The general principles that underpin USP's approach to Reviews are:

• USP is committed to the review and evaluation of its activities as an integral part of its quality assurance processes
• Reviews are primarily directed towards addressing USP priorities established in the context of its strategic direction
• The review process shall ensure critical self-evaluation
• Reviews will be conducted in a clear and orderly manner, with transparent processes
• Discussions and submissions will be treated with discretion and confidentiality
• There will regular evaluation of the review processes

Centrally-managed Reviews

Overall responsibility for the review process rests with the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Quality).

Centrally-managed reviews include Programme Reviews (which focus on coursework programme) and Organisational Unit Reviews.

Locally-managed Reviews

Responsibility for locally-managed reviews rests within the section heads of Faculties/Schools (example: Deans, Heads of School). Such reviews are supported directly by the local academic area. These reviews may focus on courses, ongoing monitoring of academic programmes, and other activities of  the individual Faculty/School.

The University's review process for academic and professional support services is evidence-based.  The following roles and responsibilities pertain to the relevant areas and parties:

Area under Review

The area under Review shall prepare the Terms of Reference for the Review in consultation with the the Divisional Heads or Faculty Deans. Upon approval from the Divisional Head or Faculty Dean, the area shall forward the Terms of Reference to the Planning and Quality Office.

Upon submission of the Terms of Reference, the area shall commence the preparation of its Self Assessment Report. Guidelines for the Self Assessment Report can be found here.

The area shall forward the Self Assessment Report to the Planning and Quality Office at least three weeks prior to the Review Panel Site Visit.

A draft Review Report shall be forwarded to Head of the Area to enable correction of any factual errors, but not matters concerning with the Panel's opinions, judgement or conclusions except where these are clearly formed on the basis of factual error(s).

The area under review shall formulate a follow-up action and submit to the Office of the Vice-Chancellor and President to respond to the Final Review Report that specifically address the Recommendations, Commendations and Affirmations made by the Review Panel.

Planning and Quality Office

The Planning and Quality Office shall identify the Review Panel from internationally recognized higher education institutions or relevant organisations, for instance a professional body or consulting organisation.

Upon identification of the Review Panel, the Office shall obtain initial endorsement on the Panel Make-up from the area under Review.

The Planning and Quality Office shall then provide a formal recommendation to the Office of the Vice-Chancellor and President regarding the prospective Members of the Review Panel and Chair of the Review Panel. The recommendation shall include Bio-Data of the Prospective Members of the Review Panel and the Terms of Reference for the Review.

Upon approval from the Vice-Chancellor and President, a formal appointment of Review Panel and a designated Review Panel Chair letters shall be offered by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Quality).

The appointment shall be for a three year term.

The Planning and Quality Office shall prepare a Review Visit Programme  in consultation with both, the Review Panel Members and  area under Review. The Review Programme shall entail:

• list of stakeholders to be interviewed during the site visit;
• date and time for the interviews

The Planning and Quality shall provide guidance to the areas in its preparation of Self Review Report and shall ensure that that the Self Review Report is forwarded to the Members of the Review Panel, together with the Terms of Reference and Panel Member Appointment Letter at least three weeks prior to the Review Panel Site Visit.  

The Planning and Quality Office shall coordinate the Review Panel Site Visit in accordance with the Review Programme.

After the review and upon acceptance of the Review Report by the Vice-Chancellor and President, the Planning and Quality Office shall forward the Review Report to the Divisional and Sectional Head of area reviewed.

The Pro Vice-Chancellor (Planning and Quality) shall present the Report in the Senior Management Team (SMT) meeting.

Office of the Vice-Chancellor and President

The Office of the Vice-Chancellor shall provide approval of a Review Panel and a designated Review Panel Chair and upon receipt of the Review Report from the Chair of the Review Panel, shall provide a formal acceptance.

The Vice-Chancellor shall place the the Review Report on the agenda of the Senior Management Team.

Review Panel

The Review Panel are expected to assess the claims in the Self Review Report submitted by the Planning and Quality Office. The principal means of undertaking the assessment shall be through structured meetings with managerial, academic and professional support staff for the area under Review, students and other relevant stakeholders.

The Planning and Quality Office with the support of the area under review, shall endeavour to provide all the qualitative and quantitive data required by the Panel of the Reviewers.

The length of the Review Visit shall be determined collaboratively by the Planning and Quality Office, Review Panel and the area under review. Factors such as the scope of the review, geographical distribution of the activities of the area under Review, across the USP campuses in the member countries shall be considered.

The Review Panel is expected to:

• Adopt a general approach to the review that will encourage critical reflection on current processes and systems, structures and operations.  This reflection will provide impetus to facilitate continuous improvement based on an objective, evidence based appraisal that will draw on the reviewers' knowledge and understanding of national and international good practices, trends and benchmarks in area(s) concerned.
• Produce a Review Report for the Vice-Chancellor and President that is evidence based and structures around the Terms of Reference for the Review.

The report shall identify the following:

• Recommendations (alerting the Section reviewed to areas that the Panel assessed required attention)
• Commendations (highlighting areas that the Panel assessed constituted good practice and commendable approaches/outcomes)
• Affirmations (drawing attention to an area that the Panel assessed required attention but had been recognised by the Section)
• An assessment of priority attached to Recommendations and Affirmations in the following terms: 'critical'; 'essential'; 'advisable'; and 'desirable', to which may also be attached the Review Panel's assessment of urgency.