In accordance with the Royal Military College of Canada (RMC) Institutional Quality Assurance Plan (IQAP), the Programme Chair and review group submitted the Programme Self-Study report in July 2016. It contained the degree-level expectations, an analytical assessment of the programme, course outlines, programme-related data, survey data from the Office of Quality Assurance and appendices with sample examinations and CVs of faculty members. One arm’s-length external reviewer (Dr. Jill Scott, Queen’s University) and an internal reviewer (Dr. Lucien Haddad, RMC of Canada) were selected from a list of possible reviewers and approved by the Deans of Arts (Interim). They reviewed the self-study documentation and conducted a site visit to RMC on 9 and 10 March 2017. The visit included interviews with the Dean of Arts (Interim), Vice-Principal Academic, Chief Librarian, as well as several civilian and military members of the Division of Continuing Studies faculty, and several students and faculty teaching in the programme. The ERC subsequently produced a report in April 2017 based on the Self-Study and site visit. The report was circulated to for comment to participants.
The ERC identified a number of strengths of the programme. Support staff from DCS were seen as a highly competent and dedicated team. Students were very satisfied with the support services they received. Instructors were generally very accomplished and talented teachers. Evaluations were an honest and reflective evaluation of the student experience. Degree-level expectations were generally aligned to program- and course-level learning outcomes. Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR) had advanced capabilities. Finally, students were highly motivated, mature professionals with clear objectives. Issues and concerns around the programme focused on five main areas: integration of onsite and offsite degrees; resources and services; instructor compensation and performance; degree level expectations; and accessibility.
The Programme Chair, after consultation with faculty and staff in the programme, submitted a response to the Reviewers’ Report in June 2017. The Dean of Arts in consultation with the Programme Chair prepared the Final Assessment Report in October 2017. Specific recommendations are discussed, and follow-up actions and timelines provided.