires

f) be accompanied by an amount that the Authority requires as a deposit on the fee charged under section 344(2)(g) of the Education and Training Act 2020

g) meet the Private Training Establishment Registration Rules 2018.

6.1: Decision to approve the registration of a private training establishment

The decision to approve the registration of a private training establishment is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te tono nei?

Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to register as a private training establishment

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The application meets all registration requirements.
- The application relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the application.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the application meets all registration requirements.
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the application relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses in self-reflective practice, and/or underlying capability and resource of the organisation.

7. Te whakairinga i ngā paerewa (Listing assessment standards)

The decision to approve the listing of assessment standards on the Directory of Assessment Standards is based on the quality and sufficiency of evidence provided with the application. The application must meet the Directory of Assessment Standards Listing and Operational Rules 2011.

Assessment standards must:

a) have no unnecessary or unreasonable restrictions on pace or mode of assessment and the outcomes and associated evidence requirements are manageable, coherent, assessable, and consistent with valid assessment practice

b) does not duplicate the significant outcome of any other standard; is portable and does not restrict assessment of generic and transferable outcomes to specific contexts

c) the quality of the language is publishable and the standards use clear and accessible language that is appropriate for intended users.

For Standard Setting Bodies (SSBs):

a) the coverage and therefore content of the standards must be within the SSB’s area of responsibility. For transitional industry training organisations (transitional ITOs), the standard must relate to the transitional ITO’s gazette coverage. For other SSBs, the standard must relate to the SSB’s strategic goals

b) the standards can be submitted in Te Reo or English. The DAS Māori indicator – a symbol of the matua (fish hook) is used as a feature of the directory to identify standards containing Māori content; consultation and endorsement must be endorsed as fit for purpose by the sector for which it is intended. Consultation must take place with current and intended users. This may include professional and trade organisations, employers, unions, organisations with consent to assess against the standards, and trainees. Feedback from moderation must be considered for reviewed and revised standards

c) SSBs must periodically review standards to ensure they continue to be fit for purpose. The frequency of the review will be driven by factors such as the SSB’s strategic plan, level and type of industry change, legislative requirements, and moderation feedback.

7.1: Decision to approve the listing of assessment standards

The decision to approve the listing of assessment standards is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i ngā paerewa nei?

Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to list a standard on the Directory of assessment standards

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The application meets all listing requirements.
- The application relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the application.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the application meets all listing requirements.
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the application relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.

8. Te tono i ngā paerewa (Consent to assess against standards listed on the Directory of Assessment Standards (DAS))

8.1: Decision to approve consent to assess against standards on the Directory of Assessment Standards

The decision to approve consent to assess against standards on the Directory of Assessment Standards is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te tono nei?

The application should meet Consent to Assess against standards requirements as outlined in the Directory of Assessment Standard and Operational Rules 2011. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake for consent to assess against standards

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The application meets all consent to assess requirements.
- The application relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the self-reflective practice report, and/or the underlying capability and resources of the organisation.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- Insufficient evidence demonstrating the education organisation has the capability and resources to assess the standards in accordance with the consent and moderation requirements.
- The standard setting body does not support the application.
- Insufficient evidence that the education organisation can manage the impacts of any specific criteria in the consent and moderation requirements for the assessment standards.
- The application does not relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses in the self-assessment report and/or the underlying capability and resources of the organisation.

9. Te kōwae mahi (Training scheme)

The decision to approve a training scheme (kōwae mahi) is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency of evidence’ provided with the application. The application should clearly demonstrate distinctiveness and genuine need for the training scheme.

A training scheme can be at any NZQF level and can provide a range of academic and vocational learning opportunities. The scheme can lead to an award but does not, of itself, lead to a qualification listed on the New Zealand Qualification Framework.

The application should meet the criteria set out in the Training Scheme Rules 2012.

9.1: Decision to approve a training scheme

The decision to approve the training scheme is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te kōwae mahi nei?

NZQA reviews the details of the training scheme provided with the application. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā Paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to approve a Te Hono o Te Kahurangi training scheme

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The training scheme design is made up of components structured in a coherent way to achieve learning outcomes and meet requirements.
- The training scheme enables ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and where applicable, hapori Māori, to achieve intended learning outcomes.
- The training scheme relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The organisation demonstrates the capability and capacity to support sustained delivery of the training scheme.
- The organisation has the capacity to review/self-reflect on the performance of the training scheme and the organisation’s capability to support and improve the scheme where required, with sub-contractors.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the training scheme.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and integrity of the information and evidence does not convincingly demonstrate that the training scheme design is made up of components structured in a coherent way to achieve learning outcomes and does not meet requirements.
- Insufficient evidence that the training scheme relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- Insufficient evidence the education organisation has the capability and resources to support sustained delivery of the training scheme.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses in the self-reflective practice report and the organisation’s capability to support and improve the scheme and where required, with sub-contractors.

10. Te whakaae me te whakamana i te akoranga ā-tohu, ā-hōtaka (taumata 1- 6) (Approval of qualifications at levels 1-6)

The decision to approve a new qualification is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency of evidence’ submitted via the online application portal. The application should clearly demonstrate a ‘distinct value and genuine need’ for the qualification seeking approval status. The application must also meet performance criteria set out in the NZQF Qualifications Listing and Operational Rules 2016.

10.1: Decision to approve a new qualification for development

The decision to approve a new qualification for development is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te tohu nei?

NZQA reviews the information and evidence provided with the application. Where further information or evidence is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake for approval to develop a qualification

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The qualification meets the needs of ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and where relevant hapori Māori and sector stakeholders. The nature, quality and integrity of the evidence support the development of the proposed qualification.
- The qualification relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- There are no significant gaps or weaknesses in the application.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence do not demonstrate that the needs of ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and where applicable, hapori Māori and sector stakeholders are met or evidence to develop the proposed qualification is insufficient.
- The qualification does not relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- There are significant gaps and weaknesses in the application.

10.2: Decision to list a Te Hono o Te Kahurangi qualification on the NZQF

The decision to approve a new qualification for listing on the NZQF, is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency of evidence’ in meeting NZQF criteria and terminology – see Te Hono o Te Kahurangi qualification details template (DOCX, 47KB). The application must meet criteria set out in the NZQF Qualification Listing and Operational Rules 2016.

The decision to list the qualification is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te whare ako nei?

NZQA reviews the details of the qualification provided with the application. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to list a qualification on the NZQF

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The qualification details relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The qualification meets the criteria for listing on the New Zealand Qualification Framework.
- There are no significant gaps or weaknesses in the qualification details.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The qualification details do not relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The qualification does not meet criteria for listing on the New Zealand Qualification Framework.
- There are significant gaps or weaknesses in the qualification details.

10.3: Decision to approve a new programme

The decision to approve a new programme leading to a Te Hono o Te Kahurangi qualification is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency of evidence’ provided in the application. The application must meet criteria set out in the NZQF Programme Approval and Accreditation Rules 2018.

The decision to approve a new programme is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te hōtaka nei?

NZQA reviews the details of the qualification provided with the application. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to approve a Te Hono o Te Kahurangi programme leading to a Te Hono o Te Kahurangi qualification on the NZQF

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The learning outcomes of the programme lead to the qualification outcomes.
- The programme enables ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and where applicable, hapori Māori, to achieve the qualification outcomes.
- The programme relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The programme is made up of learning outcomes structured in a coherent way to achieve the qualification outcomes and address the relevant needs of learners.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the programme.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not convincingly demonstrate that the learning outcomes of the lead to the qualification outcomes.
- Insufficient evidence the programme relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- Insufficient evidence that ākonga, whānau, iwi and, where applicable, hapori Māori will achieve the qualification outcomes.
- Insufficient evidence that the learning outcomes of the programme are structured in a coherent way to achieve the qualification outcomes and meet the relevant needs of learners.
- Significant gaps and weaknesses in the programme.

10.4 Decision to accredit an education organisation

The decision to accredit an education organisation is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency of evidence’ provided in the application. Except where NZQA otherwise requires, a Category 1 institution applying for accreditation is not required to provide a self-reflective practice report addressing the pātai arotake for accreditation. The application must meet criteria set out in the NZQF Programme Approval and Accreditation Rules 2018.

The decision to accredit an education organisation (whare ako) is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te whare ako nei?

NZQA reviews the details of the qualification provided with the application. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to accredit an education provider to deliver a Te Hono o Te Kahurangi programme leading to a NZQF approved qualification

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The organisation demonstrates the capability and capacity to support sustained delivery of the programme through appropriate academic staffing, teaching facilities, educational and physical resources, and support services.
- The organisation demonstrates the capability and capacity to ensure assessment materials and decisions are fair, valid, consistent, and appropriately resourced.
- The organisation adequately reviews/self-reflects on the performance of the programme and the institution’s capability to support and improve the programme, and where required, formal arrangements with programme owners.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in self-reflective practice, and/or the underlying capability and resource of the organisation.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the organisation has the capability and capacity to ensure assessment materials and decisions are fair, valid, consistent, and appropriately resourced.
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the organisation has the capability and capacity to support sustained delivery of the programme through appropriate academic staffing, teaching facilities, educational and physical resources, and support services.
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence do not reflect that the organisation adequately reviews/self-reflects the performance of the programme and the institution’s capability to support/improve the programme; formal arrangements with programme owners.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses in self-reflective practice, and/or the underlying capability and resource of the organisation.

11. Te whakaae me te whakamana i te akoranga ā-tohu i te taumata 7-10 (Approval of a programme of study leading to a degree or related qualification at levels 7-10)

11.1: Decision to list a qualification and approve the programme

The decision to approve a degree or related qualification for listing on the NZQF and approve the programme leading to the qualification is made by meeting the criteria as expressed through ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi and by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te tono nei?

The application should meet criteria set out in part 4 of the NZQF Qualification Listing and Operational Rules 2016, and parts 1 and 2 of the NZQF Programme Approval and Accreditation Rules 2018. NZQA reviews the information and the evidence provided in the application.

Ngā tūtohu taurite for Level 7-10 qualifications utilise the New Zealand Qualification Framework Listing and Programme Approval and Accreditation criteria with some minor amendments to ensure they are supportive and conducive to the advancement of Mātauranga Māori, whilst also maintaining quality and consistency across Level 7-10 qualifications within the sector. Ngā tūtohu taurite are organised against each kaupapa of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.

The kaupapa of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi are intentionally dynamic in nature. In the context of Level 7-10 qualifications, relevant criteria organised alongside kaupapa deemed as most appropriate at this time. NZQA recognises that the kaupapa themselves could equally apply to criteria other than those with which they have been associated here given the dynamic utility of kaupapa.

The kaupapa are the lens through which Level 7–10 applications are evaluated to determine sufficiency of approval and accreditation requirements.

Ngā paearu (below) sets out the expected level of performance in relation to the pātai arotake.

Ngā Paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to list a qualification

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- Good evidence as expressed through ngā kaupapa that there is a distinct need for the qualification and programme.
- Good evidence as expressed through ngā kaupapa that the qualification and programme purpose and outcomes meet the evidenced need.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the qualification.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- Insufficient evidence of a distinct need for the qualification and programme.
- Insufficient evidence that the qualification and programme purpose and outcomes meet the evidenced need.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses in the qualification.

11.2: Decision to accredit an education organisation

The decision to accredit a TEO is made by meeting the criteria as expressed through ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi and by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te whare ako nei?

NZQA reviews the information and the evidence using ngā paearu. Ngā paearu (below) sets out the expected level of performance in relation to the pātai arotake.

Ngā Paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to accredit an education organisation to provide an approved programme

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- Good evidence as expressed through ngā kaupapa that the education organisation has the capability and resources to provide the programme.
- Good evidence as expressed through ngā kaupapa that the education organisation can manage the impacts of any specific programme requirements.
- Good evidence as expressed through ngā kaupapa of formal arrangements with the programme owner where this is required.
- Good evidence of satisfactory and appropriate rangahau (research) that is adequately resourced.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the self-reflective practice report, and/or the underlying capability and resources of the education organisation.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- Insufficient evidence that the education organisation has the capability and resources to provide the programme.
- Insufficient evidence that the education organisation can manage the impacts of any specific programme requirements.
- Formal arrangements with the programme owner where these are required are insufficient to manage the provision of the programme.
- Insufficient evidence of satisfactory and appropriate rangahau (research) that is adequately resourced.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses in the self-reflective practice report, and/or the underlying capability and resources of the organisation.

Ngā tūtohu taurite o ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi (Alignment indicators for the principles of Te Hono o Te Kahurangi)

Rangatiratanga

Ngā Kaupapa Ngā whakamāramatanga Ngā whakahua
The Principles Definitions Active translation
Rangatiratanga Ka hua te rangatiratanga mā te whakatīnana i tā te Māori titiro ki te ao i te wā e uruparetia ana ngā tūmanako me ngā whakahihiritanga o te ākonga, o te whānau, o te hapū, o te iwi, o te hapori Māori, o te hapori whānui. Autonomy realised through the enactment of a Māori world-view in response to the aspirations and driving motivators of ākonga, whanau, hapū, and where relevant, the Māori community and sector stakeholders.

NZQF Criterion 2

The title, aims, stated learning outcomes, and coherence of the whole programme is adequate and appropriate and clearly meets the graduate profile and specification for the qualification as listed on the NZQF.

Accreditation Criterion 3

If the applicant TEO is not the holder of the programme approval, there is support from the holder of the programme approval.

Accreditation Criterion 4

There must be adequate and effective review of programme performance and the TEO’s capability to support the programme.

There must be monitoring of improvement following review, and processes for determining whether the programme should continue to be delivered.

Whanaungatanga

Ngā Kaupapa Ngā whakamāramatanga Ngā whakahua
The Principles Definitions Active translation
Whanaungatanga Ka tuia, ka kumanutia hoki ngā whanaungatanga kia mau tonu ai ngā hononga i runga i te kauanuanu, i te pono me te māramatanga, hei painga mō te katoa. Connecting, fostering, and maintaining relationships based on respect, integrity and understanding for the benefit of all.

NZQF Criterion 1

The programme meets the definition published on the NZQF website of the applicable qualification type listed in the second column of the Table in the Appendix to the NZQF Qualification Listing and Operational Rules 2016.

NZQF Criterion 4

There is a written summary of the consultation undertaken, the views expressed, and consideration of the views. The consultation and summary must cover the acceptability of the programme to the relevant communities (including whānau, hapū, iwi, or hapori Māori) and other key stakeholders (including any relevant academic, employer, industry, professional and other bodies).

Manaakitanga

Ngā Kaupapa Ngā whakamāramatanga Ngā whakahua
The Principles Definitions Active translation
Manaakitanga Te whakaatu i te hāpaitanga o te mana mā roto i ngā whanonga me ngā mahi manaaki i te ākonga, i te whānau, i te hapū, i te iwi, i te hapori hoki. Manaakitanga realised by mana enhancing behaviour and practises for the care of ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and community.

NZQF Criterion 3

The delivery modes and methods are adequate and appropriate, given the stated learning outcomes for the programme. Where specific resources are necessary for the programme to be provided, those resources are clearly outlined.

NZQF Criterion 6

Assessment methodology is fair, valid, consistent, and appropriate given the stated learning outcomes. There is an effective system for moderation of assessment materials and decisions.

Accreditation Criterion 2

The TEO has the capability and capacity to support sustained delivery of the programme through appropriate academic staffing, teaching facilities, educational and physical resources, and support services.

Pūkengatanga

Ngā Kaupapa Ngā whakamāramatanga Ngā whakahua
The Principles Definitions Active translation
Pūkengatanga E whakahua ana i te mātauranga me ngā pūkenga e mau tonu ai ngā mātāpono, ngā whakapono, ngā hiahia matua me ngā tūmanako o te iwi. Represents the knowledge and skills to ensure the principles, beliefs, needs and aspirations of the people are sustained.

Accreditation Criterion 8

The links between research and the curriculum are clear, adequate, and effective.

Accreditation Criterion 1

The TEO has the capability and capacity to ensure assessment materials and decisions are fair, valid, consistent, and appropriate, given the stated learning outcomes.

Kaitiakitanga

Ngā Kaupapa Ngā whakamāramatanga Ngā whakahua
The Principles Definitions Active translation
Kaitiakitanga Te rokirokitanga, te kaitiakitanga, te hāpaitanga hoki o te ao me ōna taonga hei painga mō te katoa. Preservation, guardianship and enhancement of the world and its treasures for the benefit of all.

NZQF Criterion 5

There are clear, relevant, and appropriate regulations that specify requirements for:

  • admission
  • credit recognition and transfer
  • recognition of prior learning
  • programme length and structure
  • integration of practical and work-based components
  • assessment procedures, including authenticity of student work
  • normal progression within the programme.

NZQF Criterion 7

The TEO:

  • assesses the currency and content of the programme
  • has adequate and effective processes for the ongoing review of the programme, taking account of the results of any review of the qualification
  • has adequate and effective processes for monitoring the quality of outcomes for learners and other stakeholders, and for reviewing programme regulation and content
  • updates the programme accordingly.

Accreditation Criterion 5

Research facilities and the support of staff involved in research are adequate, the levels of research activity of staff involved in the programme are satisfactory, and the ways by which the research-teaching links are made in the curriculum are appropriate.

Te Reo Māori

Ngā Kaupapa Ngā whakamāramatanga Ngā whakahua
The Principles Definitions Active translation
Te Reo Māori E ora ana, e momoho ana, e matomato ana hoki te tipu o te kākano o te reo Māori. The Māori language is alive, vibrant, and flourishing.

Opportunities for the maintenance and advancement for te reo Māori are supported.

12. Te whakaae me te whakamana i ngā akoranga ā-tohu, ā-hōtaka, i ngā Whare Wānanga Māori (Legislated Wānanga qualifications and programmes) 

 Legislated Wānanga are recognised as tertiary institutions under section 268 of the Education and Training Act 2020. As such, Wānanga are regarded as the peers of universities, New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology subsidiaries, and colleges of education.

Under the Act:

a Wānanga is characterised by teaching and research that maintains, advances, and disseminates knowledge and develops intellectual independence, and assists the application of knowledge regarding ahuatanga Māori (Māori tradition) according to tikanga Māori (Māori custom).

12.1: Decision to approve a new Legislated Wānanga qualification for development

The decision to approve and list a new Legislated Wānanga qualification is based on a ‘distinct value and genuine need’ and the ‘quality and sufficiency’ of evidence. Written verification from Te Tau Ihu o Ngā Wānanga confirming that the title and level of the proposed qualification meets the Legislated Wānanga and NZQA criteria is required at the time of submission.

Submitted Legislated Wānanga qualification details must meet the listing requirements and terminology of the NZQF Qualifications Listing and Operational Rules 2016 for the Legislated Wānanga qualification details template (DOCX, 73KB).

The decision to approve a Legislated Wānanga qualification is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te tohu nei?

NZQA reviews the information and evidence provided with the application. Where further information or evidence is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake for approval to develop a Legislated Wānanga qualification

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The qualification meets the needs of ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, where relevant hapori Māori and sector stakeholders and the nature, quality and integrity of the evidence supports the development of a qualification.
- The qualification relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- There are no significant gaps or weaknesses in the application.
He pounamu ANY of the following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not demonstrate that the needs of ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and where applicable, the hapori Māori, are met and there is a need for a qualification to be developed.
- The qualification does not relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- There are significant gaps and weaknesses in the application.

12.2: Decision to approve the listing of a Legislated Wānanga qualification on the NZQF

The decision to approve the listing of a Legislated Wānanga qualification is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te Whare Wānanga nei?

NZQA reviews the details of the qualification provided with the application. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to list a Legislated Wānanga qualification on the NZQF

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The qualification has received approval to develop.
- The qualification details effectively relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The qualification meets the criteria for listing on the New Zealand Qualification Framework.
- There are no significant gaps or weaknesses in the qualification details.
He pounamu ANY of the following:
- The qualification has not received approval to develop.
- The qualification details do not relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The qualification does not meet criteria for listing on the New Zealand Qualification Framework.
- There are significant gaps or weaknesses in the qualification details.

12.3: Decision to approve a Legislated Wānanga programme

The decision to approve a Legislated Wānanga programme leading to a Legislated Wānanga qualification is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency of evidence’ provided in the application. The application must meet criteria set out in the NZQF Programme Approval and Accreditation Rules 2018.

The decision to approve a Legislated Wānanga programme leading to a Legislated Wānanga qualification is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te hōtaka nei?

NZQA reviews the details of the programme provided with the application. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to approve a Legislated Wānanga programme leading to a Legislated Wānanga qualification listed on the NZQF 

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The programme matches the strategic purpose and requirements of the qualification.
- The programme enables ākonga, whānau, hapū, iwi, and where applicable, hapori Māori, to achieve the qualification outcomes.
- The programme relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The programme is made up of learning outcomes structured in a coherent way to achieve the qualification outcomes and addresses the relevant needs of learners.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in the programme.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not convincingly demonstrate that the programme matches the strategic purpose and requirements of the qualification.
- Insufficient evidence the programme relates to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- Insufficient evidence that ākonga, whānau, iwi and, where applicable, hapori Māori will achieve the qualification outcomes.
- Insufficient evidence the learning outcomes of the programme are structured in a coherent way to achieve the qualification outcomes.
- Significant gaps and weaknesses in the programme.

12.4: Decision to accredit a Legislated Wānanga to deliver an approved programme

The decision to accredit a Legislated Wānanga to deliver an approved Legislated Wānanga programme is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency of evidence’ provided in the application. The application must meet criteria set out in the NZQF Programme Approval and Accreditation Rules 2018.

The decision to accredit a Legislated Wānanga is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Kahurangi i te Whare Wānanga nei?

NZQA reviews the details provided with the application. Where further information is required, NZQA will contact the applicant directly.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to accredit an education provider to deliver a Legislated Wānanga programme leading to a Legislated Wānanga qualification

Te taumata Ngā taunaki
He pounamu kahurangi ALL the following:
- The organisation demonstrates the capability and capacity to support sustained delivery of the programme through appropriate academic staffing, teaching facilities, educational and physical resources, and support services.
- The organisation demonstrates the capability and capacity to ensure assessment materials and decisions are fair, valid, consistent, and appropriate, and learning outcomes relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The organisation adequately reviews/self-reflects on the performance of the programme and the institution’s capability to support and improve the programme.
- No significant gaps or weaknesses in self-reflective practice, and/or the underlying capability and resource of the organisation.
He pounamu ANY of following:
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the organisation has the capability and capacity to ensure assessment materials and decisions are fair, valid, consistent, and appropriate, and learning outcomes do not relate to ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi.
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence does not reflect that the organisation has the capability and capacity to support sustained delivery of the programme through appropriate academic staffing, teaching facilities, educational and physical resources, and support services.
- The nature, quality and/or integrity of the evidence do not reflect that the organisation adequately reviews/self-reflects on the performance of the programme and the institution’s capability to support/improve the programme.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses in self-reflective practice, and/or the underlying capability and resource of the organisation.

13. Te aroturuki i ngā hua ā tohu (taumata 7-10) (Monitoring delivery outcomes of qualifications at level 7-10)

13.1: Undertaking a monitoring visit

Under Rules 12.1 and 12.2 of the NZQF Programme Approval and Accreditation Rules 2018, an education organisation is required to participate in a monitoring visit to ensure sufficiency and capability to maintain ongoing approval and accreditation for the delivery of an approved programme or part of an approved programme at levels 7-10.

13.2: Stages of the monitoring visit

There are three stages involved with the visit:

  • planning the onsite visit
  • undertaking the onsite enquiry
  • reaching judgements about the programme’s performance and capability.

13.3: Planning

Following the first year of delivery

The NZQA monitor will make initial contact with the education organisation to:

  • explain process expectations and compliance requirements
  • confirm the schedule of visits and the external monitor in consultation with the provider.

The NZQA monitor will organise relevant contract arrangements with the external monitor and ensure the monitor understands process expectations, compliance requirements and report conventions prior to the scheduled site visit(s).

Professional Bodies

The NZQA monitor will make initial contact with the professional body representation to explain process expectations and confirm the schedule of visits.

Education organisation

The education organisation will organise travel and accommodation itineraries for the monitors and where relevant, the professional body representative. The education organisation will also compile a body of wide ranging evidence about the performance of the programme from the previous year including details such as:

  • a statistical table outlining data relating to the programme’s number of enrolments, completions, withdrawals, and graduations rates for the previous year
  • internal and external moderation reports for the previous year
  • a self-reflective practice summary or a programme review report for the previous year
  • a summary of programme changes, including formal notification from NZQA verifying changes approved
  • a summary of rangahau/research activity undertaken by staff in the previous year
  • information as required by professional body standards.

13.4: On-site visits

The on-site visit is the opportunity for the organisation and its key stakeholders to talk with the monitors about programme performance and self-reflective practice capacity relating to the previous year of delivery. Evaluation conversations are the primary method for gathering evidence, although all material evidence is validated through triangulation (that is, verifying what is said with other stakeholder feedback and/or written documentation).

On-site enquiry will be guided by the following pātai arotake:

Kua tutuki ngā kaupapa o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi i te hōtaka nei?

13.5: Reaching judgements

Prior to the completion of the on-site enquiry, the monitors, and where applicable the professional body representative, will undertake a comprehensive analysis of the evidence gathered prior to, and during the site visit for the purpose of triangulation.

A general summary of interim findings is presented by the monitors at the final session of the visit.

After the visit, the external monitor, in consultation with the internal monitor, will generate an initial written report outlining:

  • an overview of the programme
  • the performance trends of the programme
  • processes conducted and outcomes achieved by the organisation in the previous year of delivery
  • evidence demonstrating the organisation’s capability to meet ongoing approval and accreditation requirements
  • a self-monitoring consideration or a recommendation for NZQA monitoring to continue from the monitor.

13.6: Self-monitoring

Self-monitoring occurs when the NZQA monitor considers that a programme and its delivery are stable, and that all conditions for changing the organisation’s monitoring status are met.

The organisation must formally request a transfer to self-monitoring status. Where NZQA approves self-monitoring, other registration bodies may continue to monitor the programme.

NZQA expects that organisations will continue to use an external monitor as part of the self-monitoring process.

Self-monitoring involves the organisation submitting an Annual Programme Evaluation Report (APERs) to NZQA. If NZQA identifies any concerns about the programme(s), NZQA may revoke the organisation’s approval to self-monitor.

For more information see Self-monitoring.

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to the pātai arotake to maintain accreditation

Ngā Hua o te Hōtaka
(Programme Performance)
Te Whakairinga Kōrero
(Self-Reflective Practice)
Pounamu Kahurangi Pounamu Kahurangi
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are clearly exemplary and imbue performance in nearly all levels of the programme.
- Very few or no gaps or weaknesses.
- Any gaps or weaknesses have no significant impact and are managed effectively.
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are clearly exemplary and inform highly effective self-reflective practice used to gain a comprehensive understanding of programme performance, and to bring about wide ranging and or worthwhile improvements.
- Clear and comprehensive evidence of improved outcomes.
- Any gaps or weaknesses are not significant and are managed effectively.
- Self-reflective practice is clearly part of a coherent and comprehensive approach across the organisation or the focus area.
Pounamu Whakairo Pounamu Whakairo 
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are generally strong and imbue performance across most levels of the programme.
- Few gaps or weaknesses.
- Gaps or weaknesses have some impact but are mostly managed effectively. 
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are generally strong and inform effective self-reflective practice and understanding of performance used to bring about worthwhile improvements.
- Good evidence of improved outcomes.
- Any gaps or weaknesses are not significant and mostly managed effectively.
- Self-reflective practice is generally a part of a reasonably coherent and comprehensive approach across the programme.  
Pounamu Hukihuki  Pounamu Hukihuki 
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are inconsistent across most levels of the programme.
- Some gaps or weaknesses have impact, and are not managed effectively.
- Meets minimum expectations/requirements as far as can be determined. 
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are of inconsistent quality or used inconsistently to understand performance and bring about worthwhile improvements.
- Limited or little evidence of improved outcomes.
- Some significant gaps or weaknesses in self-reflective practice, which are not managed effectively.
- Self-reflective practice is not part of a coherent and comprehensive approach across the programme.  
He pounamu  He pounamu 
ANY ONE of the following:
- Kaupapa are unacceptably weak and not evident at all levels of programme.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses are not managed effectively.
- Does not meet minimum expectations/requirements. 
ANY ONE of the following:
- Kaupapa are ineffective or demonstrate serious weaknesses at all levels of programme.
- Little or no evidence of improved outcomes.
- Weaknesses not addressed effectively or require significant improvement to meet minimum expectations. 

Monitoring by NZQA is not intended to replace actions taken by education organisations to monitor, review, and regularly improve the quality of programmes for which they are responsible.

14. Te arotake me te aromātai ā-waho (External evaluation and review processes)

14.1: Undertaking external evaluation and review (EER)

Under the Education and Training Act 2020, NZQA quality assures the non-university tertiary education sector through management of the New Zealand Qualifications Framework and statutory rules, which provide for a quality assurance framework. Participation in external evaluation and review and self-reflective practice is required for:

  • maintaining accreditations to deliver approved programmes
  • training schemes
  • consent to assess against standards
  • registration of a Private Training Establishment.

14.2: The stages of the review

There are four stages involved with the review:

  1. Planning the external evaluation and review
  2. Undertaking the onsite enquiry
  3. Reaching judgements about organisational performance and self-reflective practice
  4. Finalising and publishing of the external evaluation report

14.3: Planning the EER

Following the scheduling of a Te Hono o Te Kahurangi EER, the Lead Evaluator compiles a range of information to plan the EER (such as TEO details, its self-reflective summary, NZQA moderation and risk information, TEC data and audit reports).

The Lead Evaluator will then make initial contact with the organisation to explain process expectations and compliance requirements, and to request further information required to complete the planning process for the scheduled EER.

A planning meeting at the location of the organisation is recommended, but time spent by the evaluator at the location is at a cost to the organisation.

Once the proposed focus areas for the EER and draft agenda have been discussed with the organisation, the scope, agenda and confirmation letter is submitted to the Manager of Evaluation for approval.

The organisation can expect to receive the draft agenda and confirmation letter from NZQA at least four weeks prior to the on-site enquiry starting, unless agreed otherwise.

14.4: Initiating enquiry on-site

The on-site enquiry is the opportunity for the organisation and its key stakeholders to talk with the evaluation team about its performance and self-reflective practice lensed through the kaupapa. Evaluation conversations are the primary method for gathering evidence, although all material evidence is validated through triangulation (that is, verifying what is said with other stakeholder feedback and/or written documentation).

14.5: Reaching judgements

Prior to the completion of the onsite enquiry, the evaluation team will undertake a comprehensive analysis of the evidence gathered during the site visit and secondary sources. This is intended to ‘synthesize’ and generate interim findings, conclusions and statements of confidence based on ngā paearu (on the following page). The decision to rate outcomes achieved or processes contributing to such outcomes is based on the ‘quality and sufficiency’ of evidence.

The intent of the review should meet the Te Hono o Te Kahurangi criteria in the Quality Assurance (including External Evaluation and Review (EER)) Rules 2016. The decision to rate and finalise a statement of confidence is made by answering the following pātai arotake:

Ka pēhea tā koutou whakapuaki i te kaupapa, ā, ka pēhea koutou e mōhio ai e whakatutukihia ana?

Ngā paearu: Criteria for rating answers to pātai arotake for education performance and self-reflective practice

Ngā Hua o te Whare Ako
(Education Performance)
Te Whakairinga Kōrero
(Self-Reflective Practice)
Pounamu Kahurangi Pounamu Kahurangi
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are clearly exemplary and imbue performance in nearly all levels of the organisation, or the focus area.
- Very few or no gaps or weaknesses.
- Any gaps or weaknesses have no significant impact and are managed effectively.
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are clearly exemplary and inform highly effective self-reflective practice used to gain a comprehensive understanding of organisational performance, or the focus area, and to bring about wide ranging and, or, worthwhile improvements.
- Clear and comprehensive evidence of improved outcomes.-  Any gaps or weaknesses are not significant and managed effectively.
- Self-reflective practice is clearly part of a coherent and comprehensive approach across the organisation or the focus area.
Pounamu Whakairo Pounamu Whakairo
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are generally strong and imbue performance across most levels of the organisation or the focus area.
- Few gaps or weaknesses.
- Gaps or weaknesses have some impact but are mostly managed effectively.
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are generally strong and inform effective self-reflective practice and understanding of organisational performance, or the focus area, used to bring about worthwhile improvements.
- Good evidence of improved outcomes.
- Any gaps or weaknesses are not significant and mostly managed effectively.
- Self-reflective practice is generally a part of a reasonably coherent and comprehensive approach across the organisation or the focus area.
Pounamu Hukihuki Pounamu Hukihuki
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are inconsistent across most levels of the organisation or the focus area.
- Some gaps or weaknesses have impact, and are not managed effectively.
- Meets minimum expectations/requirements as far as can be determined.
ALL the following:
- Kaupapa are of inconsistent quality or used inconsistently to understand organisational performance or the focus area and bring about worthwhile improvements.
- Limited or little evidence of improved outcomes.
- Some significant gaps or weaknesses in self-reflective practice, which are not managed effectively.
- Self-reflective practice is not part of a coherent and comprehensive approach across the organisation or the focus area.
He pounamu He pounamu
ANY ONE of following:
- Kaupapa are unacceptably weak and not evident at all levels of organisation or the focus area.
- Significant gaps or weaknesses are not managed effectively.
- Does not meet minimum expectations/requirements.
ANY ONE of following:
- Kaupapa are ineffective or demonstrate serious weaknesses at all levels of organisation or the focus area.
- Little or no evidence of improved outcomes.
- Weaknesses not addressed effectively or require significant improvement to meet minimum expectations.

14.6: Preparing the report post site visit

The report can be written in ‘te reo Māori’ or English depending on the preference of the organisation. The final draft is sent to the organisation for comment within 30 days of the on-site review.

Once the organisation and all other interested parties have provided comment within the agreed timeframes, the finalised version is approved for release to the organisation for a factual accuracy check. If the report is confirmed by the organisation following a factual accuracy check or if reconsideration is not sought by the organisation, the final report will be ‘published’ on the NZQA website.

Ngā momo tono

Registration of a private training establishment

Registration of a private training establishment is defined as an applicant meeting the requirements for registration outlined in the Private Training Establishment Registration Rules 2018, and further statutory requirements and NZQA rules applying to PTEs.

Assessment standards

Assessment standards is defined as learning outcomes, together with performance or assessment criteria or evidence requirements and examples of their interpretation and application and associated quality assurance processes. A standard is either a unit standard or an achievement standard or both.

Consent to assess

Consent to assess is defined as an organisation meeting the requirements of provider registration and all the general and industry-specific requirements of the relevant Consent and Moderation Requirements (CMR), and the moderation requirements of the standard-setting body responsible for the unit standards.

Training scheme

A training scheme is defined as study and training that leads to an award but does not, of itself, lead to a qualification listed on the NZQF.

Qualification

A qualification at levels 1-6 is defined as a formal certification for a given purpose of the achievement of specified graduate outcomes to a given standard.

Programme

A programme at levels 1-6 is defined as a coherent arrangement of learning or training that is based on clear and consistent aims, content, outcomes, and assessment practices, which lead to a qualification, listed on the NZQF.

Level 7 diploma

A Level 7 diploma is defined as a coherent arrangement of learning or training with specialised and technical knowledge and skills within a professional context.

Bachelor degree

A Bachelor Degree is defined as a systematic and coherent introduction to a body of knowledge of a recognised major subject (or subjects, in the case of a double degree or a double major) as well as to problem solving and associated basic techniques of self-directed work and learning.

A Bachelor’s Degree involves at least one sequential study programme in which content is progressively developed such that it might form a basis for postgraduate study and/or professional practice.

A Bachelor Degree is taught mainly by people engaged in research.

Graduate certificate

A Graduate Certificate is defined as a certificate for degree graduates to pursue further study at an advanced undergraduate level.

The Graduate Certificate is typically designed as a bridging qualification to postgraduate study for individuals developing educational, professional, or vocational knowledge in a new discipline, profession, or subject area and/or as a broadening or deepening of skills or knowledge already gained in an undergraduate qualification.

A Graduate Diploma is defined as a diploma for a significant body of study at an advanced undergraduate level. The Diploma is typically designed as a bridging qualification to postgraduate study as well as broadening knowledge and skills in a familiar subject or discipline, or developing knowledge in a new area.

Bachelor Honours degree

A Bachelor Honours Degree is defined as a Level 8 degree or recognises distinguished or a discrete postgraduate degree following a Bachelor Degree.

The award of honours recognises outstanding achievement, meritorious achievement, or a pass; these may be termed first class honours, second class honours: first or second divisions, and third class honours.

Postgraduate certificate

A Postgraduate Certificate is defined as a certificate designed to extend and deepen an individual’s knowledge and skills. The Postgraduate Certificate involves credits from a specified subject and cognate areas.

It recognises continuing professional development or academic achievement in advance of a Bachelor degree in the same area as the individual’s original degree or Graduate Certificate or Diploma.

Postgraduate diploma

A Postgraduate Diploma is defined as a diploma designed to extend and deepen an individual’s knowledge and skills by building on attainment in the principal subject(s) of the qualifying degree, graduate diploma, or graduate certificate.

A Postgraduate Diploma prepares an individual for independent research and scholarship in the principal subject of the diploma.

Master's degree

A Master’s Degree is defined as an advanced body of knowledge in a range of contexts for research, a pathway for further learning, professional practice and/or scholarship.

Master’s Degrees usually build on a Bachelor’s Degree, Graduate Diploma, Bachelor Honours Degree, or a Postgraduate Diploma. They may also build on extensive professional experience of an appropriate kind. Their outcomes are demonstrably in advance of undergraduate study, and require individuals to engage in research and/or advanced scholarship.

Master’s Degrees are constituted in one discipline or coherent programme of study. They may be undertaken by taught courses or research, or by a combination of both.

Doctoral degree

A Doctoral Degree is defined as a research degree whereby the individual becomes an increasingly independent scholar who makes a substantial and original contribution to knowledge. It is normally the culmination of study, which begins at the bachelor level and reaches a stage beyond the masters.

For the PhD/DPhil and the named doctorate (e.g. DMus), the development takes place under the guidance of recognised experts in the field of study and under circumstances that allow the individual access to appropriate research resources.

The contribution to knowledge is judged by independent experts applying contemporary international standards of the discipline.

The hallmark will be the individual’s capacity for substantial independent research or scholarly creative activity as attested by his/her educational institution and/or as demonstrated by submitted work.

Ngā momo arotake

Degree monitoring

Degree Monitoring is defined as a scheduled diploma or degree review conducted by NZQA to ensure an approved and accredited Level 7 diploma or Levels 7-10 degree meets qualification and associate programme outcomes at a nationally accepted standard.

Consistency review

A consistency review is defined as a periodic review conducted by NZQA to ensure all graduates of New Zealand qualifications meet the outcomes to an equivalent and nationally acceptable standard.

External evaluation and review

An external evaluation and review is defined as a periodic evaluation of a tertiary education organisation (TEO) conducted by NZQA to provide an independent statement of confidence (judgement) about an organisation’s educational performance and capability in self-reflective practice.

To request an information package about any one of the business processes outlined in these guidelines please email the Te Hono o Te Kahurangi team at tehono@nzqa.govt.nz.

Ngā ringa tautoko o Te Hono o Te Kahurangi

Name Organisation
Te Urikore Biddle Unitec Institute of Technology
Pani Bird NZQA
Finney Davis Whakaruruhau
Dr Shane Edwards NZQA External Lead Evaluator
Titia Graham Te Kōhanga Reo National Trust Board
Kieran Hewitson Independent
Hemi Hoskins Ara Institute of Canterbury
Angela Karini NZQA
Syd King Independent
Mania Maniapoto Ngaia NZQA
Merepaea Manukau Independent
Talei Morrison Whakaruruhau
Ben Ngaia NZQA
Puti Nuku Eastern Institute of Technology
Roxanne Smith NZQA External Lead Evaluator
Keri-Anne Stephens NZQA
Joelene Takai Tūranga Ararau
Ron Taukamo Skills Active Aotearoa
Tamati Waaka Te Whare Wānanga o Awanuiārangi
Campbell Wiki NZQA
Aneta Wineera Te Wānanga o Raukawa
Pakake Winiata Te Wānanga o Aotearoa

Te Kuputaka

Term Description
Assessment standard The collective term for unit standards and achievement standards listed on the NZQA Directory of Assessment Standards.
Component  Parts of a programme (or training scheme), which together make up a coherent arrangement of learning or training. Components include projects, papers, programmes, modules, practicum and skill and assessment standards. 
New Zealand certificate or diploma  A qualification that meets the requirements for listing on the NZQF at levels 1-6 and level 7 diplomas. 
Ngā Paearu  Evaluative rubrics 
Ngā Pātai arotake  Evaluative questions 
Ngā Taunaki  Evidence requirements 
Ngā Taumata  Level  
Ngā Tūtohu  Outcome and process quality indicators 
Programme (approved)  An approved programme is a coherent arrangement of learning or training that is based on clear and consistent aims, content, outcomes, and assessment practices leading to a qualification listed on the NZQF. 
Qualification  Formal certification for a given purpose of the achievement of specified graduate outcomes to a given standard. 
Qualification strand  A specialisation within a qualification that represents a distinct component of the qualification, and is at the level of the qualification. Strands are documented through strand-specific outcomes in the graduate profile. 
Quality assurance body  NZQA or New Zealand Vice-Chancellors’ Committee (also known as Universities New Zealand). 
Stakeholders  Individuals, groups, or organisations with an interest (or ‘stake’) in the outcome of a qualification. 
Training scheme  Study or training that leads to an award, but does not, of itself, lead to an award of a qualification on the NZQF. 
 
Skip to main page content Accessibility page with list of access keys Home Page Site Map Contact Us newzealand.govt.nz