Online Accreditation Guide
A structured approach for academics and faculty teams, whether you are extending an on-campus accreditation or making a new submission.
Section 2 of 10
The decisions you need to make
Eight decisions shape every online accreditation with a professional, statutory or regulatory body (PSRB). These need to be agreed prior to approaching the accreditation process. Record who made them and why, and you will have most of your submission narrative before you write it.
Your answers are saved in this browser only.
Rules that only tell students how they may use generative artificial intelligence (AI) are hard to enforce. Corbin et al. (2025) argue that validity comes from changing how a task works, for example observed, staged or oral elements, rather than from instructions alone. Sector guidance takes a similar line, favouring a mix of secured assessment and assessment that openly incorporates AI (Lodge et al., 2023). Frameworks such as the AI Assessment Scale give a shared language for what AI use is permitted in each task (Perkins et al., 2025).
Remote proctoring is often promoted as a solution to exam security, but a large review found no system fully prevents cheating, with privacy, bias and student anxiety concerns that need institutional rules (Han et al., 2024). Coursework-based assessments often align better with online programmes, both because of delivery constraints and to keep flexibility for students.
Use it: show the panel where in the programme each competence is assessed under secure conditions, not just your academic misconduct policy.
Group work: formative practice, individual assessment
Many PSRBs name teamwork or collaboration as a competence graduates must show, and some expect to see group work in the programme. In online part-time programmes, group-assessed work is harder to run fairly: students work across time zones and around jobs, contribution is uneven, and group marks generate complaints and appeals that are difficult to resolve at a distance.
Experience from online postgraduate programmes suggests a reliable pattern: use group activities as formative elements, where students practise collaboration and get feedback, and assess the competence through individual summative elements that draw on that group work.
Structured, tutor-facilitated tasks such as case analyses, projects or simulations, with clear roles, regular checkpoints and feedback on both the work and how the group worked together.
Each student submits their own assessed piece: a reflective account of their contribution and what they learned about teamwork, an individual report built on the group's work, or a short pre-recorded presentation on their part.
Making the case to the PSRB
- Map the competence in two places: where students develop teamwork (the formative group activities) and where it is assessed (the individual summative tasks). Panels look for both.
- Show evidence of participation: how will students evidence their contribution to the group activity, and how will minimum levels of engagement in the group activity be maintained?
- Explain the reasoning: individual assessment of group work gives each student a fair, defensible mark and still verifies the competence, which matters more at a distance, where tutors cannot observe groups directly.
- Ask early whether the PSRB requires a group-assessed mark. Some do; most care more that the competence is developed and reliably assessed.
Running group work well online
- Keep groups small; set roles, deadlines and expectations at the start; and allow most of the work to happen asynchronously.
- Give each group a shared workspace the tutor can see, so problems are spotted early rather than at submission.
- Agree what happens when someone stops contributing, and tell students before the activity begins.
- Use peer feedback to inform the formative feedback, not to adjust anyone's summative mark.
A meta-analysis of 145 studies found simulation-based learning had a large positive effect on complex skills in higher education (Chernikova et al., 2020).
Use it: if you propose simulation or virtual labs in place of some face-to-face practice, cite the evidence, and justify how it meets the PSRB requirements.
Positioning online activities as labs and simulations
Panels will accept online practical work when it is designed to meet the same learning outcomes and competences as the activity it replaces, and when you can show how it is assessed. Calling a recorded demonstration a "virtual lab" will not convince anyone. Describe each activity by what students actually do, and by the competence it develops.
Software that reproduces equipment, procedures or experiments, where students make choices and see the consequences, including mistakes they could not safely make in a real lab.
Branching cases, role-play or simulated clients, patients or organisations, where students practise judgement and decision-making against realistic constraints.
Real equipment operated remotely, or work on real datasets, code or documents, so students handle authentic material rather than a description of it.
Replacing in-class practicals with online activities
- List every practical activity in the on-campus programme, with the outcomes and PSRB competences each one serves. Some practicals serve several; some serve none and can be dropped or merged.
- Check the PSRB's rules before designing anything. Some PSRBs specify minimum supervised or in-person hours, named equipment or particular settings. Where they do, an online version can only supplement, not replace, that element.
- Match each practical to an online activity that develops the same competence, choosing the type above that fits it. Be honest where an online version is weaker, and say how you compensate, for example with additional formative activities, tutor support and scaffolding.
- Decide how each competence is assessed. Use written reflections, live demonstrations, vivas, lab reports from real or simulated data, or portfolios, so the panel can see where practical skill is verified, not only knowledge.
- Plan the practicalities: software licences, minimum device and connection requirements, accessibility and reasonable adjustments, time zones for live sessions, and support when the technology fails.
- Pilot and gather evidence. Run each activity with a small group or a single module first, and use student feedback and results to show the panel it works, building on existing practice.
| On-campus practical | Competence | Online activity | How it is assessed |
|---|---|---|---|
| The session as it runs now | The PSRB competence or learning outcome it serves | The virtual lab, simulation, remote or live activity that replaces it | Where and how practical skill is verified |