UK Quality Framework OU and ARCs

1
UK Quality FrameworkOU and ARCs

• Diana Stammers, Head of Quality
• December 2014

2
Coming up

• UK quality assurance framework
• Quality Assurance Agency for HE (QAA) HE Review
  of OU, December 2015
• UK Quality Code for HE

3
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.)

4
Quality and The Open University

• 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

5
QAA HE Review what is it?

• QAAs principle review method for universities
  and colleges
• Aim is to inform students and the wider public if
  a provider meets UK Expectations for
• setting and maintenance of academic standards
• provision of learning opportunities
• provision of information
• enhancement of the quality of learning
  opportunities
• providing accountability encouraging
  improvement

6
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

7
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

8
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

9
Outcome

• Four judgements on
• setting and maintenance of academic standards
• meets / does not meet UK Expectations
• quality of learning opportunities
• information about learning opportunities
• enhancement of students learning opportunities
• commended
• meets
• requires improvement to meet
• does not meet
• UK Expectations
• Can be differentiated judgements for different
  provision

10
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

11
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

12
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

13
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
14
QAA UK Quality Code for HE
Part 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 achievement B5 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
15
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

16
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

17
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

18
OU and ARC Quality Code mappings

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

19
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