September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow

September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow

September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow

September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow

September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow

September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow

September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow

September Programme offers available now!

Arrow

Register Now - Equity in Education & Society conference

Arrow
Partnership

Course Mapping & Validation

We support providers who offer training and/or qualifications in Leadership and/or Equity Diversity & Inclusion

The aim of our course mapping & validation service is to support providers who offer training and/or qualifications in (i) Leadership and/or (ii) Equity Diversity & Inclusion which does not lead to a defined exit award or qualification.

A course mapping and validation service is a structured, multi-step process to ensure a qualification from one system is recognised and accepted within another.

Our course mapping and validation service is only available to training providers.

We do not offer mapping to our MBA programme.

Course Mapping Process

The mapping phase focuses on comparing the core components of two different qualifications to establish a preliminary equivalence. It requires a detailed comparison of (i) curriculum content, (ii) learning outcomes, and (iii) assessment methods.

 

Step 1: Pre-submission discussion

Initial exploration: The provider makes a request for meeting to engage in a qualification mapping and validation exercise.

Mapping & validation: The provider and the IEUC agree process, terms and timelines.

 

Step 2: Comparative analysis

Curriculum analysis: A subject-matter expert analyses the provider’s course modules and content to find direct or comparable matches with the reference qualification’s curriculum.

Learning outcomes assessment: The IEUC compares the expected learning outcomes of both qualifications. This goes beyond just module titles to ensure the skills and competencies achieved are equivalent.

Assessment methodology: The assessment types (e.g., exams, practical work, workplace assessments, projects) and standards are compared to see if they align with the rigour and requirements of the IEUC’s qualification.

Credit and level analysis: Based on the above, a determination is made regarding the alignment of the (i) academic level and (ii) credit value of the provider’s qualification.

 

Step 3: Mapping outcome

Equivalency report: A detailed report is produced for the training provider, confirming a qualification is or isn’t a match.

If the comparison confirms the qualifications are a direct and fair match, the next step is to move to the validation phase. If a qualification is not considered a direct match, specific recommendations/ suggestions will be provided.

Course Validation Process

If the initial mapping process reveals that a provider’s qualification is equivalent to a specific IEUC qualification, the following steps will follow:

 

Step 1: Quality Review and Approval

Quality Assurance Committee review: A panel of experts including internal staff reviews the equivalency report and verification evidence. If necessary, external advisors and employer representatives might also be invited or consulted.

Approval: Following approval by the QAC, a Certificate of Equivalency or a Statement of Comparability, confirming that a provider’s qualification is valid and equivalent to a specified IEUC qualification.

Non-Equivalent

If the initial mapping process reveals that a provider’s qualification is not believed to be sufficiently aligned, the IEUC will provide recommendations / suggestions to bridge identified gaps.

 

Step 1: Detailed gap analysis report

Explain the non-equivalency: The IEUC submits to the provider a detailed report explaining exactly where and why their qualification does not meet the criteria for equivalency.

This could highlight deficiencies in:

Content: Specific modules or subject areas that are missing.

Competency: Practical skills or workplace experience that has not been adequately assessed.

Level and credit: An overall shortfall in the academic level or scope of the qualification.

Feedback session: An appropriate IEUC staff will debrief the provider and discuss potential options.

 

Step 2: Compensatory measures

Prescribed additional learning: For minor gaps, the IEUC may recommend specific, focused “compensatory measures” to achieve equivalency.

These may include:

Completing specific modules or units from an IEUC reference qualification.

Undertaking an additional assessment to prove a specific competency.

Completing a specified period of supervised practice or placement or activity.

Alternative pathway plan: For more significant gaps, the IEUC may advise the provider to pursue a different, less direct route, such as enrolling in a condensed or bridging course.

For more information,

read our flyer

Download PDF

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
This field is hidden when viewing the form

Please contact us for an informal conversation about our course mapping and validation services

Get in Touch

Endorsements and Recommendations

The research consultancy led by Professor Paul Miller and his team at the University of Greenwich provided valuable insights into our current policies and practices, and made practical recommendations for how we can address under-representation and barriers to progression for colleagues from a minority ethnic background in our organisation, and build a more inclusive culture. We are grateful for their support.

Fiona Bartels Ellis, Head of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, British Council

“…Thanks to Paul Miller. His work has shaped some policy development we are still undertaking and hope to be able to share more widely soon”.

Mark Stephens CMG, Director Cultural Engagement, British Council

“Thought provoking and challenging throughout, using both theory and practical information to support discussion not only in the workplace but more widely too. Highly recommended.”

Helen Ruddle, FInstLM, Director of HR, Delta Academies Trust

“The Leading EDI course delivered by Educational Equity Services (now Institute for Equity, University Centre) was highly informative and rooted in academic research. I found the content thought provoking not only in relation to EDI areas but overall leadership theory and practice. I would highly recommend the Fellowship to leaders and aspiring leaders across all sectors.”

Fabian De Fabiani, FInstLM, Assistant Headteacher, Townley Grammar/Odyssey Trust

“I whole-heartedly recommend this programme. The taught modules are very well sequenced and research based. Plenty of time is allowed time to explore and reflect on key EDI issues & important factors to consider when leading multicultural teams, improving diversity and ensuring sustained momentum in driving organisational change for equitable practice. Facilitators provide a safe space to discuss and navigate the course materials with further reading and resources to support you in acquiring further depth. The assignments help to secure knowledge and the action research case study has left me feeling prepared and inspired to undertake further action research.”

Shelly Geeson, FInstLM, Deputy Director SCITT/ECF, NOVA Education Trust

“I have always been interested in developing wider diversity within schools and was delighted to take part in this course. It was thought-provoking and certainly challenged your mindset towards Equality, Equity, and Inclusion (EDI). There were many healthy discussions about the fundamentals of EDI but also academic background reading that developed your understanding of things such as bias. The sessions were virtual and took place over a number of weeks whilst assessment was through a small number of essays and online tests. I would thoroughly recommend taking part as it has had a resounding impact on my thoughts and, subsequently, the systems and processes we are now developing in school.”

Kate Coates, AInstLM, Headteacher, Kingsfield Primary School

“I recently had the privilege of completing the programme in Equity, Inclusion & Organisational Diversity. I am proud to call myself a long standing anti-racist activist, trustee and anti-racist educator and this course has definitely supported my work in these areas. The course prompted an open and honest debate on EDI and how important it is for us all to disrupt organisational mindsets, policies, and practice especially from a leadership perspective. The journey was academic, contextualised, and practical. It required group participation as well as independent study to complete a small number of modules. These modules have proven invaluable in practice. Facilitators are experienced and empathetic. The course was invaluable for developing my role as a trustee. Thought provoking? Yes, but more importantly it gives you the resources and tools to extend thoughts into action which is what is needed, and I hope to implement within the trust and my wider work. In short, I am a richer person for attending the course and wouldn’t hesitate to recommend it.”

Catherina Quinn, AInstLM, Trustee, Active Learning Trust

“I came to the programme with little knowledge of matters to do with race and ethnicity having lived and worked in a predominantly white British part of the country all my life. The approach Professor Paul Miller took was engaging, non-threatening yet challenging. The material and resources used were very good and the discussion among participants so helpful in thinking through a personal response to matters of race and racism. The programme was also very practical with the assessed element really focused on what you could do back in your own organisation. Therefore the training made a real difference!”

Paul Dunning, Director of Education, Diocese of Norwich