UK Quality FrameworkOU and ARCs

Diana Stammers, Head of Quality

December 2014

Coming up …

• UK quality assurance framework• Quality Assurance Agency for HE (QAA) HE Review of

OU, December 2015• UK Quality Code for HE

Academic quality and standards – what do we mean?

• Academic standards: the level of achievement that a student has to reach to gain an academic award (skills and knowledge base expected of students for a particular subject area at a particular level).

• Academic quality describes how well the opportunities provided for students help them to achieve their award; making sure that appropriate and effective learning/programme design, teaching, supervision, other support, assessment and resources are provided. (Also known as “quality of learning opportunities”; “quality of student learning experience” etc.)

• The OU operates within same UK frameworks for quality and academic standards as other HE institutions awarding degrees

• Academic standards and attainment by students must be equivalent to that of whole higher education sector

• Quality management audited by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education - external peer review, used for all universities

• The OU is accredited by the US Middle States Commission on HE – accreditation reapproved in 2010

Quality and The Open University

QAA HE Review – what is it?

• QAA’s principle review method for universities and colleges

• Aim is to inform students and the wider public if a provider meets UK Expectations for:

1. setting and maintenance of academic standards

2. provision of learning opportunities

3. provision of information

4. enhancement of the quality of learning opportunities

• providing accountability + encouraging improvement

5

Scope

• All provision leading to OU qualifications or credit at FHEQ levels 4 to 8 (+ Scottish equivalent)

• Taught provision and research degrees• Direct provision and provision delivered with third party

6

Key elements

1. Peer review

2. Involvement of students (reviewer, lead rep, meetings)

3. Management of standards, quality, information, enhancement

4. Evidence-based – self-evaluation document supported by documentary evidence

5. Built entirely around the UK Quality Code for HE

6. Reference to (benchmarked) data

7. Core and theme

7

Outcome• 7 March 2016 QAA publish Report

• 9 May 2016 OU publishes action plan on its public website

Report, includes:

• Judgements

• Features of good practice

• Affirmations of current action

• Recommendations for action -with deadlines

• Commentary on a selected theme

8

Outcome• Four judgements on:

1. setting and maintenance of academic standards• meets / does not meet UK Expectations

2. quality of learning opportunities

3. information about learning opportunities

4. enhancement of students’ learning opportunities• commended• meets• requires improvement to meet• does not meet

UK Expectations

• Can be differentiated judgements for different provision 9

Review Visit• 9 Nov 2015 OU finds out duration; lines of enquiry;

who team wishes to meet, including partners; visit timetable; further document requests (incl audit

trails)

• 7 Dec 2015 Review visit meetings start

• Staff (including VC; ALs)

• Staff from partner links

• Students: OUSA reps; other students incl students at partners; possibly alumni

• Possibly external examiners, employers

• Team interrogate documentation further - triangulation

• Final day reach judgements – team spend with QAA Review Manager

10

QAA HE Review of OU, December 2015 – ARC involvement

• Self-evaluation document (February-May 2015)

• Student “mini-submission”?

• Possible visit meetings – senior staff, supervisors, students; video or tele-conference• 9 Nov 15 Find out who team wants to meet

• 7 Dec 15 Week of review visit

• Letter to be sent shortly

UK Quality Code for HE

• Published by QAA• First section October 2011; last sections October 2013• Phased in for QAA reviews; all in use from August 2014• Three parts: academic standards; academic quality;

published information• Expectation per chapter; indicators of sound practice;

explanatory text

QAA UK Quality Code for HE

Part A: Setting and maintaining academic standards

Covers:A1: UK and European reference points for academic standards A2: Degree-awarding bodies' reference points for academic standards A3: Securing academic standards and an outcomes-based approach to academic awards

QAA UK Quality Code for HEPart B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality   B1: Programme design, development and approval B2: Recruitment, selection and admission to HE B3: Learning and teaching B4: Enabling student development and achievementB5: Student engagement B6: Assessment of students and recognition of prior learning B7: External examining B8: Programme monitoring and review B9: Academic appeals and complaints B10: Managing higher education provision with others B11: Research degrees

QAA UK Quality Code for HE

Part C: Information about higher education provision

Information about the higher education provider Information for prospective students Information for current students Information for students on completion of their studies Information for assuring quality and standards

B10 Managing HE with others• Responsibility for academic standards of awards cannot be delegated

by the degree awarding organisation - OU needs to ensure equivalent academic standards (covered in Quality Code Part A)

• Overall responsibility for academic quality with the degree awarding organisation but delivery is shared - OU to ensure equivalence of opportunities

• Processes for assuring quality and academic standards, at least as rigorous as for direct provision, e.g.:

– Approval, monitoring & review (partnership; programmes; information)

– Use of management information, student feedback

– External examiners and other external input

• Due diligence (regular), written agreements

• Risk-based approach

B11 Research Degrees• Environment for success, quality of support• Consistency while recognising diversity amongst students• Clear and available regulations, codes of practice, procedures• Robust, fair and transparent selection• Clear entitlements and responsibilities of students• Supervisor skills, time, development and responsibilities• Research, personal, professional skills development - aligned with Researcher Development

Framework; reviewed regularly• Robust progress monitoring, review, and assessment• Evaluation and action – MI, feedback, representation • Records• Communication and accessibility of information

OU and ARC Quality Code mappings

• Evaluating alignment with Expectation and Indicators• Planning actions for improvement• Refreshing mappings after action

A reflective approach to quality: 6 quality questions

What are you trying to do? PURPOSES Why are you doing it? REASON How are you going to do it? METHOD Why is that the best way to do it? OPTIMISATION

How do you know it works? EFFECTIVENESS How can you improve it? ENHANCEMENT