Consent Holders: Frequently Asked Questions

1. We have Ministerial consent to offer a degree program and want to add/update some aspects of it. Which changes will require consent?
2. Is a full PEQAB submission required for every review?
3. What’s the role of the PEQAB secretariat?
4. Since Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology are assessed against the Honours Degree Standard can they use the Honours Bachelor nomenclature for their programs offered pursuant to consent?
5. What will assessors consider when reviewing renewal applications?

1. We have Ministerial consent to offer a degree program and want to add/update some aspects of it. Which changes will require consent?

For answers to questions about what requires consent, please contact the Universities Unit at the Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities (Email: PostsecondaryAccountability@ontario.ca, Mailing Address: Mowat Block, 900 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario, M7A 1L2 Canada). Return to FAQs

2. Is a full PEQAB submission required for every review?

For information on submission requirements pertaining to new consents please consult the Submission Guidelines for New Programs. PEQAB requirements for current consent holders seeking to renew consent are addressed in the Submission Guidelines for Renewal of Ministerial Consent. Both can be found in the publications section on the PEQAB website.

For all other kinds of reviews contact the secretariat to discuss our submission requirements.(Telephone Number: 416- 212-1230, E-mail: peqab@ontario.ca, Mailing Address: Mowat Block, 900 Bay Street, 23rd Floor, Toronto, ON M7A 1L2). The Board does not need full applications for amendments for consent such as program or nomenclature changes. For example, for amendments to add a degree completion option to a program offered under consent, the Board requires a gap analysis prepared by the consent holder assessing prior learning, entry point(s) to the degree program, and any bridging requirements. Return to FAQs

3. What’s the role of the PEQAB secretariat?

The Chair and the Board are supported by a secretariat. The secretariat undertakes research; drafts the Board's criteria, policies and procedures and coordinates the Board's relations with Ministry officials and regulatory bodies. Each application for ministerial consent is managed by a member of the secretariat who assists the college and expert assessors in understanding the Board's criteria and procedures to facilitate the comprehensive review of applications. Return to FAQs

4. Since Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology are assessed against the Honours Degree Standard can they use the Honours Bachelor nomenclature for their programs offered pursuant to consent?

While college degrees are assessed against the Board’s Honours Bachelor Degree standard, which is the same as the Baccalaureate/Bachelor's Degree: Honours standard outlined in the Ontario Qualifications Framework, the term “honours” is not available for designating college degrees.

Pursuant to the Post-secondary Education Choice and Excellence Act, 2000, Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology may apply for the Minister’s consent to offer bachelor degrees in applied areas of study. There are a variety of ways to connote with nomenclature whether a degree is applied, professional- or research-oriented. With the exception of Bachelor of Applied Science, which connotes research-oriented degrees, research-oriented degrees are normally of the form: Bachelor of Faculty (Subject), e.g., Bachelor of Arts (Psychology) or Bachelor of Science (Chemistry). The level of study at the Bachelor level can be further differentiated as “honours” for research-oriented degrees. Because colleges are enabled by the Act to offer only degrees in applied areas, research-oriented nomenclatures (e.g., Bachelor of Arts/Science/Applied Science), and the term “honours”, are not available for designating college degrees. The typical approaches to nomenclature for Bachelor degrees in applied areas, available for designating college degrees, are:
1. Bachelor of Faculty (Subject), for example, Bachelor of Technology (Information Technology);
2. (With the exception of Applied Science) Bachelor of Applied Faculty (Subject), for example, Bachelor of Applied Arts (Justice Studies); or
3. Bachelor of Subject, for example, Bachelor of Interior Design.
Return to FAQs

5. What will assessors consider when reviewing renewal applications?

At renewal of consent, as part of the program review, the Quality Assessment Panel (QAP) reviews the actual delivery of the program and the implementation of policies and procedures (proposed during the initial review) and assesses the program against the Board’s standards and benchmarks, articulated in Chapter 5 of the Handbook for Ontario Colleges and the Handbook for Public Organizations, and Chapter 7 of the Handbook for Private Organizations. The organization is responsible for demonstrating program quality and an ability to assure quality on an ongoing basis. In addition to the program review, private organizations must undergo an organization review.

As indicated in the respective Submission Guidelines for Renewal of Consent all organizations are required to submit the following for the program review:

• a self-study conducted according to policies and procedures for such reviews that have been approved by the Board;
• all program-, resource- and policy-related materials (e.g., course outlines, CVs, admission criteria, library and other learning resources, etc.);
• a self-assessment against the Board’s standards and benchmarks; and
• a report on the commitments made during the last Board review.

There are additional submission requirements for the organization review of private organizations (for details please refer to the Submission Guidelines for Private Organizations (Renewal of Consent).

The organization’s self-study documents and samples of student work are the core elements of the program review. Key issues considered by the QAP are whether:
1. the organization and the program meet the standards and benchmarks set by the Board;
2. individual student work in the terminal stage of the program that reflects exemplary, average, and minimally acceptable performance demonstrates that the degree-level standard has been achieved;
3. the policy environment meets the requirements set by the Board; and
4. the organization’s internal program evaluation exercise aligns with the Board’s requirements for such program evaluations, and whether the organization’s internal quality assurance/program evaluation achieves its intended aim of continuous program improvement.

As part of their renewal applications (in the Report: Assessment Against PEQAB Standards and Benchmarks) organizations are also asked to

• list any commitments made during the last Board review, and report on how these were addressed;
• address significant changes made to the program during consent; and
• include a thorough, frank and accurate analysis of the program against the Board’s standards and benchmarks.

In cases where information pertinent to the panel’s judgement is included in the self-assessment against the Board’s standards and benchmarks, but not elsewhere, the organization is responsible for ensuring this information is provided to the QAP.

In addition, during the site visit, the QAP will be responsible for reviewing samples of student work selected at random. This exercise may be approached in the following manner: prior to the site visit, the organization may sort the student work into what it considers exemplary, average, and minimally acceptable performance categories. At the site visit, the QAP may randomly select samples from among these three categories and review these against the relevant Board standards and benchmarks. Return to FAQs