The course design TEQSA accreditation requires is a complete, internally consistent document set: a course structure that fits the AQF level, course and unit learning outcomes that map to each other, an assessment map showing where every outcome is assessed, unit outlines, a staffing matrix, a learning resources plan, benchmarking against comparable courses, an independent external review, and admission and credit rules. Miss one and the application is incomplete. Let two of them contradict each other and it will draw a request for further information.
This article lists each component, explains what an assessor is looking for in it, and describes the failure I see most often. It reflects fifteen years of preparing course accreditation applications for private providers, and it assumes you have already read our broader overview of TEQSA course accreditation.
Course structure and AQF level
Everything starts with the level. The AQF level descriptors set the knowledge, skills and application expected of a graduate at each level, and the volume of learning each level typically requires: three to four years for a level 7 bachelor degree, one to two years for a level 9 coursework masters depending on entry, and so on. The course structure has to show a coherent sequence of units, with prerequisites, that delivers the qualification at that level in that volume.
The failure is a structure that has been built from available staff rather than from the qualification. Assessors can see a masters that is a bachelor with two extra units, or a bachelor whose third year contains nothing that could not have been taught in first year. Our guide to AQF levels for course designers sets out how to build from the descriptors up.
Course and unit learning outcomes
Course learning outcomes state what a graduate of the whole course can do. Unit learning outcomes state what a student can do at the end of each unit. Standard 1.4 of the Threshold Standards requires the course outcomes to be consistent with the AQF level and the field of education, and Standard 3.1 requires the units to build towards them.
TEQSA reads outcomes for verbs. A masters course whose outcomes are all "describe" and "identify" is pitched at the wrong level. A set of unit outcomes that never mention a course outcome cannot deliver it. The mapping between the two is the single document I would prepare most carefully, and I would have someone outside the design team check that every course outcome is developed across several units and not just asserted in one.
The assessment map
The assessment map shows, for every course learning outcome, which assessment tasks in which units provide the evidence that the outcome has been achieved. It is the document that turns a set of outcomes into something a regulator can verify. Standard 1.4 requires assessment methods capable of confirming that all specified learning outcomes are achieved, and the map is how you show that.
The recurring weakness is a map that assesses each outcome once, in a final-year capstone, with nothing before it. That is not a map of a course; it is a hope. A stronger map shows outcomes introduced, developed and then assured, with the secured assessment points that the generative AI environment now demands. Our article on what AI means for course design compliance explains why that structure has become non-negotiable.
Unit outlines
Each unit needs an outline that a student, a tutor and an assessor could all read and understand the same way: outcomes, content by week, assessment tasks with weightings and due points, the resources required, and the integrity and support statements. The outlines are where the design becomes concrete, and assessors read a sample of them against the assessment map to check that the map is true.
In my experience the outlines are the component most likely to have been drafted by a different person from the course document, and therefore most likely to disagree with it. A unit outline that assesses by exam while the map says portfolio is a small error with a large consequence, because it tells the assessor the document set was not read as a whole before lodgement.
The staffing matrix
Standard 3.2 requires teaching staff qualified to at least one AQF level above the course they teach, or with equivalent professional experience, and a proportion with the doctoral qualifications and scholarship expected in higher education. The staffing matrix lists each unit against the person who will teach it, that person's highest qualification, their discipline currency and their employment status.
The failure is the matrix that names the same three people against every unit, or that lists staff "to be recruited" for half the course. Assessors know a new provider cannot employ a full faculty before it has students, but they expect signed letters of intent, a recruitment plan with dates, and a credible account of who will teach the first intake. A matrix with gaps is acceptable if the gaps are explained. A matrix with fiction in it is not.
Learning resources and support
Standard 3.3 covers the resources students need: library and database access, learning management system, specialist facilities for the discipline, and academic and English language support. The application needs to show that the resources exist or are contracted, that they are adequate for the number of students proposed, and that they are matched to the units that need them.
A course design TEQSA accreditation assessors read carefully will show a reading list for each unit, evidence that the items on it are accessible to students, and a support plan proportionate to the entry cohort. A nursing or engineering course with no laboratory access, or a business course whose library is a list of free websites, will not pass.
Benchmarking and external review
Benchmarking compares your course to comparable courses at other providers: structure, outcomes, entry requirements, assessment approach. External review is an independent academic in the discipline reading the whole document set and reporting on it. Standard 5.1 requires both, and TEQSA treats the external reviewer's report, and your response to it, as among the strongest evidence in the set.
The mistake is choosing a reviewer who is a friend of the design lead and produces a page of praise. Assessors read the report for criticisms and then read the course document for what changed. A review that found nothing to change is read as a review that did not look. Our article on what TEQSA looks for in a new course explains how the academic board should handle that review before approving the course.
Admission and credit rules
Standard 1.1 requires admission criteria that give students a reasonable prospect of success, and Standard 1.2 requires credit and recognition of prior learning decisions that preserve the integrity of the outcomes. The course document needs to state the entry requirements, including English language requirements for international students, and the maximum credit available and how it is assessed.
The weak point is usually credit. A policy that allows credit for up to two thirds of a masters, with no rule about currency or level, tells an assessor that the qualification can be bought cheaply. State the limits, explain the reasoning, and show how the academic board will monitor credit decisions once the course is running.
Putting the course design TEQSA accreditation set together
The nine components above are not nine separate documents. They are nine views of one design, and the assessor's central test is whether they agree with each other. Before lodgement I have a client walk one course learning outcome through the whole set: where it is developed in the units, where it is assessed, who teaches those units, what resources they need, what the external reviewer said about it. If the walk breaks anywhere, the application is not ready.
Course design TEQSA accreditation assessors will accept is not about volume. It is about coherence, evidence and honesty about what is still to be built. Get those right and accreditation follows the course rather than obstructing it.
Download the Darlo New Course Readiness Checklist
— a component-by-component check of an accreditation document set, drawn from our TEQSA registration and accreditation work with private providers. Get the checklist
Want the full article?
Enter your email for free access to the rest of this guide and our TEQSA resource library.
Frequently asked questions
How many units does a TEQSA-accredited bachelor degree need?
The AQF sets a volume of learning of three to four years for a level 7 bachelor degree rather than a unit count. In my experience most providers deliver that as 24 units of equal weight, but the test is that the structure delivers the level 7 outcomes in that volume.
Does every course need an external review before accreditation?
Yes. Standard 5.1 requires independent external review of a course before approval, and TEQSA treats the reviewer's report and the provider's response as central evidence in an accreditation application.
Can staff who are not yet employed be listed in the staffing matrix?
Yes, provided the application is honest about it. Assessors expect signed letters of intent, a dated recruitment plan and a clear statement of who will teach the first intake, rather than placeholder names.
What is the difference between course learning outcomes and unit learning outcomes?
Course learning outcomes describe what a graduate of the whole course can do at the AQF level. Unit learning outcomes describe what a student can do after each unit. The mapping between them shows how the units build the graduate outcomes.
Dr Brendan Moloney is CEO of Darlo Higher Education, Australia's largest specialist TEQSA consultancy. He holds a PhD from the University of Melbourne, is a Cambridge University Press author on governance in higher education, and has advised private providers on registration and course accreditation for more than fifteen years.