UG Amendments Process for 2026-27

For the 2026/27 programme amendment period, the criteria for classifying UG programme amendments as ‘significant’ have been updated. This is because the C4C principles underpinning the changes have already been approved by Education Board, Senate and the University’s Principal External Examiner.

Updated Criteria for Significant Amendments

Programmes which would previously been treated as significant may now be processed and approved as moderate amendments.

However, if a programme amendment meets the current significant amendment criteria (ref TQA Manual) PLUS ANY of the criteria listed below, it must follow the significant amendment process and approval route:

The programme is PSRB-accredited.
The programme involves a change of core compulsory credit that
- will impact current students/offer holders, or
- equates to more than 50% of compulsory credit across UG Stage 2 (level 5) and/or Stage 3/4 (level 6)
The programme involves domestic or international partnerships.

All other amendments may be processed as moderate amendments, unless the faculty considers that a full significant amendment process is required.

These changes impact UG amendments only

(PGT and other programmes will continue to follow TQA Manual)

Signatory Arrangements for UG Amendments

FTPG to review /approve significant amendments only
Faculties should develop a plan to enable FTPG to review changes efficiently, for example by reviewing them in bulk (e.g. through a weekly operations group) or by managing changes in departmental segments.
External Examiners (on moderate changes) /Assessors (on significant changes) not required – but FTPGs may appoint APVCE or other colleague in cognate discipline to conduct internal review
Market Insights / Financial Viability: Required for significant amendments only.
Not required on moderate amendments because they were undertaken through the UG review process.
Moderate amendments will be signed off within Faculties, unless PDQE requests DFTS to review.