Educational Oversight Conference 2014: Embedding Quality Enhancement 24 November 2014 Outcomes from educational oversight Rachael Gee, Assistant Director, QAA Educational Oversight Conference November 2014 Total EO activity to date Year Total Providers Drop out rate (%) 2012 287 26 213 90 2013 236 8 216 97 2014 234 9 213 95* *provisional (some outcomes pending) Providers reviewed Pass rate (%) Over 3 years, 135 providers have maintained a 100% pass rate at the first attempt (99 REO; 15 RSEO; 27 ECREO) Of all providers, 157 have passed all activity first time Only 2 providers have had a full review every year (3 consecutive years) Key findings from reviews • Good practice found in teaching and learning, and student support • Most recommendations around formalising and implementing more robust quality assurance processes • Room for improvement in ongoing quality monitoring and evaluation • Providers very responsive to student feedback but still developing student engagement in quality assurance, especially on committees New overview report: Findings from the first year of annual monitoring 2013 http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/ReviewsAndReports/P ages/Educational-Oversight-.aspx First monitoring visit findings • Commendable: fully implemented action plan, effectiveness evaluated and in many cases, additional actions carried out (27 per cent) • Acceptable: action plan mostly implemented; limited evidence of effectiveness (64 per cent) • Improvement required: lack of engagement with action plan or with the Quality Code (9 per cent) First monitoring visit findings • Enhancements in learning and teaching: – Teaching and learning strategy implemented – Extensive use of guest speakers/ industry practitioners – Improvement to or extension of learning resources • Other enhancements: – – – – More effective annual monitoring: continual improvement More rigorous oversight of the integrity of assessment Students engaged in work of programme committees Better identification of and support for ‘students at risk’ First monitoring visit findings • Room for improvement: – – – – – – – – More timely completion of actions More evaluation of impact/effectiveness Better engagement of students More proactive than responsive QAE More rigorous oversight of assessment More scrupulous programme monitoring/review Staff development in pedagogy/subject expertise More thorough oversight of information EO activity 2014 • 118 monitoring visits Method Total Commend able Acceptable Requires pending improvement REO 93 16 54 4 19 RSEO 8 5 3 - - 10 4 - 3 ECREO 17 39 providers did not require a visit 20 REO; 13 ECREO; 6 RSEO 29 providers triggered a full review 20 REO; 6 ECREO; 3 RSEO EO activity 2014 • 56 Full reviews Method Total Pass Near miss Fail pending REO/HER+ 44 35 5 2 2 RSEO 3 3 - - - ECREO 10 5 - - 5 Second monitoring visits Enhancements to quality assurance processes: • regular academic discussion and review of programmes • Use of Quality Code to review and improve policies • Staff development in assessment procedures • Detailed and evaluative monitoring reports • improvements to student feedback questionnaires • maintenance of an institution-wide quality action plan Second monitoring visits Enhancements to learning and teaching: • • • • greater use of technology-enhanced learning staff research interests to inform their teaching promotion of student research-led presentations improvements to the quality and availability of learning resources • introduction of peer observation and forums for sharing good teaching practice • increased engagement with industry practitioners Second monitoring visits Enhancements to student support: • Improving understanding of good academic practice • Use of tutorials to support students’ academic study skills, language skills and academic progress • Careers support, including feedback from recent graduates • Use of personal development plans to enable students to plan and monitor their own achievement Second monitoring visits Areas for improvement in quality assurance: • Lack of effective marking and internal verification • Poor record keeping of student attendance and academic progress • Inaccuracies/inconsistencies in information • Poor oversight of academic standards and quality • Limited or no annual monitoring Second monitoring visits Areas for improvement in teaching and learning: • Poor oversight of teaching quality • Little or no consideration of student feedback • Students have difficulty in accessing necessary learning resources Annual monitoring in 2015 More of the same... Plus a focus on the rigour of admissions and assessment qaa.ac.uk [email protected] +44 (0) 1452 557000 © The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2014 Registered charity numbers 1062746 and SC037786
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc
