Managing Academic Quality and Standards

1
Managing Academic Quality and Standards Part
II The Universitys Framework

• 30 Nov 07
• Tim Burton, University Senior Quality Officer

2
Objectives

• To increase understanding of the Universitys
  quality and standards framework with specific
  reference to how the framework is
• developed, approved, enhanced, and communicated
  the process and reviewed
• Informed by external expectations, internal
  feedback and the values and strategic priorities
  of the University the substance
• To explain how responsibilities for quality and
  standards are allocated within, and underpin, the
  framework
• To outline some potential future developments
  internal and external

3
Key elements of the framework

• Regulations
• University programmes regulations (governing
  award of credit and progression to the award)
  16 chapters
• Unfair means
• Complaints by students
• Codes of practice ( annexes)
• Programme approvals (four chapters)
• Annual monitoring
• Assessment Procedures (10 chapters)

4
Influences on the framework (the substance)

• External expectations
• internal feedback
• values
• strategic concerns of the University
• External feedback external examiners, other
  stakeholders
• Student feedback

5

• External expectations
• QAA Academic Infrastructure
• Direct impact for academic staff subject
  benchmark statements and programme specifications
• Indirect QAA Code reflected in University codes
  and regulations FHEQ in regulations

6

• Examples
• Regulations on complaints by students (E2)
• Academic appeals (E1)
• - both Section 5 QAA Code
• Programme approvals (G1-4) reflecting Section 7

7

• QAA Audit and Review
• Evaluating management of QS
• against the academic infrastructure (esp PGR
  against section 1)
• (see further Part I)
• European Standards and Guidelines
• TQI availability of external examiner reports
  to student representatives

8

• Internal feedback through
• Informal communications
• QA processes including thematic QER reporting
• committee structures (faculty-university)
• sampling of processes (e.g. attending programme
  approval, periodic review events and boards of
  examiners)

9

• Values (agreed in 2004)
• we aim to be
• collaborative seeking partnership between
  learners, teachers and service/support staff
• collegial valuing the contributions of all our
  staff and students to the life and ethos of the
  University
• fit for purpose in our facilities and equipment
• open and clear in our procedures and
  information
• professional and rigorous in all our
  activities, in particular the maintenance of
  academic standards
• relevant in our programmes, qualifications,
  research and reach out activities
• responsive to learners, employers, and other
  stakeholders
• supportive towards learners and teachers and
  service/support staff.

10

• Principles (2007)
• Our management of quality and standards is
  underpinned by ensuring that our framework is
• clear and accessible to those required to use it
• applied consistently and transparently
• increasingly based on a variation of touch
  reflecting an identified level of risk
• streamlined and
• locates responsibility at the most appropriate
  level of the institution subject to effective
  institutional oversight.
• Strategic commitments (discussed below)

11
Developing the framework (process)

• Stages of development of a code of practice
• Project specification
• Scope (inclusions/exclusions)
• Implementation date
• Consultees
• Establishment of working group
• Consultation
• Drafting
• QH template cover sheet
• Must should - may
• standard items authority

12

• Approval
• 1st reading principles
• 2nd reading detail
• Relevant committees
• QSC Academic Board (codes) Senate
  (regulations)

13

• Publication
• Quality Handbook www.hull.ac.uk/quality
• Defined sections QH reference number
• Version control (1 00, 1 01 or 2 00)
• Summary of changes from previous version
• Contents page
• Annotated version (explanatory notes)

14

• Communication
• Quality and Standards Update (and consolidated)
• http//www.hull.ac.uk/quality/office/news_events/i
  ndex.html
• Implementation guide
• user friendly information
• Staff development
• Advice and guidance

15
Responsibilities for QS

• QS are the responsibility of all academic and
  related support staff
• The tiered management (of QS) structure
• Contributions at each appropriate level
• Departmental Academic staff designing a
  programme, carrying out the assessment process
  providing academic support and guidance,
  monitoring student progression
• Defined departmental roles (vary from dept to
  dept) quality officer, exams officer, student
  progress, year tutor, director of UG/PG studies
• Specific responsibilities (HoD/delegated)
  student complaints, exam boards, annual
  monitoring, peer observation scheme

16

• Faculty
• Oversight across cognate disciplines
• Specific functions
• Programme approvals
• Unfair means
• Producing the Quality Enhancement Report (QER)

17

• University-level institutional oversight
• Quality and Standards committee
• Oversight of the QS framework
• Monitoring effectiveness of the processes
• enhancement
• Oversight of the outputs of the processes
• Good practice
• Concerns (e.g. complaints, external examiner
  serious concerns)
• Oversight of the provision through periodic
  review, QERs and external examiners (now appoints)

18

• Parental responsibility
• SPC/RDC
• application of regulatory framework to student
  cases
• Award of degrees on behalf of Senate
• Academic appeals
• Programme Approvals Monitoring and Enhancement
  Committee (PAMEC)
• On campus and international programme
  (partnership) approvals

19

• Collaborative Provision Committee (CPC)
• CP processes and the outputs of those processes
• External Examining Advisory and Monitoring Panel
  (EEAMP)
• Advises chair QSC on EE appointments
• Monitors effectiveness of EE process
• Audit Advisory Group

20

• ULTAC
• the practice of LT (strategic development)
• Learning and Teaching Enhancement Committee
• Assessment Committee
• Educational Partnerships Committee
• Strategic oversight of UK and international
  partnerships

21

• The hierarchy in action
• Student feedback at module and programme level
  (inc via representative mechanisms)
• Self-evaluation by teaching staff
• External examiner feedback
• annual monitoring of programmes
• Faculty Quality Enhancement Report
• Annexes including EE reports
• QSC (analysis of QER by QSC team of 3)
• Overview to full committee good practice /
  recommendations

22

• Periodic review
• QSC process chaired by member of QSC but
  partnership with faculty, report to QSC
• Review of the management of QS in defined
  subject areas not review of the department or
  its teaching

23
Future developments the near horizon

• External
• Academic Infrastructure
• Revision of each section of the Code
• Revision of the FHEQ
• Integrated (combined) institutional audit
• IQER Integrated Quality and Enhancement Review
• FDAP
• The national Credit Framework
• The Honours Classification
• The Bologna Process

24

• Internal - Strategic commitments
• UoH Strategic Plan 2007-2012
• Outstanding student experience
• Operating quality processes which enhance the
  student learning experience
• continuing to encourage student participation in
  decision making processes
• Develop sustainable and distinctive academic
  provision
• our challenges
• employer engagement will play a significant
  role in our planning, while student demand will
  be the primary driver of curriculum development

25

• Learning and Teaching Strategy
• Providing fair access to educational
  opportunities in which learners are partners in
  learning
• Integrated plan
• we also believe in subsidiarity
• The plan will assure the quality of the student
  learning experience through rigorous internal and
  external review mechanisms

26

• Our Approach to Quality and Standards
• Assurance of quality
• Maintenance of standards
• Enhancement of the systems and processes
• Effectiveness of institutional oversight
• Priorities
• Risk management model (risk register) variation
  of touch
• Enhancement projects e.g. student participation,
  aspects of the student experience

27
Student participation in quality management

• Scope
• Feedback at module and programme level
• Being consulted e.g. on programme changes
• Is the feedback loop closed?
• Student ? programme provider ? student
• Membership of relevant committees
• Participation in management decisions e.g.
  through University committees
• Participation in QA activities periodic review?
• (parallel QAA proposals for student membership
  of audit teams)

28
The role of UQO

• Developing the framework
• Advice and guidance
• Leaflet on programme approvals
• Key concepts for boards of examiners
• Co-ordinating QA activities
• periodic review
• Programme approvals PPC and FAP membership
  (advice if outwith regulations)
• Preparation for audit
• Sampling of processes
• Departmental/faculty meetings

29

• Faculty links
• Tim Burton Scarborough, HYMS
• Lynne Braham HSC, PGMI
• Christopher Cagney IfL, FoS
• Stuart Gilkes FASS
• Liz Pearce HUBS
• Janet Pearce Collaborative Provision
• Sue Cordell - YHELLN

30
Further SD events

• Unfair means (mandatory for chairs and
  secretaries of UM Panels)
• Programme approvals
• Other ideas ?
• Generic or bespoke for a department/faculty