Integrated Quality Enhancement and Review IQER

1
Integrated Quality Enhancement and Review (IQER)

• The proposed new QAA method for the review of HE
  in FECs

2
Timetable for development

• consultation Easter 2006
• pilots 2006-07
• implementation 2007-08 to 2009-10

3
IQER aims

• Working within QAAs mission, standards and
  values, to
• assist colleges to build their capacity for
  managing standards and quality of HE and
• assist HEFCE to meet its statutory
  responsibilities

4
Issues to address

• comparability of the quality and standards
• uneven scrutiny of HEFCE funded HE
• balance enhancement and quality assurance
• FECs are not awarding bodies
• provide information for awarding bodies and
  OfSTED/ALI

5
Main stages of IQER
IQER 3 year college cycle planning
Developmental review
Summative review
6
IQER core question 1

• Academic standards
• Does the college effectively manage and assure
  the security of academic standards as required by
  the awarding bodies?

7
IQER core question 2

• Quality of learning opportunities
• Does the college effectively manage and assure
  the quality of the learning opportunities as
  required by the awarding bodies to enable
  students to achieve the intended learning
  outcomes?

8
IQER core question 3

• Teaching quality information (TQI)
• In the context of TQI project development, can
  reliance be placed on the accuracy and
  completeness of the information that the college
  is responsible for publishing?

9
IQER teams

• For each college
• 1 coordinator
• DR teams
• the coordinator, 1 specialist reviewer, 2
  institutional nominees
• SR teams
• the coordinator, 3 specialist reviewers
• (also SR facilitator)

10
Reports

• DRs and SRs
• conclusions and recommendations
• implications for awarding body(ies)
• action plan
• SRs published
• judgements confidence, limited confidence or
  no confidence for each of the three core
  questions
• DRs unpublished?
• narrative and evaluation

11
Key development questions

• Will IQER encourage enhancement?
• How can we involve awarding bodies without adding
  significantly to their work loads?
• How can we encourage student involvement?
• Will colleges nominate reviewers?
• Will it work?