Quality Handbook Supplement 3B - Guidance on Professional Certificates and Professional Diplomas

1.1 The above principles underpin the definition of the University’s Professional Certificate and Professional Diploma awards. While they form part of NTU's award framework (see Quality Handbook Section 3 and Section 4), they are intended to operate greater flexibility than full degree courses.  In particular, they are not bound by rules governing modular structures, specific Common Assessment Regulations (CAR) or certain aspects of assessment and admission requirements (although the University’s level descriptors still apply).

1.2 Students enrolling on Professional Certificate and Professional Diploma courses are normally sponsored by their employers or are undertaking study or training to gain or maintain PSRB accreditation. They are usually working towards Continuing Professional Development (CPD) outcomes, often defined in terms of competence and practice-based elements. These students are primarily focused on enhancing their vocational or professional skills, and the associated employment opportunities, rather than the academic award itself.

1.3 As these courses that are not governed by the University Degree CAR, course teams must apply a set of standard requirements when drafting assessment regulations (see QH Section 16E: Common Assessment Regulations for HN Awards). These regulations may include provisions not typically found within Degree CAR such as requirements relating to professional behaviour, absolute attendance requirements or failure on non-academic grounds.  Students must be made aware, upon enrolment on a Professional Certificate or Professional Diploma that they are accepting the provisions of that course’s specific regulations.

1.4 All Professional Certificate and Professional Diploma courses are subject to peer review and approval. However, course design should recognise that these awards are not required to conform to all aspects of the University’s regulatory framework as outlined in the Quality Handbook. Academic scrutiny should focus on whether the proposed structure and design are appropriate to the professional context and intended outcomes. The primary concern is that the proposal is rational and defensible; the process should not seek to re-design a course or make it conform to degree requirements.