TEQSA Course Accreditation: Everything You Need to Know

What goes into the application?

The application is lodged through TEQSA's provider portal against the current application guide, and the guide changes, so check the version before you start. In substance, every TEQSA course accreditation application I have prepared has contained the same core elements, and I will describe them as a narrative rather than a checklist.

The course design specification under Standard 3.1.1 comes first: the qualification, AQF level, structure, duration, modes of delivery, units, entry requirements, learning outcomes, assessment methods, indicative workload, compulsory requirements and exit pathways. The learning outcomes must be mapped to the AQF level descriptors and to the units and assessments that deliver them. The most common weakness I see is a map that exists but does not close: outcomes that no assessment confirms, or assessments that test nothing in the outcomes.

Then the evidence of academic scrutiny: the academic board's approval, its minutes, the external review by a discipline expert not involved in the course, and the provider's response to that review. Then staffing under Standard 3.2, meaning a staffing profile for the course, CVs showing qualifications at least one AQF level above the award or equivalent experience, and evidence that any staff who fall short are supervised by those who do not. Then learning resources under 3.3, admission and credit rules under 1.1 and 1.2, and the monitoring plan under 5.3 showing how the course will be reviewed and externally referenced once it runs. Our article on what TEQSA looks for in a new course walks through the assessor's reading of these documents, and the design content itself is covered in course design for TEQSA accreditation.

What does TEQSA course accreditation cost?

Fees are set out on TEQSA's application-based fees page and are revised periodically. For a registered provider seeking accreditation of a new course, the 2026 preliminary assessment fee is $5,200 and the substantive assessment fee is $19,100. Nested related courses, for example a graduate certificate, graduate diploma and masters sharing units, attract reduced fees of $1,300 and $4,800 respectively.

For a prospective provider applying for accreditation alongside initial registration the fees are higher: $6,000 per course at preliminary stage and $44,700 per course at substantive stage, with nested related courses at $40,000. Renewal of accreditation is $24,500 per course, with nested related courses at $5,900. Fees exclude GST and are not refundable, and providers with fewer than 5,000 equivalent full-time student load may receive discounts of up to 70 per cent.

Those are TEQSA's fees. The internal cost of building a course to accreditation standard is larger: curriculum development, an external reviewer, library and LMS resourcing, and the academic staff who must be identified before the course is approved. Our guide to how much TEQSA registration costs sets both sides of the ledger out for the initial registration case.

How long does TEQSA course accreditation take?

TEQSA publishes indicative timeframes for initial registration but does not, in my reading, commit to a fixed period for a standalone accreditation application by a registered provider. The process follows the same shape: preliminary assessment to confirm the application is complete, then substantive assessment, possibly with a request for further information, then a decision. In my experience a well-prepared application from a provider in good standing takes six to nine months from lodgement to decision, and a poorly prepared one takes as long as it takes to answer the requests.

The elapsed time before lodgement matters more. A course design, external review and academic board cycle takes three to four months if the board meets regularly and the reviewer is engaged early. Add staff recruitment and resourcing, and a provider deciding today to offer a new course should not plan to enrol students in it within twelve months. Providers who market a course before it is accredited are in breach and, in my experience, the regulator notices.

Conditions, requests for further information and refusal

Most applications that stall do so at a request for further information. The request will identify specific standards on which TEQSA is not yet satisfied and give a period to respond. The fastest applications are the ones that never draw a request, which is why I tell clients that the goal is a complete, specific, true application rather than a quick one.

TEQSA may accredit with conditions, for example a requirement to report on staffing or to complete a review by a set date. Conditions are recorded on the National Register and are visible to students and competitors, and they are a compliance obligation in their own right. Outright refusal is less common but does happen, typically where the design is not at the claimed AQF level or the staffing is not real. A refusal is a reviewable decision, and TEQSA charges $1,100 for an internal review.

Renewal of accreditation and teach-out

Accreditation is granted for a period of up to seven years. Renewal is a fresh application assessed on the course as it has actually operated: student outcomes, external referencing under Standard 5.3.4, the review and improvement record, and any changes made since the original accreditation. TEQSA's renewal of registration guidance asks providers to lodge at least 180 calendar days before expiry, and I apply the same discipline to accreditation renewal because an accreditation that lapses while an application is pending creates real problems for enrolled students.

Where a provider decides not to renew, it must teach out the enrolled students. TEQSA's fee schedule includes a teach-out accreditation at $3,100, which allows the course to continue for existing students only. The teach-out plan is read for the protection it gives students: staffing to the end, support services, transfer arrangements for those who cannot complete, and clear communication. A provider that announces a course closure without a teach-out plan in place has, in my experience, an urgent problem under Standard 6.2.1(i), which requires safeguards for students unable to progress because of changes to the provider's operations.

Changing an accredited course

An accredited course is accredited as described. Changes to duration, mode, units or learning outcomes that alter what was accredited may be material changes requiring notification to TEQSA under section 29 of the Act, within fourteen days of the provider becoming aware. TEQSA's material change notification policy lists major course changes, including a notable reduction in duration, among the events it expects to hear about.

Minor changes within the academic board's own approval authority, such as refreshing readings or adjusting an assessment weighting, do not need TEQSA's approval. The judgement about where the line falls should be made by the academic board and recorded. If the course has drifted far enough from its accredited form that the academic board itself would treat it as a new course, it is a new application.

The self-accrediting alternative

A provider that has accumulated several accredited courses and at least one full cycle of course review may consider applying for self-accrediting authority. There is no fixed number of years or courses required. TEQSA's self-accrediting authority application guide asks for evidence against Standards 5.1, 5.3, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and Part B2, including a completed review and improvement cycle, and the scope is granted by AQF level and field of education.

The application fee for new self-accrediting authority is $51,800, and the case has to be made on the strength of the provider's own academic governance rather than on the quality of any single course. For a provider that expects to launch more than a course or two a year, the arithmetic can favour self-accreditation. For a provider with a stable portfolio of three or four courses, TEQSA accreditation every seven years is usually simpler. Our comparison of provider registration and self-accrediting authority works through the trade-off.

What I tell providers before they start

TEQSA course accreditation is not an exercise in describing a course persuasively. It is an exercise in demonstrating that a course was designed to the Threshold Standards, was scrutinised by an academic body competent to refuse it, is staffed and resourced by people and things that already exist, and will be monitored once it runs. The providers who find the process straightforward are the ones whose internal course approval already looks like that, so the application is a record of what happened rather than a reconstruction.

The board and the academic board remain responsible for the application whoever drafts it. TEQSA reads the governance record to see whether the decision to offer the course was genuinely the provider's own, and an application that a consultant clearly wrote and a board merely noted will draw questions that a plainer application would not. Get the design right, get the scrutiny real, get the resources committed, and lodge something complete.