Program Management Policy (PMP)

Scope of application

This policy describes the stages of the program management process for all credited programs offered at Vanier College. This includes programs in the regular sector and in Continuing Education.

The policy and its associated procedures are applied within the provisions set in the following documents:

• Règlement sur le régime des études collégiales (College Education Regulations);
• Loi sur les collèges d’enseignement général et professionnel (General and Vocational Colleges Act);
• Loi sur la Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collégial (CÉEC);
• Collective agreement between La Fédération nationale des enseignantes et enseignants du Québec (FNEEQ) and Le Comité patronal de négociation des collèges (CPNC);
• Collective agreement between La Fédération du personnel professionnel des collèges – Centrale des syndicats du Québec (FPPC-CSQ) and Le Comité patronal de négociation des collèges (CPNC);
• Collective agreement between La Fédération du personnel de soutien de l’enseignement supérieur, au nom des syndicats du personnel de soutien des collèges (FPSES-CSQ) and Le Comité patronal de négociation des collèges (CPNC);
• Plan de classification des emplois types et guide de classement des postes de cadre pour le personnel d’encadrement des collèges d’enseignement général et professionnel;
• Règlement déterminant certaines conditions de travail des hors-cadre des collèges d’enseignement général et professionnel.

In addition, all information and data collection performed as part of program management, as well as all documentation and reporting, are carried out in agreement with Vanier College’s Records Classification Policy and Management and Information Security Policy.

Definitions to ensure a common understanding of the key concepts of this policy are found in Appendix 1, and acronyms are found in Appendix 2.

1 Policy statement

At Vanier College, education is viewed as a transformative process that guides all students towards their personal and professional self-realization as engaged citizens of the world. Well-developed programs play an essential role in supporting students’ achievement of their full potential. It is the College’s responsibility to ensure and attest to the quality of the programs it offers to its student population, as stipulated by the Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collegial (CÉEC).

Through academic program management, the College responds to opportunities and changes in the educational landscape and society at large, including workforce needs.This policy supports the mission, vision, and values of the institution and contributes to each program’s ability to adapt to fast-paced changes in today’s environment by encouraging transparent communication, reflective collaboration, and informed and timely interventions. The Program Management Policy (PMP) guides the program management process and allows all stakeholders to contribute effectively to this shared responsibility.

2 Purpose

This policy aims to enable Program Committees and other stakeholders to take informed, appropriate, and timely actions based on the needs of their programs. Specifically, it:

• explains how the College assumes its roles and responsibilities towards program management and addresses the requirements of the Ministère de l’enseignement supérieur (MES);
• explains pedagogical approaches foundational to teaching and learning in CEGEP: the program approach and competency-based education;
• describes the annual cycle by which the College supports ongoing evaluation and development of its academic programs, for both Diploma of College Studies (DCS) and Attestation of College Studies (ACS);
• specifies the criteria, institutional structure, and means that ensure the quality of the College’s programs;
• describes the required documents for program revisions;
• provides guidance about best practices in program management in both the regular sector and Continuing Education for both major and minor program revisions;
• clarifies roles and responsibilities of groups and individuals;
• outlines procedures related to program management, which are detailed in guidelines found in the PMP Toolbox;
• describes the structures and processes for information and data management, as well as the documentation of program management activities;
• outlines the way the PMP is implemented and reviewed on an ongoing basis.

3 Pedagogical approaches

Teaching and learning in the CEGEP system are rooted in the program approach and competency-based education.

3.1 The program approach

A program is defined by Québec’s MES as an integrated set of learning activities leading to the achievement of educational objectives based on set standards. Taken together, educational objectives and standards make up competencies. Within the program approach, learning activities from all program disciplines, including General Education and contributing disciplines, collaboratively contribute to students’ achievement of the program’s aims, goals, and competencies. This learning is expressed in an integrative manner in the program exit profile.

Given the integrative nature of the program approach, Vanier College advocates the use of several disciplines in its programs. As mandated in their ministerial devis, pre-university programs tend to include numerous disciplines. To ensure an interdisciplinary program approach, technical DCS programs should include at least two contributing disciplines to teach program-specific competencies.

3.2 Competency-based education

CEGEP programs lead students towards the achievement of competencies. A competency is the ability to act effectively by mobilizing a range of resources and includes knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Each program’s ministerial devis provides a list and description of every competency to be developed in the program.

Colleges are responsible for interpreting each program’s ministerial devis. Its interpretation leads to the production of local program documents during the program revision process. These include the exit profile, the Program Comprehensive Assessment (PCA), the program grid (the courses and their sequence), and course frameworks.

4 Program management process and documentation

4.1 Annual cycle

Vanier College ensures the quality of programs through a cyclical process consisting of three recurring steps: evaluation/analysis, development/revision, and implementation. All DCS and ACS programs are expected to follow this program management cycle annually.

DCS programs

Every year, Program Committees review and reflect on information and data related to program quality. They examine their latest annual report, their program dashboard, surveys, and other information related to program quality. They reflect on recent program management activities and determine their objectives for the upcoming year(s), ensuring alignment with Vanier’s Strategic Plan and Student Success Plan.

Program Committees identify one or more areas of need for further analysis. Should no concerns be raised, the Program Committee should choose to examine a program quality criterion (described in section 4.2) that has not been reviewed recently. The Program Committee may then recommend actions or changes to the program and act to develop and implement the recommended changes.

All aspects of program quality should be monitored on an ongoing basis, and each of the Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement du collegial (CÉEC) quality criterion should be evaluated over the course of seven years. Through this process, programs can determine their own program management priorities within the constraints and regulations established by the Ministère and the College.

ACS programs

Every year, the Pedagogical Counsellor ensures the collection and tracking of data related to the quality criteria as outlined in section 4.2. Once the analysis is complete, some interventions (such as material resources) might be immediate, whereas others (such as coherence) may take years to implement. All aspects of program quality are monitored continually and fully evaluated over the course of four years to remain relevant and coherent with regard to industry-level and environmental changes.

4.2 Program quality criteria

Program quality criteria are consistent across the CEGEP network; they are described in the guidelines and frameworks of the CÉEC. Quality criteria are evaluated by Program Committees, who select a quality criterion for further analysis, based on annual academic priorities, and qualitative and quantitative data. Every program is required to work on each of the six program quality criteria within their respective cycle: a seven-year cycle for DCS programs, and a four-year cycle for ACS programs.

• Coherence – The extent to which all components of the program form a logical and integrated whole that facilitates the achievement of the learning objectives and standards.
• Relevance – The extent to which the program’s devis, objectives and standards, as well as their local interpretation and implementation, reflect the needs and expectations of students, society, universities, and the labour market.
• Effectiveness – The extent to which the program attracts and retains qualified students, enables student success, and graduates students who are adequately prepared for higher studies or employment in their field of study.
• Teaching methods and student support – The extent to which instructional strategies, measures, and support are adapted to program objectives and student needs and enhance student success.
• Human, material, and financial resources – The extent to which the program is adequately equipped with the necessary staff, facilities, equipment, and budget to meet the program’s needs.
• Governance – The extent to which a program’s organizational structure, management methods, and means of communication are clear and ensure the harmonious functioning of the program and the program approach.

4.3 Program revision process

A program revision may be initiated by the following circumstances: a new ministerial devis, identification of program gaps based on data, or an Academic Steering Committee (ASC) recommendation.

4.3.1  Major program revision

DCS

The Ministère de l’Enseignement supérieur establishes programs of study, which are articulated in a program devis. The issuance by the Ministère of a new devis for a program offered by the College triggers a program revision. Major program revisions can be triggered by other factors, such as major changes in external accreditation standards, or an unexpected or significant change in enrolment, success, or graduation rates. These factors are likely to be identified by Program Committees or any of the Deans.

A major program revision requires an in-depth analysis of the devis and an analysis of relevant information and data from the current program at the College. It also involves the gathering of input from stakeholders outside the College through the Program Advisory Committee meeting. A major program revision results in the development of a revised program grid and all related required documents, followed by the implementation of the new program and the evaluation of its implementation.

Prior to the initiation of a major program revision, ASC determines general orientations for the revision. General orientations consist of high-level principles to keep in mind when working on a program revision such as the roles and responsibilities of each group and individuals, the student-centered approach, the program approach, differences in the number of competencies and in the number of hours of the new devis compared to the previous devis, proposed contributing disciplines, resource considerations and their impact on the revision, retention issues or gender concerns to consider, and other relevant information and data from the current program. For technical programs, the orientation can also include orientation for stage and ATE initiatives.

Informed by feedback from the Pedagogical Support and Innovation office (PSI), the Program Committee, the Tutoring & Academic Success Centre (TASC), and Academic Advising, ASC shares these general orientations for the program with the Revision Team.

It is the role of members of ASC to assign resources and release time, when appropriate and/or available. Once the orientations are received, the program Pedagogical Counsellor(s) will advise and support the Program Committee and the Revision Team on the steps and timeline for the program revision process. Particulars will be detailed in program work plans and annual reports.

Steps to a major DCS program revision

Figure 2 – Required steps and program documents of a major DCS program revision

• * Contributing Disciplines apply to the vast majority of technical programs (rare exceptions exist) – Does not apply to pre-university programs.
• ** Iterative process between Revision Team, Department(s), Program Committee, and when applicable, other college groups.
• *** Program Documents excluding Course Frameworks: Exit Profile, PCA Outline, Program Flowchart, Program Grid, and prerequisites.

ACS programs

In some cases, public funds are made available by the Ministère for the development or revision of ACS programs; these are intended for use by members of a consortium of colleges (Continuing Education Departments). These ACS programs are known as “public”; they can be offered by any CEGEP and are modified by the representative colleges and their staff/committees.

In many cases, ACS programs are developed locally and as such, are known as “local” ACS programs. These programs are elaborated/revised by the “master” college and submitted to the Ministère for adoption and coding, but they remain the property of the individual college(s). ACS programs draw competencies from one or several reference DCS programs (DEC de souche) associated to ministerial devis. However, these competencies can be modified and/or new ones created in order to properly address required learning outcomes in specific job functions.

ACS program revisions and new developments begin with industry consultations (projets de formation). Consultations are led by the Continuing Education Pedagogical Counsellor responsible for the program along with the Director of Continuing Education and/or their delegate. Industrial representatives act as consulting content experts alongside ACS teachers. DCS teachers should also be called upon as disciplinary experts, when applicable. All ACS programs, new or revised, follow the Cadre d’élaboration de programmes d’études menant à une attestation d’études collégiales (AEC) of the Fédération des cégeps. The MES approves ACS programs.

Steps to an ACS program revision

Figure 3 – Required steps and program documents of a major ACS program revision

• * When applicable, consult with faculty from the regular sector.

4.3.2 Minor program revision for DCS programs

Requests to undertake minor program revisions may be approved by ASC in some circumstances. A minor program revision should have minimal impact on the grid and could include, but is not limited to:

• moving two or three courses to different semesters
• adding, removing, or modifying prerequisites
• changing course titles

The program Pedagogical Counsellor(s) will advise and support the Program Committee and the Revision Team on the steps and timeline for the program revision process. Once changes are complete, the Program Committee and ASC can approve the minor revision.

4.4 Required program documents

The Program Management Policy outlines the structures and processes associated with program management as well as the roles and responsibilities of stakeholders. The steps as to how these responsibilities are carried out are provided in the guidelines and templates found in the PMP Toolbox. These college-wide tools, developed by PSI under the responsibility of the Academic Dean’s Office, complete the PMP and as such, must be used in all program revisions.

Required program documents are the official expression of the College’s decisions on programs. They are listed and defined below.

Exit profile

An exit profile is a document that communicates a coherent and integrated portrait of the learning that students will have achieved upon successful completion of their program. It illustrates the purpose of the program, its main areas of teaching and learning, and some additional elements such as some of the essential skills and attitudes developed in the program. It highlights any local orientations given to the program.

Program comprehensive assessment (PCA)

An integrative evaluation that verifies that the student has, at the end of the program, met the aims of college education, met the exit profile, and is able to integrate and apply all the competencies through the realization of complex, authentic tasks. It is made up of the following required documents:

• The description of the PCA
• Its evaluation criteria
• A marking rubric

Program grid file

A file made up of several tabs which includes a by-semester chart of all courses indicating the disciplines, course codes, competencies, ponderation and prerequisites, and the capstone course carrying the program comprehensive assessment. The program grid file also includes the following tabs:

• Program information
• Comparative grid
• By-objectives (SOBEC)
• Course-competency matrix
• Course substitutions
• Program flowchart
• Courses

Course framework

A document that describes a given course’s role and place in a program. It includes the competencies covered by the course, the learning outcomes, the essential knowledge, skills and attitudes to be developed, as well as the integrative assessment and its evaluation criteria. The course framework forms the basis from which teachers develop their course outlines.

4.5 Program information system

The Program Information System (PIS) is an organized repository containing all the information, data, and documentation required for the College to ensure and attest to program quality. This includes documents resulting from program revisions. The PIS is organized by program and contains a General Education section as well as a section comprising College-wide data and reports. It is stored on a secure server at the College.

5 Roles and responsibilities

Ensuring program quality is a shared responsibility at the College. The following section specifies the roles and responsibilities of all parties involved.

Responsibilities in program development

A general aim of this policy is to foster effective collaboration towards the shared goal of offering quality programs to students. Responsibilities vary according to the work being done.

Several individuals play an active and ongoing role in a program revision and make up the Revision Team: The Faculty Dean, designated teachers, and the program Pedagogical Counsellor(s). Revision Team members work collaboratively on program documents, and regularly consult with department faculty members as well as the Program Committee, seeking their input on program documents such as the exit profile, the PCA, and the program flowchart.

5.1 Groups

5.1.1 Academic steering committee

The Academic Steering Committee is composed of the Academic Dean, the Faculty Deans, the Dean of Academic Development and Research, and the Dean of Academic Systems and Registrar. In certain circumstances, such as review of the Program Management Policy or ensuring alignment between DCS and ACS programs, the Director of Continuing Education and Community Services will be invited to join ASC.

ASC members collaborate to ensure consistent and coherent program management, with a college-wide perspective. Specifically, the Academic Steering Committee:

• Provides general orientations and recommendations for program work at the start of a program revision;
• Identifies potential contributing disciplines based on an analysis of the competencies and the needs of the College (for DCS programs);
• Allocates available resources for program management activities;
• Produces an impact analysis for proposed grids;
• Reviews the contributing disciplines for proposed program revisions;
• Reviews and recommends the program grid, the exit profile and the PCA outline, including its evaluation criteria, to Academic Council;
• Reviews the annual workload resulting from the consolidation of all program work plans.

5.1.2 Program committee

The Program Committee plays an active role in program evaluation, development, and implementation activities, while respecting ministerial documents as well as the structures and processes in place at the College. Specifically, the Program Committee:

• Ensures the quality of the program, the integration of learning, and interdisciplinary coherence;
• Participates in preparing annual work plans and reports, as well as evaluation plans or revision proposals when required;
• Implements the work plan;
• Forms sub-committees when necessary;
• Approves course frameworks;
• Recommends the program grid, the exit profile and the PCA Outline, including its evaluation criteria, to ASC.

Program Committees are made up of voting members, which include faculty representatives of all program disciplines including representatives for General Education, and non-voting advisory members, which include the Faculty Dean, the Pedagogical Counsellor(s), an Academic Advisor, and a program-specific student if available, and may include technicians, other professionals and managers, and support staff, as needed.

In Continuing Education, the role of the Program Committee is performed by the Director of Continuing Education and/or their delegate (Coordinator of Academics), the Pedagogical Counsellor responsible for the program, consulting representatives from industry, and consulting teachers who have industry experience and/or who have taught within the ACS program (for revisions of existing programs). Other teachers, professionals, and support staff may be consulted as needed.

5.1.3 Revision team

The Revision Team is a working group made up of program teachers, the program Pedagogical Counsellor(s), and the Faculty Dean associated with the program. The Revision Team leads the development of the program revision based on ASC orientations. Specifically, the Revision Team:

• Proposes a vision for the program revision that takes into account the program devis as well as the program revision orientations provided by ASC;
• Seeks advice from the department(s), the Program Committee, Academic Advising, TASC, and other College entities for additional input;
• Analyses program competencies, keeping in mind the program approach;
• Invites potential contributing disciplines;
• Leads Program Advisory Committee meetings;
• Develops and proposes program documents as well as the program flowchart;
• Updates the Program Committee on the program revision;
• Seeks approval for program documents.

In Continuing Education, the role of the Revision Team is performed by the Coordinator of Academics, the Pedagogical Counsellor responsible for the program, industry representatives, and consulting ACS teachers, or DCS teachers when needed. Their responsibilities are the same as those for DCS programs.

5.1.4 Departments

Departments provide disciplinary expertise to the Program Committees or General Education committees. Specifically, Departments:

• Appoint representatives of their disciplines to relevant program or General Education committees;
• Advise Program Committees through their representatives;
• Develop course frameworks for their discipline(s) (in DCS programs);
• Provide course information to Communications for web updates.

For ACS programs in Continuing Education, disciplinary expertise may be provided either through consultation with disciplinary departments or by Continuing Education ACS teachers. Course frameworks in ACS programs are initially reviewed by the responsible Pedagogical Counsellor and approved by the Director of Continuing Education and/or their delegate.

5.1.5 General Education Committee

The General Education Committee (GEC) promotes the aims of college education across all DCS programs. As it pertains to program management, GEC:

• Addresses concerns and challenges specific to General Education in relation to programs;
• Appoints General Education representatives who participate in Program Committees;
• Brings to Program Committees expertise on their disciplines;
• Advises Program Committees and votes on the recommendation or approval of program documents, through their representatives;
• Advises programs on how to support the integration of learning from General Education and ensure, for all students, effective course progression for their courses;
• Participates in establishing GEC annual work plans and reports.

5.1.6 Pedagogical Support and Innovation

Pedagogical Support and Innovation (PSI) is the service within the Academic Dean’s Office that is responsible for providing pedagogical perspective, resources, and tools needed to ensure the implementation of this policy. Specifically, PSI, through its Coordinator and Pedagogical Counsellors:

• Provides support to Program Coordinators and Program Committees for program management activities;
• Gives counsel to the Program Committee and to members of ASC;
• Develops and communicates the means (i.e., processes, tools, and guidelines) required for the management of programs;
• Ensures appropriate collection, analysis and communication of program data;
• Ensures the documentation of all program management activities in the Program Information System;
• Validates that program documents support program revision best practices;
• Updates the PCA tracking document;
• Provides the Academic Dean, Academic Council and the Board of Directors with College-wide data and reports on program management.

5.1.7 Students

As the principal beneficiaries of programs, students provide crucial information on the quality of programs. Specifically, students:

• Participate in the collection of data and information to ensure the quality of programs. Methods of data collection include surveys, focus groups, and participation in program advisory committees;
• Report to the program coordinator or Faculty Dean any issue related to the quality of their program;
• Serve on Program Committees as non-voting members, if available.

5.1.8 Academic systems

Within the Academic Dean’s Office, Academic Systems is the centre of administrative operations related to programs. Specifically, the service of Academic Systems Management:

• Ensures effective verifications and operations for all programs;
• Validates program grids produced by the Revision Team with requirements of the Ministère, using SOBEC;
• Conducts impact analyses on any changes affecting programs, including, but not limited to, allocation, scheduling, impacts on support staff, and equipment requirements;
• Informs Academic Advising of approved programs;
• Oversees students’ progression, from admission to certification;
• Establishes program admission criteria, in collaboration with programs and departments;
• Provides feedback on student progression;
• Liaises with ministerial databases and partner systems.

5.1.9 Academic council

Academic Council is a permanent body whose mandate is to make recommendations to the College on any question pertaining to the maintenance, improvement, or development of the College's academic life, including but not limited to programs in the regular and Continuing Education divisions. In relation to program management, Academic Council:

• Reviews program revision plans on a yearly basis for all DCS programs;
• Recommends program grids, exit profiles, and PCA Outlines, including their evaluation criteria, to the Board of Directors;
• Reviews the college-wide report issued by the Academic Dean’s Office on program management;
• Monitors the implementation of the Program Management Policy including the consolidation of work plans, major program revisions, minor program revision reports, and program implementation reports;
• Recommends revisions to the Program Management Policy.

5.1.10 Board of directors

As the body mandated by law to ensure the governance of the College, the Board of Directors:

• Approves new and revised programs;
• Approves any revisions to the Program Management Policy.

5.1.11 Communications and corporate affairs

As the body responsible for how Vanier College communicates its offerings and activities, Communications and Corporate Affairs:

• Updates the College’s website and the prospectus with the most recent version of program grids;
• Updates the College’s website with the most recent course descriptions.

5.2 Individuals

5.2.1 Academic dean

The Academic Dean is responsible for the management of all regular sector programs (DCS) at the College as well as all services and resources linked to teaching and learning. Specifically, the Academic Dean:

• Plays a leadership role in creating appropriate structures and means for the evaluation of priorities and issues, the establishment of strategic orientations, and the assurance of the quality of DCS programs;
• Attests to the quality of programs to College stakeholders such as Academic Council, and to stakeholders outside the College such as the CÉEC;
• Applies the laws governing College education, notably the Loi sur la Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collégial (CÉEC);
• Leads the Academic Steering Committee and Academic Council;
• Provides guidance on resolving conflicts when Program Committees cannot reach a common understanding. The Academic Dean may strike a special committee to help with this task.

The roles and responsibilities of the Academic Dean are carried out in consultation with the Academic Steering Committee.

5.2.2 Director of continuing education

The Director of Continuing Education is responsible for the management of all Attestation of College Studies (ACS) programs at the College, including certain services and resources linked to teaching and learning. Specifically, the Director of Continuing Education:

• Plays a leadership role in creating appropriate structures and means for the evaluation of priorities and issues, the establishment of strategic orientations, and the assurance of the quality of ACS programs;
• Attests to the quality of ACS programs to College parties such as Academic Council, or to instances outside the College such as the CÉEC;
• Applies the laws governing College education, notably the Loi sur la Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collégial;
• Attends Academic Steering Committee meetings when needed such as in matters pertaining to the review of the Program Management Policy or when alignment between DCS and ACS programs is required;
• Resolves conflicts when ACS Program Committees cannot reach a common understanding.

5.2.3 Dean of academic development and research

The Dean of Academic Development and Research (DADR) is responsible for the implementation of the PMP; this includes ensuring that processes and tools are in place to ensure the quality of all the College’s programs. The DADR works with Faculty Deans and the Academic Coordinator of Continuing Education to ensure consistent and coherent program management with a College-wide view. Specifically, the DADR:

• Oversees the implementation of the Program Management Policy, reviews the efficacy and the efficiency of the processes and tools required for its implementation, and proposes updates;
• Assesses the ongoing implementation and the effectiveness of the policy to ensure program quality;
• Assesses and provides feedback on program revision at major milestone meetings, to ensure the effectiveness of the processes and tools attached to the PMP;
• Presents annual College-wide reports on program management activities for a seven-year cycle to Academic Council and the Board of Directors;
• Collaborates with the Faculty Dean and with the Director of Continuing Education in program management;
• Collaborates with PSI to modify the PMP toolbox as needed;
• Approves processes, tools, and guidelines required for the management of programs. When required, DADR brings them to ASC for approval;
• Determines the effectiveness of the PMP to ensure program quality based on CÉEC criteria;
• Proposes changes to the PMP as needed.

5.2.4 Faculty dean

Faculty Deans are directly responsible for the management of DCS programs. They ensure the quality of programs in accordance with the policies of the College, in alignment with the College’s Strategic Plan and Student Success Plan, and with respect to the orientations of the Academic Dean and Academic Steering Committee.

As part of the Revision Team, the Faculty Dean plays an active and ongoing role in program revision. They may provide insight from work with other programs and other colleges. They may also provide information about the College’s capacity with regard to resources and vision, and they may assess work to ensure alignment with ASC’s orientations and of the PMP. They hold a leadership role in the revision work and meet with the Revision Team, as required by the program revision milestones. Specifically, each Faculty Dean:

• Plays an active role in program evaluation, development, and implementation, respecting the structures and processes in place at the College and Ministerial requirements;
• Collaborates with the Dean of Academic Development and Research in program management;
• Participates in Program Committees and Revision Teams and promotes consensus;
• Oversees the work of Program Committees and Revision Teams under their responsibility, including in program revision milestones meetings;
• Collaborates with the Director of Continuing Education and the DCS Program Coordinator, for programs offered in both the regular sector and in Continuing Education;
• Provides guidance on program management objectives and priorities through discussion with the Program Coordinator;
• Reviews, provides feedback on, and approves program work plans and year-end reports;
• Provides support and resources for program management activities;

5.2.5 Coordinator of academics, continuing education

The Coordinator of Academics in Continuing Education is responsible for the management of ACS programs in Continuing Education. They ensure the quality of programs in accordance with the policies of the College, in alignment with the College’s Strategic Plan and Student Success Plan, and with respect for the orientations of the Director of Continuing Education and the Academic Dean, if required. Specifically, the Coordinator of Academics:

• Leads Continuing Education’s Pedagogical Counsellors and provides guidance on program management objectives and priorities;
• Provides Pedagogical Counsellors with feedback on program work plans and year-end reports;
• Oversees and assesses the work of Program Committees under their responsibility;
• Verifies program documents and approves program work plans and reports;
• Provides support and resources for program management activities.

5.2.6 Program coordinator

The Program Coordinator is usually a teacher in the program of study and acts as the main liaison between the program and the College. The Program Coordinator:

• Holds and facilitates Program Committee meetings, ensuring that they are held at an appropriate frequency given the program work plan;
• Follows up on work performed by the Program Committee and its subcommittees;
• Maintains effective communications to ensure fulfillment of the Program Committee’s mandate, including with academic management, departments that contribute to the program, and individuals and groups outside the program;
• Informs Communications about modifications to the grid and/or course descriptions, ensuring that information in the Prospectus and on the College website are updated with all program changes;
• Produces and submits the program work plan and year-end report to the College.

6 Implementation and review of the policy

Once approved by the Board of Directors, the policy will be distributed to all teachers and other members of the Vanier community to whom the policy is applicable. The policy will also be made available on the Vanier College website. In addition, the policy will be submitted to the Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collégial. Any subsequent revisions to the policy approved by the Board of Directors will be similarly disseminated.

It is the role of the Academic Dean’s Office to ensure the implementation, application, and review of this policy.

6.1 Ongoing policy monitoring

Based on feedback collected from parties across the College, the Academic Steering Committee will ensure the annual monitoring of the implementation of the Program Management Policy and its effectiveness based on the following criteria:

• Relevance: The extent to which the policy contributes to the quality of academic programs.
• Feasibility: The extent to which the policy is realistic, appropriate, easily applicable, and efficient.
• Comprehensiveness: The extent to which the policy includes all the necessary information to guide the management of academic programs.
• Coherence: The extent to which the elements of the policy and the wording of the content agree with each other to form a logical, consistent, and unified whole.
• Clarity: The extent to which readers understand the content after a first read without assistance.
• Accuracy: The extent to which the content is current and correct.
• Effectiveness: The extent to which the policy and its associated tools meet their intended goals.
• Participation: The extent to which stakeholders are involved in, and committed to, carrying out program management activities in accordance with the policy.

6.2 Scheduled policy revisions

The Academic Dean’s Office will review this policy every five years.

6.3 Unscheduled policy revisions

The Academic Dean may initiate an unscheduled policy revision based on the results of ongoing policy monitoring or in response to recommendations from stakeholders named in the policy. Unscheduled revisions to this policy may be initiated in response to the following factors:

• External requirements, including but not limited to:
  • Changes in the law
  • Changes in collective agreements
  • Requests or recommendations from the Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collégial
• Internal requirements, including but not limited to:
  • Changes in related policies or procedures
  • Results of policy monitoring
  • Results of an evaluation of the policy

7 History of Policy Revision

This policy was first implemented on June 13, 2017.

It was first reviewed in 2018-19 and had a new version that was approved on May 28, 2019.

It was reviewed between 2022 and 2024, and the latest version was approved on June 18, 2024.

Appendix 1 - Definitions

Definitions are presented in this appendix to support a common understanding of the key concepts of this policy.

Competency

The ability to act effectively by mobilizing a range of resources. Resources include knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Each program’s ministerial devis provides a list and description of competencies to be developed in the program. Competencies are made up of objectives (what the students will be able to do) and standards (the type of situation and the criteria by which they demonstrate performance).

Contributing Discipline

A program-specific discipline that contributes a minority of courses to the total number of program-specific courses in technical programs. In a program approach, contributing disciplines should create the course framework and lab activities in co-development with the main discipline.

Course-Competency Matrix

A graphic representation that provides an overall view of courses and the designed sequence of students’ acquisition of competencies. It indicates the weight of each competency, in hours.

Discipline

A field of study or branch of knowledge within a program that is recognized by the Ministry. It is also the unit in which a teacher is hired to work at the College, forming the basis of departments.

General Education Discipline

A discipline directly associated, in the ministerial devis, with the General Education component common to all DCS programs. There are four General Education disciplines: English, French, Humanities, and Physical Education. With the inclusion of complementary courses, when applicable, General Education is responsible for a total of 26⅔ credits in a typical program.

Main Discipline

For technical programs, a program-specific discipline directly associated to the program in the ministerial devis. It is usually responsible for delivering the majority of courses in the program. Its department is responsible for the program’s coordination [French: discipline porteuse].

Ministerial Devis

The program description created by the Ministère. It contains the goals and general aims of the program as well as the General Education and program-specific objectives and standards (i.e. competencies) for all programs. The devis specifies the parameters and constraints guiding local implementation, such as the total number of contact hours and credits. For some programs, the devis mandates ponderations and disciplines for certain competencies.

PMP Toolbox

The PMP Toolbox is a collection of tools (e.g. guidelines, templates, checklists, etc.) that support the realization of the processes and responsibilities described in the Program Management Policy.

Program

An integrated set of learning activities (e.g. courses, stages, PASS Day, or program activities such as symposia) leading to the achievement of educational objectives based on set standards.

Program Approach

The notion that a program is an integrated set of interconnected courses from various disciplines that collaboratively participate in the achievement by students of the exit profile, program objectives, and standards.

Program Information System

The organized repository containing the program devis, required program documents, program data (dashboards and other detailed reports), program work plans and annual reports, evaluation reports, and other program-related or College-wide documents or data.

Program Flowchart

A schematic form of the logical organization of courses and competencies in a program.

Program Management

The structures and processes through which the College oversees and conducts the evaluation, development, and implementation of its programs, all while ensuring and attesting to their quality for the ministry.

Program Quality

The extent to which a program meets a set of agreed-upon criteria. For the CEGEP network, the criteria to measure program quality are program coherence, relevance, effectiveness, teaching methods and student support, resources, and governance.

Appendix 2 - Acronyms

The acronyms presented in this appendix are found in this policy.

• ACS: Attestation of College Studies
• AEC: Attestation d’études collégiales (named ACS in English)
• ASC: Academic Steering Committee
• CÉEC: Commission d’évaluation de l’enseignement collégial
• DADR: Dean of Academic Development and Research
• DEC: Diplôme d’études collégiales (named DCS in English) – Diploma of College Studies
• DCS: Diploma of College Studies
• GEC: General Education Committee
• MES: Ministère de l’enseignement supérieur
• PAC: Program Advisory Committee
• PCA: Program Comprehensive Assessment
• PIS: Program Information System
• PMP: Program Management Policy
• PSI: Pedagogical Support and Innovation
• SOBEC: Système des objets d’études collégiales
• TASC: Tutoring & Academic Success Centre