Outcomes from Educational Oversight, Rachael Gee, Assistant

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