Tips for Writing Proposals

Although many EPC proposals are well prepared, overall the quality is poor. Proposals with deficiencies are returned to the academic units to be corrected, which delays the approval process and creates considerable additional work for both the faculty members revising them and the EPC members who must review them again. Moreover, once these proposals receive final approval, they become the official academic record at TRU. EPC feels this documentation should be of high quality.

EPC has a Submissions Preview Sub-Committee (SPS) whose responsibility it is to review all proposals before they are posted for review. These are their major concerns:

Writing – Many of the submissions are poorly written and lack proofreading. This is a particularly important issue with course descriptions, pre-requisites, and co-requisites that are later included in the TRU Calendar. Course descriptions should be thorough consisting of between 40 and 60 words, be in the present tense, and use full sentences. They should not repeat the name or acronym of the course and not use abbreviations (ex. NPV, EKG) – write the words out in full. The wording of pre-requisites and co-requisites must be clear to ensure students are not confused as to the exact requirements – words like “and” or “or” as well as commas and semi-colons must be used carefully.

Completeness – All questions on the forms are to be answered concisely and completely. The words “not applicable” should be used sparingly.

Research – New programs must be thoroughly researched. Offerings at other universities should be reviewed and outside experts consulted including professional organizations. EPC requires this process as does DQAB.

Consultation – All academic or administrative units at TRU that might be reasonably affected by the changes should be consulted and a summary of this consultation provided when requested. Other departments that have expertise in the area should also be consulted.

Budgetary Implications – Faculty are too quick to answer “No additional costs associated with this change” or “Additional costs absorbed by the Division/School/Faculty” when it is clear to EPC that this is not the case. If “Additional funding is required,” be sure to itemize the operating and capital budget requirements and the funding source and complete the Budge Template.

Numbering System – All courses should be indentified using four numbers in accordance with current TRU policy.

Academic Policies – Errors are frequently made because faculty are not familiar with related academic policies - calculation of course credits is a particular concern.

Lead Time – Adequate time is not being left for the approval of submissions before implementation. One-time approvals are not given as readily as in the past, so academic units must plan their curriculum development well in advance to avoid disappointment.

For any questions or comments about this page or its contents please contact jmoores@tru.ca.