Group of Eight Verification System

The Group of Eight Quality Verification System (QVS) is a process of external, discipline-led, academic peer review of final year undergraduate student outcomes. The primary focus is to assist Go8 Universities in maintaining and improving their academic standards.

The key features of the Go8 QVS include:

• a focus on assessment in a sample of final year subjects in undergraduate programs;
• benchmarking for comparing grades awarded in similar programs across Go8 universities;
• senior discipline-specific academics will conduct the review and will have an understanding of academic standards in similar universities around the world; and
• flexibility to complement other quality assurance mechanisms within Go8 universities.

Go8 QVS External Reviewers:

• review the appropriateness and comparative quality of the specified learning outcomes, assessment tasks, assessment criteria and assessment processes set for samples of final year subjects; and
• report on the appropriateness of the grades awarded to stratified random samples of student work in these subjects.

2018 disciplines for review

• Physics and Astronomy
• Information Systems
• Aerospace Engineering and Technology
• Studies in Human Society
• Public Health
• Language and Literature
• Philosophy and Religious Studies
• Economics and Econometrics
• Visual Arts and Crafts
• Business and Management

Given the limited range of courses offered in the Undergraduate space for the Public Health and our lack of involvement in the Aerospace Engineering disciplines, ANU was excused from these categories for 2018.

2017 disciplines for review

• Agriculture
• Architecture and Urban Environment
• Chemical Sciences
• Computer Science
• Electrical and Electonic Engineering and Technology
• Medical Studies (including Biomedical Sciences and excluding MBBS programs)

2016 disciplines for review

• Biology
• Education
• Engineering
• Environmental Science
• Law

2015 disciplines for review

No fields of discipline were selected to be reviewed during 2015.

2014 disciplines for review

• Chemistry
• Geology
• Political Science
• Sociology

2013 disciplines for review

• Chinese (Mandarin)
• English
• Mathematics

There was agreement with the grades awarded for the Chinese (Mandarin), English and Mathematics courses. The learning outcomes, assessment tasks and assessment processes for all courses were deemed to be set at the appropriate level.

2012 disciplines for review

• Accounting
• Economics
• Philosophy
• Psychology

There was agreement with the grades awarded for one of the Philosophy courses reviewed. The second Philosophy course attracted some difference of opinion, with one mark being deemed unduly high, and one mark unduly low. The learning outcomes, assessment tasks and assessment processes for the Philosophy courses were deemed to be set at the appropriate level.

2011 disciplines for review

• History
• Physics