ICA is fundamental to the University’s Education Quality Framework, and supports the following key areas:
Educational quality assurance – uses robust frameworks, models, policies and processes to ensure educational offerings comply with all legislative and regulatory requirements and reflect excellent practice in core academic structure.
Educational quality improvement – uses a strong central framework and processes to support cycles of continuous improvement, recognising that educational quality is not an end goal, but an ongoing pursuit.
In this way, ICA supports both legislative compliance and continuous course improvement. The accreditation cycle forms part of the University's broader educational quality processes.
ICA is not a standalone review activity. Instead, it brings together evidence from across the ongoing cycle of academic quality assurance as a key summative milestone.
Internal course accreditation is governed by the Award Courses Policy and supported by the Award Course Improvement and Accreditation Procedures.
As specified in the procedures, the internal course accreditation submission will:
- align the data and information with the applicable standards of the HESF relevant to course accreditation;
- include recommendations to support the ongoing improvement of the course curriculum and delivery; and
- include a plan and timeframes for the implementation of the recommendations. Generally, recommendations must be implemented within twelve months from the date of the approved submission, unless an extension of time has been granted by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Academic Quality and Enhancement).
The College leads the ICA process through the Academic Lead, being the Teaching Program Director or their nominee, who has overall responsibility for developing and submitting the ICA template in CouresLoop, supported by other contributors who provide specialist input and evidence as required.
The Office of Academic Quality and Enhancement coordinates the ICA process through the Academic Quality, Compliance and Risk team, which manages scheduling, governance processes and submission quality, with support from the Curriculum Services team for systems, data and approved curriculum changes.
The Courses and Admissions Committee provides academic governance oversight by approving the review schedule and ICA submissions, and by monitoring 12-month implementation progress to ensure recommendations are actioned and risks are addressed.
For ICA, most quantitative and contextual evidence is provided centrally through the ICA Review Group Information Pack on FLIP. Colleges supplement this with relevant qualitative evidence to contextualise the data, demonstrate ongoing monitoring and improvement, show alignment with external standards, and support sound evaluative judgement. This may include CQAG advice and implementation progress, professional accreditation findings, benchmarking or calibration outcomes, discipline or market context, Joint Management Committee feedback for third-party academic partnership, and significant course changes recorded in CourseLoop.
As part of this process, the Academic Lead also reviews recommendations from the previous ICA cycle to ensure they are completed, carried forward with justification, or formally closed, supporting a continuous improvement approach.
Course information, findings, analysis and recommendations are aligned to the applicable HESF requirements within the ICA submission template. This alignment ensures each course is assessed against relevant criteria and that ICA findings and recommendations are clearly linked to the evidence and supported by a strong and coherent evidence base.
The completed ICA template, including supporting evidence and data uploaded in the Attachments tab and the associated implementation plan recorded in the Recommendations tab, is submitted to the Academic Quality, Compliance and Risk team for final quality check and to seek endorsement from the respective Dean (Education) on the advice of the College Education Committee.
Following endorsement, the submission is progressed to the Courses and Admissions Committee for consideration. On the advice of the Committee, a determination is made on whether the course/s are reaccredited for a period of up to seven years, or for a shorter period where required.
When developing ICA recommendations, the emphasis should be on clear, evidence-based actions that address identified findings and support course quality and risk mitigation. Well written ICA recommendations are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound, with a clear line of sight from evidence to action, proportionate scope, and defined responsibility. Recommendations should focus on strategic, course level improvements, distinct from more operational CQAG actions, and be supported by an implementation plan that enables progress to be tracked within 12 months.
Detailed guidance on writing S.M.A.R.T. and evidence-based recommendations, and on completing the implementation plan in CourseLoop, including examples, is available in the ICA Training and Induction module on FLO (see Quick links).
Approval of the ICA submission does not conclude the ICA process. Following course reaccreditation, the Academic Lead is responsible for implementing the approved recommendations within 12 months. As part of this responsibility, the Academic Lead must return to the Recommendations tab of the ICA submission in CourseLoop to provide updates on the status and progress of implementation, ensuring the improvement cycle is fully completed.
During this period, the Curriculum Services Team works with the Academic Lead to facilitate approval of any course or topic amendments arising from the ICA submission. At the 12‑month point, the Academic Quality, Compliance and Risk team generates a report on the implementation progress of the recommendations. This report is then submitted to the Courses and Admissions Committee for review.
Sturt Rd, Bedford Park
South Australia 5042
Follow Flinders
