Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College · The audit process Institutional audits are carried out by teams of academics who review the way in which institutions oversee their

Buckinghamshire ChilternsUniversity College

APRIL 2005

Preface The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) exists to safeguard the public interest insound standards of higher education (HE) qualifications and to encourage continuous improvement in the management of the quality of HE.To do this QAA carries out reviews of individual HE institutions (universities and colleges of HE). In England and Northern Ireland this process is known as institutional audit. QAA operates similarbut separate processes in Scotland and Wales.

The purpose of institutional audit

The aims of institutional audit are to meet the public interest in knowing that universities andcolleges are:

providing HE, awards and qualifications of an acceptable quality and an appropriate academicstandard, andexercising their legal powers to award degrees in a proper manner.

JudgementsInstitutional audit results in judgements about the institutions being reviewed. Judgements aremade about:

the confidence that can reasonably be placed in the soundness of the institution's present and likelyfuture management of the quality of its programmes and the academic standards of its awards the reliance that can reasonably be placed on the accuracy, integrity, completeness andfrankness of the information that the institution publishes, and about the quality of itsprogrammes and the standards of its awards.

These judgements are expressed as either broad confidence, limited confidence or no confidenceand are accompanied by examples of good practice and recommendations for improvement.

Nationally agreed standardsInstitutional audit uses a set of nationally agreed reference points, known as the 'AcademicInfrastructure', to consider an institution's standards and quality. These are published by QAA andconsist of:

The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (FHEQ),which include descriptions of different HE qualificationsThe Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher educationsubject benchmark statements, which describe the characteristics of degrees in different subjectsguidelines for preparing programme specifications, which are descriptions of the what is onoffer to students in individual programmes of study. They outline the intended knowledge,skills, understanding and attributes of a student completing that programme. They also givedetails of teaching and assessment methods and link the programme to the FHEQ.

The audit processInstitutional audits are carried out by teams of academics who review the way in which institutionsoversee their academic quality and standards. Because they are evaluating their equals, the processis called 'peer review'. The main elements of institutional audit are:

a preliminary visit by QAA to the institution nine months before the audit visita self-evaluation document submitted by the institution four months before the audit visita written submission by the student representative body, if they have chosen to do so, fourmonths before the audit visita detailed briefing visit to the institution by the audit team five weeks before the audit visitthe audit visit, which lasts five daysthe publication of a report on the audit team's judgements and findings 20 weeks after theaudit visit.

The evidence for the audit In order to obtain the evidence for its judgement, the audit team carries out a number of activities,including:

reviewing the institution's own internal procedures and documents, such as regulations, policystatements, codes of practice, recruitment publications and minutes of relevant meetings, aswell as the self-evaluation document itselfreviewing the written submission from studentsasking questions of relevant stafftalking to students about their experiencesexploring how the institution uses the Academic Infrastructure.

The audit team also gathers evidence by focusing on examples of the institution's internal qualityassurance processes at work using 'audit trails'. These trails may focus on a particular programme orprogrammes offered at that institution, when they are known as a 'discipline audit trail'. In addition,the audit team may focus on a particular theme that runs throughout the institution's managementof its standards and quality. This is known as a 'thematic enquiry'. From 2004, institutions will be required to publish information about the quality and standards of theirprogrammes and awards in a format recommended in document 03/51, Information on quality andstandards in higher education: Final guidance, published by the Higher Education Funding Council forEngland. The audit team reviews progress towards meeting this requirement.

ISBN 1 84482 338 5

© Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2005

All QAA's publications are available on our website www.qaa.ac.uk

Printed copies are available from:Linney DirectAdamswayMansfieldNG18 4FN

Tel 01623 450788Fax 01623 450629Email [email protected]

Summary 1Introduction 1Outcome of the audit 1Features of good practice 1Recommendations for action 1Outcomes of discipline audit trails 2National reference points 2

Main report 4

Section 1: Introduction:Buckinghamshire ChilternsUniversity College 4

The University College and its mission 4Mission statement 5Collaborative provision 5Background information 5The audit process 6Development since the previousacademic quality audit 7

Section 2: The audit investigations:institutional processes 8

The institution's view as expressed inthe SED 8The institution's framework for managingquality and standards, includingcollaborative provision 8The institution's intentions for theenhancement of quality and standards 9Internal approval, monitoring andreview processes 10External participation in internal reviewprocesses 12External examiners and their reports 12External reference points 13Programme-level review and accreditationby external agencies 14Student representation at operationaland institutional level 15Feedback from students, graduatesand employers 16Progression and completion statistics 16Assurance of the quality of teaching staff,appointment, appraisal and reward 17

Assurance of the quality of teaching throughstaff support and development 18Assurance of the quality of teachingdelivered through distributed anddistance methods 19Learning support resources 20Academic guidance, support andsupervision 21Collaborative provision 23

Section 3: The audit investigations:discipline audit trails 25

Discipline audit trails 25

Section 4: The audit investigations:published information 31

The students' experience of publishedinformation and other informationavailable to them 31

Reliability, accuracy and completenessof published information 32

Findings 34The effectiveness of institutional proceduresfor assuring the quality of programmes 34The effectiveness of institutional procedures for securing the standards of awards 38The effectiveness of institutional procedures for supporting learning 39Outcomes of discipline audit trails 40The use made by the institution of theAcademic Infrastructure 42The utility of the SED as an illustrationof the institution's capacity to reflectupon its own strengths and limitations,and to act on these to enhance qualityand standards 42Commentary on the institution'sintentions for the enhancement ofquality and standards 43Reliability of information 43Features of good practice 44Recommendations for action 44

Appendix 45Buckinghamshire Chilterns UniversityCollege's response to the audit report 45

Contents

Summary

Introduction

A team of auditors from the Quality AssuranceAgency for Higher Education (QAA) visited theBuckinghamshire Chilterns University College(the University College) from 18 to 22 April2005 to carry out an institutional audit. Thepurpose of the audit was to provide publicinformation on the quality of the opportunitiesavailable to students and on the academicstandards of the University College's awards.

To arrive at its conclusions the audit team spoketo members of staff throughout the UniversityCollege, to current students, and read a widerange of documents relating to the way theUniversity College manages the academicaspects of its provision.

The words 'academic standards' are used todescribe the level of achievement that a studenthas to reach to gain an academic award (forexample, a degree). It should be at a similarlevel across the UK.

Academic quality is a way of describing howwell the learning opportunities available tostudents help them to achieve their award. It isabout making sure that appropriate teaching,support, assessment and learning opportunitiesare provided for them.

In institutional audit, both academic standardsand academic quality are reviewed. Provisionand awards offered by both the UniversityCollege and its collaborative partners wereincluded in the audit.

Outcome of the audit

As a result of its investigations, the audit team'sview of the University College is that:

there can be broad confidence in thesoundness of the University College'scurrent and likely future management ofthe quality of its academic programmesand the academic standards of its awards

there can be broad confidence in theUniversity College's present and futurecapacity to manage effectively the

academic standards of its awards offeredon its behalf by collaborative partners.

Features of good practice

The audit team identified the following areas asbeing good practice:

the clarity, thoroughness, interrelatedness,management and presentation ofdocumentation that supports the deliberativeprocesses of the University College

the student retention project, in particular,its multifaceted action lines and use ofperformance indicators

the student-focused culture to support thedevelopment of students through, forexample: representation, consultation andcollaboration with the Students' Union, theopen-door policy of academic staff, thetutoring system, the proactive institutionalsupport mechanisms, and the extent andusage of the Student Experience Survey

the culture of enhancement with, forexample, benchmarking of the UniversityCollege performance, the work of theSchool of Continuing ProfessionalEducation, and the extensive uptake ofstaff development opportunities

the depth and scope of relationship at alllevels with strategic further educationcollege partners that contributes to themanagement of the quality of learningand securing of standards.

Recommendations for action

The audit team also recommends that theUniversity College consider taking further actionin a number of areas to ensure that the academicquality and standards of the awards offered by itand its collaborative partners are maintained.

The team advises the University College to:

ensure that the University College's policyon appraisal is consistently applied acrossthe University College

determine how to speed up thedeliberative process without destroying theconsensual approach to managing change

Institutional Audit Report: summary

page 1

continue to monitor the steps it has takento ensure the timeliness and accuracy oftimetables produced for all students acrossthe University College.

It would also be desirable for the UniversityCollege to:

consider ensuring that the peerobservation system works in a way that willretain the flexibility of the current systembut will enable greater dissemination ofgood practice within and between faculties

use the full range of information produced by the Planning Unit and othersources more extensively and consistentlyacross the institution to monitor studentprogress and achievement and matchsupport appropriately

ensure greater clarity and consistency(while allowing some measure of diversity)in the rolling out of student PersonalDevelopment Planning across theUniversity College

continue to find appropriate ways ofensuring the timeliness of the appointmentof external examiners, the production ofannual review and evaluation reports, andthe convening of the Joint CombinationPanels in validation schedules

review practice and policy for placementlearning to ensure that all placementproviders for students undertaking work-based learning required by a programmeare suitably prepared, whether or not theplacement is arranged by the student orthe University College.

Outcomes of discipline audit trails

In the course of the audit, programmes ofstudy leading to academic awards in tourism,transport and travel; furniture studies and fineart; and sociology, criminology and policingwere scrutinised. In each case the audit foundthat the standard of student achievement in theprogrammes was appropriate to the titles of therelevant awards and their location within Theframework for higher education qualifications inEngland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and that

the quality of learning opportunities available tostudents was suitable for programmes of studyleading to those awards.

National reference points

To provide further evidence to support itsfindings the audit team also investigated the usemade by the University College of the AcademicInfrastructure which QAA has developed onbehalf of the whole of UK higher education. TheAcademic Infrastructure is a set of nationallyagreed reference points that help to define bothgood practice and academic standards. Thefindings of the audit suggest that the UniversityCollege's response to all aspects of the AcademicInfrastructure has been timely and appropriate.

From 2005, the published information set willinclude the recommended summaries ofexternal examiners' reports and of feedbackfrom current students for each programme. Theevidence provided for the audit shows that theUniversity College has taken the necessary stepsto be able to meet the requirements of theHigher Education Funding Council for England'sdocument 03/51, Information on quality andstandards in higher education: Final guidance.

Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College

page 2

Main report

Main report 1 An institutional audit of theBuckinghamshire Chilterns University College(the University College) was undertaken duringthe week commencing 18 April 2005. Thepurpose of the audit was to provide publicinformation on the quality of the UniversityCollege's programmes of study and on thedischarge of its responsibility for its awards.

2 The audit was carried out using a processdeveloped by the Quality Assurance Agency forHigher Education (QAA) in partnership with theHigher Education Funding Council for England(HEFCE), the Standing Conference of Principals(SCOP) and Universities UK (UUK), which hasbeen endorsed by the Department forEducation and Skills. For institutions in England,it replaces the previous processes ofcontinuation audit, undertaken by QAA at therequest of UUK and SCOP, and universal subjectreview, undertaken by QAA on behalf of HEFCE,as part of the latter's statutory responsibility forassessing the quality of education that it funds.

3 The audit checked the effectiveness of theUniversity College's procedures for establishingand maintaining the standards of its academicawards; for reviewing and enhancing thequality of the programmes of study leading tothose awards; and for publishing reliableinformation. As part of the audit process,according to protocols agreed with HEFCE,SCOP and UUK, the audit includedconsideration of examples of institutionalprocesses at work at the level of theprogramme, through discipline audit trails(DATs), together with examples of thoseprocesses operating at the level of theinstitution as a whole. The scope of the auditencompassed all of the University College'sprovision, including collaborative arrangements.

Section 1: Introduction:Buckinghamshire ChilternsUniversity College

The University College and its mission

4 The University College is the main providerof higher education (HE) in the Buckinghamshireregion and has two sites at High Wycombe andan additional rural campus at Chalfont St Gilesabout 12 miles from the town centre sites. Afourth site, Missenden Abbey, is the venue for awide range of management training activities,consultancy and short-course provision.

5 In recent years, the University College hasinvested in excess of £20 million in developingits estates. This includes provision of newteaching and library facilities, social facilities forstudents and over 800 new student residences.A major strategic objective of the UniversityCollege is to consolidate most of its operationsand provision on a single campus site in HighWycombe, and planning and negotiations arewell advanced with the acquisition of a site andthe aim of opening a new campus by 2008.

6 The origins of the University College lie inthe School of Art founded in 1893, from which itdeveloped into a college of further education (FE)after the Second World War. In 1975 the thenHigh Wycombe College of Technology and Artamalgamated with Newland Park College ofEducation in Chalfont St Giles to form theBuckinghamshire College of Higher Education. In1995 it gained degree-awarding powers havingpreviously had accreditation of awards throughthe Council for National Academic Awards, BTECand Brunel University. At the time of the presentaudit Brunel continued to offer registration forthe University College's research degree students.The title of 'University College' was gained in1999. A principal aim of the institution's strategicplan is to achieve university title. The UniversityCollege is organised into six teaching faculties:Applied Social Sciences and Humanities (ASSH),Design, Leisure and Tourism, and Technology arebased in High Wycombe, and theBuckinghamshire Business School and HealthStudies are located at Chalfont St Giles.


page 4

7 At present the University College hasapproximately 8,100 students on full and part-time awards, with a significant concentrationof the latter studying for professional or post-experience awards in the faculties of HealthStudies, Technology and the BuckinghamshireBusiness School. Around 7,750 students areregistered on undergraduate programmes, about300 students for postgraduate awards, and theother students are studying on a range ofawards (for example, Foundation Degrees(FDs), HNC, HND, Diploma of HigherEducation). Approximately 75 students areregistered for research degrees with BrunelUniversity. Around 57 per cent and 43 per centof the student population is female and malerespectively, and about 40 per cent are maturestudents over the age of 25. Growth in studentnumbers has been modest with approximatelya 6 per cent increase in recent years.

Mission statement

8 The mission of the University College is'Buckinghamshire Chilterns University Collegeoffers access to quality teaching and researchwithin a committed regional and internationalenvironment which is caring, supportive ofscholarship and provides students and staff with the opportunity for personal andprofessional development'.

9 In pursuing this mission the UniversityCollege states that it retains a primary emphasisas a teaching institution and seeks to promotesocial inclusion and widen participation in HE.

Collaborative provision

10 The University College has formed astrategic alliance with four local FE colleges:Amersham and Wycombe College, AylesburyCollege, Berkshire College of Agriculture andEast Berkshire College. The collaborative awardsoffered through the partnerships include sub-degree awards, typically HNC, HND andFoundation, and undergraduate degrees. Theoverall student number on the programmes in2003-04 was approximately 870 with around46 per cent of the students at Amersham and

Wycombe. In addition, the University Collegehas small numbers of students on collaborativeprogrammes with Uxbridge College, Bracknelland Wokingham College, Oxford and CherwellValley College of Further Education andReading College of Art and Design; therelationship with the last two is coming to anend and the University College sees anopportunity for strengthening links with thefirst two. The University College also hasoverseas collaborative partners: FachhochschuleOsnabrück, Germany; Számalk Open BusinessSchool, Budapest, Hungary; and MANCOSA,South Africa. The relationships with the last twoare being phased out through an agreed exitstrategy and the University College is preparingto phase out the relationship with theFachhochschule. All the overseas collaborativeprogrammes are in the business andmanagement subject area and the overallstudent number for 2003-04 was about 400.

Background information

11 The published information available at thetime of audit included:

information available on the institution'swebsite

the University College prospectus andcourse information

QAA continuation audit report of August2002

Higher Education Quality CouncilAcademic Audit of May 1996

academic reviews: Engineering (March2004); English (March 2004); Law(January 2004)

QAA subject reviews: Sociology (1996);Agriculture, Forestry and AgriculturalScience (1998); Communications andMedia, Film and Television Studies (1998);Engineering (1998); Nursing (1999);Psychology (2000); Art and Design(2000); and Hospitality, Leisure,Recreation, Sport and Tourism (2001);Business and Management (2001)

overseas audit MANCOSA 1999.

Institutional Audit Report: main report

page 5

12 The University College also provided QAAwith:

an institutional self-evaluation document(SED)

discipline SEDs (DSEDs), includingprogramme specifications, for furniturestudies and fine art; sociology, criminologyand policing; tourism, transport andtravel; computing and businessinformation technology

the Strategic Plan 2002-2007

the application for University TitleSeptember 2004

the Academic Staff Quality Handbook2004-05

the Teaching, Learning and AssessmentStrategy 2002-05

minutes of the meetings of seniorcommittees

annual review and evaluation reports

student experience surveys 2002-03,2003-04

information on staff and student support.

13 During the audit visit the audit team wasprovided with access to other internaldocumentation in hardcopy and through theUniversity College's intranet. The team isgrateful to the University College for thereadiness to provide the information requested.

The audit process

14 Following a meeting at the UniversityCollege in August 2004, QAA confirmed thatfour DATs would be conducted during the auditvisit. The audit team's final selection of DATsincluded sub-degree, undergraduate andpostgraduate programmes in furniture studiesand fine art; tourism, transport and travel; andsociology, criminology and policing. Review ofthe fourth DAT area, computing and businessinformation technology, had to be cancelledowing to sudden and unforeseen circumstancesleading to an auditor having to withdraw justprior to the commencement of the audit.

15 QAA received the institutional SED andsupporting documentation in December 2004and the DSEDs, accompanied by programmespecifications, in February 2004. The SED wascompiled specifically for the audit and DSEDsprovided a brief overview as an introduction toexisting documentation.

16 The audit team visited the UniversityCollege from 9 to 11 March 2005 for thepurpose of exploring, with the Director, seniormembers of staff with institutional responsibilityand student representatives, matters relating tothe management of quality and standards raisedby the SED and other documentation providedfor the team. During this briefing visit, the teamidentified a number of matters for furtherconsideration during the audit visit. At the closeof the briefing visit, a programme of meetingsfor the audit visit was developed by the teamand agreed with the University College.

17 At the preliminary meeting for the audit inAugust 2004, the Students' Union (SU) officerswere invited to submit a students' writtensubmission (SWS) expressing views of thestudent body on their experience at theUniversity College and identifying any mattersof concern or commendation with respect tothe quality of programmes and the standard ofawards. They were also invited to give theirviews on the level of representation afforded tothem and on the extent to which their viewswere taken into account. In December 2004the student body submitted a detaileddocument to QAA. The SWS had beenprepared on the basis of a wide range ofactivities initiated by the SU that included useof the institution's student experience surveys,email surveys, telephone interviews, analysis ofconcerns raised through the SU Advice andRepresentation Centre, analysis of concernsraised in institutional committee meetings,focus groups, and a Representation Forum. Thefinal version of the SWS was endorsed by theSU Executive Committee and the SU Counciland made available to the student body on theSU website. An amended version of the report,omitting reference through which individualmembers of staff could be identified, was made


page 6

available to University College staff. The auditteam is grateful to the students for preparingthis valuable document to support the audit.

18 The audit visit took place from 18 to 22April 2005, and included further meetings withstaff and students of the University College whowere representative of both institutionalconstituencies and the selected DATs. The auditteam comprised Professor P Luker, Professor JBaldock, Ms J Glasman, Mr P Simpson, auditors,and Ms D Cooper, audit secretary. The auditwas coordinated for QAA by Professor H Colley,an Assistant Director, Reviews Group.

Developments since the previousacademic quality audit

19 QAA's continuation audit team, whichvisited the University College in November2001, presented a broadly positive report. Theaudit report commended the University Collegefor its approach to managing quality andstandards within its regional partnerships; theeffectiveness of its support for students withadditional needs; and the use of staffdevelopment to support developments inteaching, learning and assessment in theUniversity College and its partners.

20 The report also concluded that theUniversity College might wish to consider thedesirability of reflecting before planning a newsystem of internal reviews; eliminatinginconsistencies between policy statements forinternational provision and collaborative provision;using more challenging comparators againstwhich to benchmark its performance; frequentlyreviewing its capacity to support informationand communication technology (ICT) forteaching and learning; clarifying further therelationship between the SU and the UniversityCollege's support mechanisms to provideseamless support for students; monitoringsupport for international students; keepingunder review its capacity to deliver appraisaland staff development in a timely fashion to all teaching staff; and satisfying itself thatinduction operates consistently and effectively.

21 It is clear that the institution hasresponded seriously to all of theserecommendations, as evidenced in thesummary in the SED and in Appendix 5 of theSED which contained considerably moreanalysis and detail. Briefly, the responses werethe piloting of a process of periodic subjectreview (PSR) (see paragraphs 48-50) in 2004-05,which replaced periodic faculty review; reviewof policies for international and collaborativeprovision (see paragraphs 51 and 98); theestablishment of a Planning Unit and theappointment of an Academic InformationCoordinator for Teaching Quality Information(TQI), in part to address performancebenchmarking; enhancement of the ICTinfrastructure, with the adoption of the virtuallearning environment (VLE) giving addedstimulus; the introduction of several measuresto provide more seamless support for students,while providing additional central support forinternational students; seeking to remove abottleneck in the appraisal process; and usingan SU survey to capture students' views of theapplication, enrolment and induction processeswhich led to the production of a pre-enrolmentbooklet and an 'induction module' in the VLE.

22 The University College has developed agreater focus on supporting regional and localneeds. Linking of widening participation withregional training and collaboration with FEpartners has been brought under theresponsibility of the Assistant Director forRegional Development. Internationalcollaborative activity has been reviewed and,for a variety of reasons, all existing internationalpartnerships are coming to an end.

23 An Academic Year Working Party wasestablished in 2001 to examine the effectivenessof the semester-based academic year. This led tothe recommendation in 2003 to move toyear-long modules for first-year students which isbeing implemented in phases. Simultaneouslywith the review of the academic year, theUniversity College has reviewed its awardstructure, as a result of which it is moving awayfrom field-based awards towards defined awards.A framework for FDs was developed in 2003 andrevised, as a result of an early review, in 2004.


page 7

24 In 2003, the University College contractedan external consultancy to conduct aninstitutional evaluation of the studentexperience. The exercise was repeated in 2004and its scope increased to encompass students atpartner colleges and new students. The results ofthese student experience surveys (SESs) werelargely positive and were seen by staff andstudents of the University College as a valuablesource of information and diagnostic tool.

25 Overall, the audit team found that thedevelopments since continuation audit,whether instigated by that audit or identifiedby the institution itself, had been wellconsidered and discussed across the UniversityCollege before implementation. In additiontheir impact had been monitored.

Section 2: The auditinvestigations: institutionalprocesses

The institution's view as expressed inthe SED

26 The SED stated that the University Collegebelieves that it has a strong framework androbust procedures for managing its quality andstandards. Its strategic approach is outlined in itsQuality Policy, the principles of which the SEDstated reflect 'a culture of continual review andenhancement; alignment with recognisedstandards and established codes of practice;engagement with the wider academic andprofessional community; and partnershipbetween faculties and central services'. TheUniversity College publishes a number ofdocuments that support the delivery of itsquality policy, which are regularly reviewed toensure their effectiveness in achieving objectives.

The institution's framework formanaging quality and standards,including collaborative provision

27 The SED described how Senate has theprimary responsibility for establishing andoverseeing standards of the University College'sawards and the quality of its provision. Much of

the work required to discharge this responsibilityis devolved to Senate's subcommittees, andAcademic Audit Committee (AAC) in particular.The Teaching and Learning Committee (TLC)advises Senate on teaching, learning,assessment and related enhancements.

28 Each faculty is represented on Senate andits subcommittees. Quality and standards atfaculty level are the responsibility of FacultyBoards that formally report to Senate. TheUniversity College recognises that effective two-way communication between centralcommittees and faculties is essential. Membersof central committees are required to report totheir Faculty Board as well as representing theviews from their faculty on central committees.Central committee members also play a role atfaculty level in events such as annual reviewand evaluation (AR&E), and validation. The keycommittee on the management side is PlanningBoard, which is supported by a rich variety ofsubcommittees that includes the AcademicPlanning Committee (APC), Staff DevelopmentCommittee (SDC), Admissions and RecruitmentGroup and Student Affairs Committee.

29 The University College believes that it hasa comprehensive, thorough and well-definedset of clear documentation that defineprocedures associated with governance, policy,regulation and quality. The Academic StaffQuality Handbook, which summarises all thekey processes and references the appropriatedocuments, is issued annually to all staff. Alldocumentation is available on the UniversityCollege's intranet. The audit team identified as good practice the clarity, thoroughness,cross-linking, management and presentation of documentation to support the institution'sdeliberative processes.

30 The SED stated that the AcademicInfrastructure is embedded within normalquality procedures. Standards are set atvalidation and monitored through externalexaminers and annual monitoring.Consideration of The framework for highereducation qualifications in England, Wales andNorthern Ireland (FHEQ) and subject benchmarksare required during both validation and review,


page 8

however, the University College acknowledgesthat there is some patchiness in application ofthe FHEQ. Programme specifications areproduced for validation and are reviewed andupdated during AR&E. Sections of the Code ofpractice for the assurance of academic quality andstandards in higher education (Code of practice),published by QAA, are considered by therelevant institutional committee (or a workinggroup is established where no obviouscommittee exists) with a view to embedding theprecepts in procedures. For some sections of theCode (such as Section 6: Assessment of students,and Section 9: Placement learning), theinstitutional policy requires further considerationto be determined at the faculty level. Anupdated mapping against the sections of theCode was presented to AAC in February 2005.

31 The framework for quality and standardsfor collaborative provision is exactly the same asthat for campus-based provision. Academicmanagement and oversight of programmes isthe responsibility of the appropriate faculty. TheCollaborative Provision Unit (CPU) providessupport for partner institutions. The UniversityCollege is currently reviewing its provisionagainst the revised Code of practice, Section 2:Collaborative provision and flexible and distributedlearning (including e-learning), published in 2004.

32 Research students are registered withBrunel University, although supervision andsupport are provided entirely by the UniversityCollege. The Research Degrees Committee(RDC), which reports to Senate, is responsiblefor the quality and standards of researchdegrees. Annual review reports are forwardedto the appropriate committee at Brunel. Inaddition, reciprocal membership of appropriatecommittees at Brunel University and theUniversity College is encouraged.

33 The audit team found that the committeestructure is appropriate for monitoring qualityand standards. The University Collegeacknowledged that there is room forimprovement in communication to, from andbetween committees. Sometimes, thecommunication between committees takes time,which gives an impression of slowness in

decision-making. The team was told that the levelof discussion leads to a consensual approach thatincreases ownership, which is part of theUniversity College's philosophy. The UniversityCollege has recognised that there has been adecline in attendance at meetings and the teamfound that inquoracy can arise. The team wastold that the number of meetings is a problemand that the University College is seeking toreduce this in the next academic year. Whilerecognising the value of consensus building theteam advises that, as it considers the operation ofcommittees, the University College seeks toaccelerate the decision-making process.

The institution's intentions for theenhancement of quality and standards

34 The audit team heard that the UniversityCollege believes itself to be a self-criticalinstitution in which all are responsible for theenhancement of provision, informed by aregulatory framework which guides faculties intheir implementation of institutional policy.

35 The SED identified as plannedenhancements the introduction of a periodicreview process with a focus on the 'subject';greater focus on the 'programme' as a unit ofmanagement, rather than the 'field' (acombination of closely related programmeswithin a subject area), to give a clear focus tostudent issues; and improvements to theeffectiveness of the academic planning process. Italso noted plans for changes to the control ofcollaborative provision, alongside those forimproved links with regional schools and collegesto support raising aspirations and participation.Also included in the plans for enhancement weregreater accessibility and timeliness of data toassist in the annual review process; improvedelectronic document management; andimproved internal communications to address theissue of information overload. The audit teamtook particular note of the institution's plans for arange of measures aimed at further developingthe comprehensive strategy for student retention,including the implementation of a year-longstructure at level 1. The team was also told of theapplication for University Title, and of major


page 9

campus redevelopment intended to enhance thestudent experience.

36 It was clear from discussions with staff andstudents that there was widespread institutionalagreement on the need for theseenhancements. The audit team noted that theplans were the result of a detailed considerationof institutional performance which, in manycases, stemmed from pilot projects alreadycompleted. The team noted that the UniversityCollege undertook extensive monitoring of itsperformance in relation to externally andinternally set benchmarks and used thisinformation to seek improvements. It alsosupported staff in implementing improvementsthrough a programme of well-attended staffdevelopment activities. The team concludedthat these instances of practice and planningdesigned to contribute to quality andstandards, together with other cases referred toin this report (for example, paragraphs 40, 63,64, 82, 87,108), demonstrated a proactiveculture of enhancement, shared widely withinthe institution, which constitutes an example ofgood practice.

Internal approval, monitoring andreview processes

37 The University College regards validation as'key in the setting of appropriate standards forprogrammes of study'. It is a requirement thatthe documentation for validation addressalignment with the appropriate subjectbenchmark(s), the FHEQ and professional bodyrequirements. The validation process itself wasreviewed against the Code of practice in 2000and was revisited in 2003 with a view toreducing the volume of documentation required.

38 The first stage of the approval process isfor an outline proposal to be submitted to theappropriate faculty board, which looks atstrategic fit, major resource requirements andevidence of demand. Approved proposals aresubmitted to APC. Proposals approved by APCare referred back to the faculty for thedevelopment stage, which is regarded as themost important phase of the approval process.The documentation required at this stage

comprises the submission document, whichdescribes the development process and theexternal academic and/or pro fessional advicereceived; use of external reference points;market analysis; staff resources; programmespecification; module pro formas; and resourceschecklist. This documentation is scrutinised byan audit panel prior to a validation event.

39 Validation panels are chaired by a seniormember of the University College from a facultynot involved in the proposed programme. Thepanel also includes a member of AAC, anothermember of staff from a faculty with noinvolvement in the programme, and twomembers external to the University College (atleast one of whom must be an academic) whohave neither been involved in the developmentprocess nor currently serve as external examiners.Successful validations are recommended to AAC(then to Senate) for approval. If a validation panelimposes conditions, those conditions have to bemet before submission can be made to AAC.

40 Minutes of validation events showconsiderable use of independent academic andprofessional members; for example, membershipof a validation panel for a master's programme infurniture conservation included representativesfrom the National Portrait Gallery and a furnituremanufacturer. The audit team noted that manyof these events consider the degree of fit withboth the Academic Infrastructure and professionalstandards and this has resulted in the approval ofsome innovative new programmes. One suchprogramme is the BA (Hons) Air Transport withCommercial Pilot Training which was designed inconjunction with industry representatives andenables students to fulfil the requirements ofcommercial pilot licence authorities alongsidetheir academic work.

41 For a combination of approved routes intoa named award, a Combination Planning Panelis convened to ensure that the rationale issound, the proposal is coherent and does notentail duplication, and the resource implicationshave been fully considered.

42 Minor changes are subject to a formalprocess that is overseen by the appropriateFaculty Board. Where the alterations to a


page 10

programme's learning outcomes, assessmentregime and structure constitute more than 40per cent change compared with the originalDefinitive Documentation a revalidation wouldbe required. The SED did acknowledge that thecumulative effect of a series of minor changescan be difficult to quantify and monitor.

43 The audit team found that there had beena large number of recent validations, which wasinevitable given that many programmes hadbeen validated in 1999, when the modularstructure was changed, and were now due forrevalidation. Also, the institution's decision tomove to year-long modules for year onestudents increased the volume of validations.The team did find examples of approvals forjoint awards where it had not been possible toconvene the Combination Planning Panel. Theinstitutional 2003-04 annual report on validationand review, prepared for AAC, indicated that thelateness of convening panels was an issue whichin some cases led to incomplete panel formation,but no panel met without at least one externalmember and written feedback from another. Thesame report made reference to the response toconditions and recommendations as beingpatchy. It was reported to the team that thisreferred to actual responses to the panel chairand AAC rather than a failure to fulfil conditionsand recommendations. It was also reported thatresponses had improved significantly with theintroduction of a pro forma for recording these.Overall, the team found validation and reviewto be rigorous and thorough but wouldrecommend the desirability of the UniversityCollege addressing the problem of incompletemembership and late convening of panels (seeparagraph 240).

Annual review and monitoring 44 AR&E is described as 'the mechanism bywhich the University College undertakes anappraisal of its provision based on genuinecritical reflection and evaluation of the operationand delivery of its provision and reports on thisreflection and evaluation through the UniversityCollege Committee structure'. An away day isthe common mechanism for ensuring that thereview is open and evaluative rather than

mechanistic. Two auditors from AAC areappointed to each faculty to oversee theimplementation of the AR&E process.

45 The process begins with reports for eachmodule, which incorporate statistics showingstudent attainment, observations on issuesaffecting attainment, student feedback, externalexaminers' reports and the rationale for anyproposed changes. Student feedback isacquired through a variety of approaches. TheSED acknowledged the difficulty of gettingformal feedback from students who do notview the universal use of questionnairesfavourably. Consideration is then given atcourse or field level where all module reports,together with course level feedback andexternal examiners' comments, are broughttogether. The leader of the course or field draftsa detailed response to the external examiner(s)that forms part of the AR&E report.

46 Field and course reports go to facultyboards which summarise and evaluate issuesfrom the individual reports. Faculty boardsummaries, together with the report of the AACauditor are presented to AAC, along withreports on some central services that have aclose interaction with students. Finally, aninstitutional AR&E report is submitted to AAC,where institutional issues are discussed andthemes identified for focus in the following year.

47 The audit team found the AR&E process tobe rigorous, thorough and well conceived,although timeliness of submission of reportswas an issue. The lateness of submission ofsome AR&E reports flagged up in the annualreport for 2003-04 triggered a proposal fromAAC to Senate that those courses that fail tosubmit an AR&E should not be permitted torecruit. Following discussion at Senate it wasagreed that it would be for Senate to determinehow to respond to late submissions. At the timeof the audit, Senate had recently establishedtwo working parties, one on AR&E and theother on validation. The team was told that theintent is to streamline and reduce the burden ofthese processes while retaining their rigour. Theteam recommends the desirability of theUniversity College in finding appropriate ways


page 11

of ensuring the timeliness of key events in theapproval and monitoring process.

Periodic review48 Programmes are validated for a period of sixyears, unless a professional body imposes differentrequirements. The process of review andrevalidation of a programme is essentially thesame as that described above for validation. Themain difference is that the submission documentof validation is replaced by a review document,which reviews the operation of the programmeand outlines the rationale for change.

49 As noted above, (see paragraph 20) thecontinuation audit report recommended thatthe University College reflect before modifyingits periodic faculty review process which had yetto complete its cycle. Following somediscussion, PSR was proposed in 2003-04 andwas piloted in two subject areas, tourism andfurniture, in 2004-05. The intent of the PSR is tocomplement existing processes by adding valuethrough a more explicit focus on externality, theexternal engagement of staff and pedagogicdevelopments in the discipline. PSR will informrevalidation and review by being scheduledapproximately 18 months beforehand. AAC hasalready reviewed the process and has proposedamendments for implementation in 2005-06, toprovide more focus on the original 'added-value'intent rather than covering the same territory asthat of validation.

50 Through the DATs (see paragraph 154) andother information made available to it, the auditteam found the periodic review process to be in astate of transition, but moving towards a modelthat would, indeed, complement the otherprocesses of approval, monitoring and review.

Collaborative provision51 The above processes are broadly similarfor collaborative provision, with CollaborativeProvision Management Group (CPMG)maintaining an overview. All collaborativeprogrammes (except for Combined Studies) arebased within an appropriate faculty (or in theSchool of Continuing Professional Education(SCPE) for education awards). Partner collegecourse teams submit proposals through the

appropriate faculty board as described above.AR&E for collaborative provision has theadditional step of the partner institution, wherethere is a range of provision, compiling a self-audit report that identifies the institutionalissues. Those reports are considered by thepartner, AAC and CPMG.

External participation in internalreview processes

52 The University College regards externalinput as a key component of all its internalreview processes. As noted above, externaladvisers are involved in the developmentprocess for validation and review, whiledifferent external reviewers are involved in thevalidation event itself. External examiners,whose reports form a crucial element of AR&E,are not used for validation and review. Onprofessional courses, there is additional externalprofessional involvement.

53 The audit team learned from meetingswith staff, and from minutes, that programme-level review often incorporates substantialelements of externality, including the use ofexternal examiner reports and externalacademic opinion. The reviews also includeinformation on industrial and professional trendsand this reflects the concern for ensuring theemployability of students that was apparent tothe team in meetings with staff and students.

54 Through its analysis of policy documents,meetings with staff, and examples of approval,annual monitoring and periodic review reports,the audit team concluded that externalparticipation is highly valued and is afundamental element in curriculumdevelopment, monitoring and review.

External examiners and their reports

55 The institution's policy is that an externalexaminer is appointed to every award. A leadexaminer is also appointed for a group ofawards, for the purposes of summarising agroup of external examiner reports for theHigher Education Research Opportunities in theUK (HERO) TQI site. Individual faculties areresponsible for sourcing and nominating


page 12

external examiners within procedures andguidance set by the University College. Theaudit team was able to confirm thatinstitutional procedures for the appointment ofexaminers are generally followed. Although anumber of examiners are appointed late theinstitution is working to resolve the problem.The team found that even where extremecircumstances required the change of examinermid-year these procedures were carefullyfollowed. The University College has consideredits processes and procedures in relation to therecently revised Code of Practice, Section 4:External examining. It has also responded to thesuggestions made in the 2002 QAAcontinuation audit report and gives greateremphasis to the briefing and induction ofexternal examiners, which now includesmeetings with course team members and,where possible, students. The continuationaudit report also noted a problem with thetimeliness of reporting by external examiners.The University College has responded to this byimproving its communications with examiners,however, in late 2004, the AAC was still noting,in a review of external examiners' comments,that many of the concerns expressed byexaminers result from their late appointment.

56 External examiners are also appointed bythe University College for franchised awardsand, where a programme is taught both at theUniversity College and a partner college, this isusually the same person. The audit team notedevidence of external examiners scrutinisingassessment prior to its release and makinghelpful suggestions. Some external examinerson franchised programmes reported thatpartners are sometimes less likely to providethem with assessment tasks in time for scrutinyprior to their issue to students.

57 External examiners submit written reportsusing a well-structured pro forma, although insome cases there is little explanation added tothe tick-box statements on this form. The reportsseen showed clear external examiner agreementthat assessment and student achievement wereof a suitable standard when compared to otherinstitutions and when measured against the

FHEQ. Common features in these reports arecommendations on staff commitment tostudents (and support for them) and highstandards. Responses to external examinerreports are created by senior departmental orfaculty staff and these show due attention toexaminers' comments. The team noted thatissues raised by examiners are also discussed atdepartmental and faculty boards and action istaken where possible. The Academic Registrycompiles a thorough summary of externalexaminer reports, identifying common themesrequiring action and points of good practice.This is reported to AAC, which takes appropriateaction, including entering into discussion withfaculties over external examiners' points.

58 Through meetings with staff, and scrutiny ofexternal examiner reports and minutes ofmeetings across the University College, the auditteam was able to confirm that external examinerswere valued and that they played an importantpart, both in the assurance of quality andstandards, and in the development of institutionalprovision. However, the audit team wouldrecommend the desirability of the institution incontinuing to seek ways of ensuring the timelyappointment of all its external examiners.

External reference points

59 The SED stated that the University College'has put increasing emphasis on the need forexternality and recognition of externalguidance in all its processes' and the audit teamfound many examples of this emphasis in itsmeetings with staff and scrutiny of documents.

60 The SED noted that the Code of practice is'embedded' in its policies and procedures andminutes of both institutional and facultycommittees show awareness of the Code. TheAAC monitors institutional use of the AcademicInfrastructure, including the Code, andrecommends changes in practice and policywhere appropriate. Staff explained that this hasled to changes in guidance and procedures,such as working practices for the accreditationof prior learning. The Academic Registryproduces clear policy, guideline and proceduraldocuments that reflect the spirit of the Code,


page 13

although there is opportunity for the placementlearning policy to be further developed in thisrespect (see paragraph 136).

61 Awards are defined in the institution'sstandard programme specifications and theaudit team found that these are appropriatelydesigned and written in a way that studentswould understand, although not all studentsseen by the team were familiar with them.

62 Programme specifications make explicitreference to subject benchmarks and the auditteam found that programmes within the scope ofDATs were clearly designed to reflect the relevantbenchmark statements (see paragraphs 135, 148,164). Minutes of validation meetings showedappropriate discussion of subject benchmarkalignment. The specifications for programmeswere also found to be consistent with theprinciples of the FHEQ, although the audit teamnoted that the terminology used was sometimesinaccurate. However, the University Collegeacknowledged that understanding of thelanguage of the Academic Infrastructure isvariable throughout the institution. Responsibilityfor complying with external referents is devolvedto faculties, supported by accurate guidance fromthe Academic Registry, however, not all newprogramme proposals reflected the institutionalguidance (see paragraph 135).

63 The use of industrial and professionalbenchmarking is widespread in the institution,with employers and professional bodiescontributing to programme design and beinginvolved in the assessment and teaching of someprogrammes. Professional bodies, including theNursing and Midwifery Council, General SocialCare Council (GSCC), British PsychologicalSociety, and the Law Society also accredit orrecognise many University College awards andrecent review information confirms that theirrequirements are carefully considered duringvalidation and updating of programmes.Institutional guidance recommends that sectorskills requirements and national occupationalstandards are also used, where relevant, asexternal referents, and the audit team foundevidence of discussion of these in minutes ofvalidation and faculty meetings.

64 Staff are encouraged to engage withexternal reference points in other ways, includingparticipation in Higher Education Academyfunded projects, consultancy and knowledgetransfer activity with local and nationalorganisations, and external examinerships.

65 The audit team concluded that theUniversity College made extensive use of externalreference points in its design, development,delivery and review of programmes and theinvolvement of industry and professionalorganisations was a notable feature.

Programme-level review andaccreditation by external agencies

66 The University College has participated inthree subject-level academic reviews since thepublication of its continuation audit report in2002. These were positive and it was notedthat all reports commended the learningresources available to the programmes and thatteaching and learning was generally regardedas being of high quality.

67 The SED noted that reports from subjectreviews are considered by the relevant faculty,and reports from faculties to AAC show thataction is taken in relation to therecommendations in the reports. A summaryreport on issues from subject review is compiledby the Academic Registry and considered by AACand the TLC. This report identifies a number ofcommon themes in the subject review reportsand minutes of discussion show a concern forimproving the student experience. The UniversityCollege is progressing with several institution-wide initiatives following consideration of thereports. The change to year-long modules foryear one students and the establishment of aninstitution-wide retention and attendance projectare evidence of the institution respondingeffectively to points regarding studentprogression. In addition, improvements instudents' access to library materials, moreeffective promotion of the use of the VLE andother actions resulting from the Learning andInformation Services Review have led to anincrease in information skills training for students.


page 14

68 In line with the vocational mission of theinstitution, a significant number of itsprogrammes are recognised or accredited byprofessional, statutory and regulatory bodies(PSRBs). Programme specifications and validationrecords enabled the audit team to confirm thatthe requirements of the PSRBs are clearlyunderstood by faculties and influence resourcingdecisions. Relationships with PSRBs are verygood and representatives from some of theseare involved in validation and review activities.The audit team saw evidence of externalevaluations and accreditation visits by theNursing and Midwifery Council, the GSCC, TheBritish Psychological Society, the Law Society,the Institution of Engineering Designers and theChartered Institute of Personnel andDevelopment. There was evidence that facultiestook the reports of these bodies very seriouslyand that changes were made to plans forprogrammes as a result of the feedback fromPSRBs. As a result, accreditation or re-accreditationof programmes by PSRBs has been successful.

69 Through scrutiny of institutional and DATdocumentation and meetings with staff theaudit team was able to confirm that theUniversity College fully engages with externalreference points and makes valuable use of theoutcomes of this engagement.

Student representation at operationaland institutional level

70 The SED identified a student-centred culturewhich places a strong emphasis on studentsatisfaction and input. Opportunities for studentrepresentation are available at institutional andcourse levels. The Student Representation Policysets out key principles including stating the valueplaced on informal methods for resolution ofproblems. Care is taken by the institution in itsplanning to consult with students and this isrecognised and commented upon in the SWS.For example, students have recently beeninvolved in revising the complaints procedureand the disciplinary procedures.

71 Research students are represented throughthe RDC and the faculty boards. TheInternational Students Committee has

representatives on the SU Council. The auditteam heard that student representation at thepartner colleges has improved recently andaction plans are in place to progress this activity.

72 At programme level students haverepresentatives on course committees. Minutesindicate consideration of student matters at thislevel and also in departmental and faculty boards.

73 The SU is active in representing studentsand each faculty has appointed an SU liaisonperson who is responsible, as part of a generalliaison and contact role, for informing facultyofficers of the names of representatives. Thiswas seen by the students as useful in helpingthe student representation system to functionwell. However, the audit team heard that the SUhad experienced some problems in identifyingstudent representatives in some faculties.

74 The audit team found that the take up andeffectiveness of student representation variesbetween faculties. Students in Design andLeisure and Tourism reported that they were wellrepresented, however, students in ASSHexpressed the view that they were not wellinformed about student representationopportunities. In this faculty student problems,particularly with student parents, in relation totimetabling had been raised through a petitionand highlighted in the SWS, but at the time ofthe audit there had been no response (seeparagraph 168). Overall, although studentsreported many examples of positive workingwith staff, for example, through the secondmentof an SU officer to the SCPE to work on theretention project addressing attendance.

75 The audit team found that the institution'sclaim to have a student-centred organisationand culture was confirmed in comments fromstaff, students and documentation. Goodpractice was reflected through effectivecollaboration and consultation with studentsand the helpfulness and accessibility ofacademic, administrative and support staff. Theone small reservation mentioned by SU officersto the team was the lack of representation onthe Planning Board. The view of the team isthat this does not adversely affect therepresentation of students as ample evidence


page 15

was provided through documentation and inmeetings that students were involved in keyplanning initiatives (for example, thedevelopment of a new campus site).

Feedback from students, graduatesand employers

76 The collection of feedback from studentstake place on an annual basis through the SES,which has been designed by external consultantswith input from staff and students from theinstitution. Two surveys had been completed bythe external consultants prior to the audit and inthe last survey questionnaires were sent to bothUniversity College and collaborative partnerstudents. Survey results are distributed tofaculties and administrative departments and theresponses are tracked by the Student SatisfactionSteering Group and Planning Board.

77 The University College uses the SES to helpreview the structure and delivery of courses.Staff in student service roles see the SES as aneffective tool in measuring performance atinstitutional, course and subject levels.

78 The audit team heard that studentsperceive feedback mechanisms as positive, andin meetings they commented on differingforms of feedback including meetings withstaff, student representative meetings andinformal contact with academic staff. Studentstold the team that concerns raised in theseways were commonly resolved rapidly. Studentsgenerally felt well informed about module andcourse changes, although they commented onthe different approaches to module and coursefeedback between faculties. In addition, theteam was told that faculty annual monitoringinvolved student representatives and feedbackgiven at the first faculty board of the yearproved useful in understanding any changes.

79 Graduates and employers are involved incurriculum development through validationprocesses, professional networks and links tocourses. In addition, the audit team sawevidence that the work of the Business andCommunity Working Party shares good practiceon working with employers and is developingfurther employer links. Graduate and employer

contributions were found to be useful indeveloping teaching, assignments and newcourses such as the BA (Hons) Air Transportwith Commercial Pilot Training. The teamfound that involvement with employers wasstrong in design and tourism in a variety ofways including live projects and the use of part-time visiting lecturers, some of whom weresenior managers in larger companies.

80 The audit team was satisfied that feedbackfrom students, graduates and employers wasmaking a positive contribution to the assuranceand enhancement of quality and standards.

Progression and completion statistics

81 At the time of the audit visit the UniversityCollege had significantly strengthened itscapacity to generate and disseminate statisticalinformation for academic and managerialpurposes. In 2002 the University Collegeestablished a Planning Unit within itsManagement Information Services (MIS)Department with line managementaccountability to the Deputy Director(Planning). In 2003 an Academic InformationCoordinator was appointed whoseresponsibilities include the collection,organisation and presentation of theperformance data required for the publicationof TQI. These arrangements are consistent withthe University College's published InformationStrategy 2003-2008 which sets the goal ofefficiently producing agreed sets of data reportsnecessary to support decision-making.

82 The MIS Department collectscomprehensive data on student admissions,progression and attainment and makes theseavailable in a variety of ways including theUniversity College's intranet service. Statistics areavailable on progression within programmesand across year groups for students at theUniversity College and those studying for itsqualifications at partner colleges. Regular reportsare made to Senate in which student admissionsand progression are monitored and profiled interms of entry qualifications, ethnicity, genderand disability, among other dimensions.Following a suggestion made in the 2002


page 16

continuation audit report the Planning Unit alsoannually reports a range of teaching andlearning performance indicators benchmarkedagainst those of a comparator group of sixselected universities and against HigherEducation Statistics Agency (HESA) norms.Broadly, these data demonstrate that while theUniversity College awards a lower proportion ofFirst class honours than is typical across thesector, it either matches or betters itscomparators, and its HESA benchmarks, in termsof access indicators, continuation rates, theproportion of entrants obtaining degrees,employment indicators and in the recruitmentof disabled students.

83 Student progression and attainment dataare made available for each level of the AR&Eprocess. The range of data provided todepartments and faculties, and available to staffon the MIS website, is substantial andappropriate. However, teaching staff reported tothe audit team that data were not alwayspresented to them in forms that they found usefulat programme or module level. The SEDrecognised that there were still concerns aboutthe consistent use of data. The Senior Registrar'sreport to Senate on the AR&E process for 2003-04noted instances where the guidance on the useof data in the AR&E process could have beenbetter used, and recommended greaterincorporation of MIS data into reports in order toadd detail and aid evaluations. The Head of MISindicated to the team that a key objective was toassist faculties in the manipulation of the datathat were available. While noting the excellentrange and quality of the statistical informationprovided by MIS, and its effective use inmanaging the University College, the teamsupports the institution's recognition of thedesirability of its greater and more explicit use inAR&E reports and in supporting any consequentchanges to curriculum or assessment.

84 Notwithstanding the general need to usedata more fully, the audit team was able toidentify cases where the quality andcomprehensive nature of the statistical dataavailable within the University College hadenabled it to respond quickly and effectively to

trends or patterns that needed attention. Forexample, imaginative use of available dataplayed an important part in the initiation of theUniversity College's Student Retention Project in2003 and will allow it to monitor the effects,particularly following the restructuring of yearone of most undergraduate programmes. Asthe SED pointed out, good statisticalinformation allowed the institution toinvestigate and continue to monitor anapparent link between ethnicity andprogression, and to respond rapidly in 2004 todisappointing retention and progression rateswithin a new FD. The team is able to confirmthat the quality and range of statistics producedby the University College make a significantcontribution to the management of quality andthe monitoring of standards.

Assurance of the quality of teaching staff, appointment,appraisal and reward

85 The University College has a clearly statedHuman Resources (HR) Strategy which is fullyconsistent with its strategic aims and otherpolicies. The most recent version of the HRStrategy derives from a thorough evaluation ofthe previous one and shows a strongcommitment to recruiting high-quality staff, forinstance, through the use of recruitmentincentives and selection procedures. The SEDstated that 'fitness for purpose' is the main featureof the institution's recruitment policy and,through meetings with staff and scrutiny of HRprocedures, the audit team was able to establishthat teaching capability is an important feature inthe selection and interview process, including apresentation by candidates for teaching positionsto existing teaching staff members.

86 On appointment, an induction scheme,which has recently been redesigned, supportsnew staff and for teaching staff includes anopportunity for peer observation. The mostrecent Investors in People (IiP) report confirmedthat staff regard induction as being of valueand high quality. All newly appointed teachingstaff who do not hold a teaching qualification,are required to undertake the University


page 17

College's Postgraduate Certificate (PgCert) inLearning and Teaching in HE. There are alsoopportunities for staff at partner colleges toundertake this award.

87 A career progression policy has beenimplemented which is consistent with theUniversity College's strategic aims. The auditteam learned that teaching excellence has beenused as one of the criteria for the award of anumber of teaching fellows, senior teachingfellows and personal professorships. Teachingfellows are able to pursue personal projects thatlead to the development of teaching andlearning, and the team noted a range ofactivities undertaken as a result of these posts,including development of content and coursematerials for the VLE.

88 Arrangements for staff appraisals areclearly laid out in the appraisal handbook andthe SED noted that progress has been made inaddressing the 2002 continuation auditsuggestion that the University College keepsunder review its capacity to deliver appraisals toall staff. As a result, two faculties have widenedthe definition of appraisers to increase thenumber of staff to potentially act in this role.However, one group of staff told the audit teamthat they had not been appraised for 20months (see also paragraph 171), and recordsshowed that in one faculty fewer than half of allstaff had an appraisal in 2003-04. The teamadvises the University College to considermeasures to ensure that the policy on appraisalis consistently applied across the institution.

89 The audit team found in proceduraldocuments and minutes of meetings thatequality of opportunity is a clearly embeddedprinciple that is promoted through policies andstrategies for working with staff. The institutionhas gained 'exemplar status' for its RaceEquality Policy and Action Plan and is alsoapproved under the 'Positive about DisabledPeople' scheme.

90 The audit team concluded that thepolicies and systems for appointment, retentionand reward were clearly framed and had thesupport of staff.

Assurance of the quality of teachingthrough staff support and development

91 There is a comprehensive StaffDevelopment Policy which is informed by andcontributes to the HR Strategy. The SED statedthat the University College regards as aparticular strength its 'provision and uptake of acomprehensive and inclusive range of staffdevelopment and support mechanisms'. TheSDC is the institution-wide forum for policysetting with regard to staff development, andfor monitoring the effectiveness of thedevelopment opportunities. The recent IiP re-accreditation report noted that 'planning oftraining and development is very effective'.

92 SCPE is the institution's central service fortraining and development of all staff. It publishesannually a Staff and Professional DevelopmentHandbook which lists a large range of workshopsand seminars, such as those to enable teachingstaff to make better use of the VLE and tosupport research student supervisors. The auditteam found that take-up of the events arrangedby SCPE was extensive. Staff from partner FEcolleges are also encouraged to participate inthese activities, although there are problemswith their availability. In response, the UniversityCollege has created a fund to enable the 'buying'of teaching cover at FE partners to allow therelease of staff. SCPE delivers a PgCert Learningand Teaching in HE which is compulsory for allnew staff who do not hold a teachingqualification. This qualification hadaccreditation from the Institute for Learningand Teaching in Higher Education (ILTHE) andmembership of the ILTHE was encouraged. The benefits of membership of the successororganisation to the ILTHE, the Higher EducationAcademy, are currently being considered by theUniversity College.

93 Faculties and departments also arrangetheir own, subject-focused, developmentactivities and there is evidence of a strongcommitment to the development of staff at alllevels. For instance, one faculty sets aside aperiod in each week to enable staff to engagein development activities.


page 18

94 Staff development activity is monitored ingreat detail by the SDC, and the participationof University College and partner college staff isto be reported in the new PSR process.

95 A peer observation scheme is in place,although the institution has concerns about itscurrent ability, through central administration, tomonitor the level of activity. The audit team wastold that implementation of peer observationactivity varied from faculty to faculty, and fromdepartment to department. The team learned ofsome examples where departments hadformulated a policy on peer observation whichfocused on team teaching activities, and thatsome of this activity had resulted inenhancements to teaching and learning,through the observation of good practice.However, in other cases, it appeared that staffwere left to arrange peer observation in an adhoc manner and the team was of the view thatthe present system could not be relied on tosupport staff in the identification of goodpractice. Conceivably, it could lead to staffobserving and modelling bad practice, and it didnot encourage the transfer of good practice fromone faculty to another. The team recognises thedesirability of the University College ensuringthat the peer observation system works in a waythat will retain the flexibility of the currentsystem but will enable greater dissemination ofdemonstrable good practice between faculties.

96 In spite of some concern over peerobservation, the audit team concluded that theUniversity College has a strong commitment toenhancing staff capability through support anddevelopment activities, and there is goodpractice in the activities of the SCPE whichencourages the extensive take up of staffdevelopment opportunities.

Assurance of the quality of teachingdelivered through distributed anddistance methods

97 At the time of the audit the UniversityCollege was not teaching significant numbers ofstudents through distance-learning methods. Twostudents were registered for the part-timedistance-learning mode of the MSc Tourism

Development and Management and fewer than adozen for a programme provided by the Instituteof Wood Science. The audit team examinedexamples of the materials provided to thesestudents and of the assessment of their work andthese appeared satisfactory. The UniversityCollege was about to review this provision in thelight of the recently revised Code of Practice,Section 2: Collaborative provision and flexible anddistance learning (including e-learning).

98 The 182 part-time students currentlyregistered for elements of the BuckinghamshireBusiness School's Integrated ManagementProgramme at the Fachhochschule Osnabrück,Germany, and at the Számalk Open BusinessSchool, Budapest, Hungary, were being taughtby local staff on a franchised programme usinglearning materials provided by University Collegestaff and supported through regular visits byappropriate Business School staff who were alsoinvolved in the assessment of student work. Thesetwo links were in the process of being phasedout. The University College had conducted areview of this provision in 2003 using an externalassessor. A number of recommendations toimprove the level of contact and support fromthe University College had been made includingimproving access for the overseas students andstaff to the institution's on-line library resources.The recommendations had received appropriateformal and practical responses from theBuckinghamshire Business School.

99 The University College has significantnumbers of part-time students registered for itsprogrammes and while these involve regularattendance by the students, it was clear thatthe development of the use of the VLE couldprovide an important source of support forthese students. The growing use of the VLE waswell-monitored and supported by 'champions'in each faculty and by the recent appointmentof two staff to Senior Teaching Fellowships withresponsibility for developing the use of the VLEin teaching, learning and assessment.

100 The audit team concluded that theUniversity College had a strong commitment toassuring the quality of distributed and distance-learning provision.


page 19

Learning support resources

101 The provision of learning support resourcesis complicated by a number of factors. Firstly, theUniversity College is spread across three campussites: the main campus is in the centre of HighWycombe; the Wellesbourne Campus is a mileaway on the edge of the town and the ChalfontSt Giles Campus some 12 miles away. Secondly,many of the programmes taught at the UniversityCollege, particularly those in the Faculties ofDesign and Technology, and to a lesser extentHealth Studies, are resource-intensive, requiringworkshop space, complex equipment andmachinery as well as the application of rapidlychanging computer-based technologies. Thirdly,the University College hopes in the medium termto move much of its provision to an entirely newsite in High Wycombe and is, therefore, facedwith choices about maintenance and capitalinvestment on current sites. The quality oflearning resources had been approved by the2002 continuation audit, which pointed out that'measures to safeguard and develop the learningenvironment are being vigorously pursued', andhad been judged commendable in the threemost recent subject reviews during 2003-04.

102 The Learning Resources Strategy wasdeveloped in 2003 following an internal reviewof the existing teaching and learninginfrastructure that had indicated areas whereimprovements were desirable. The LearningResources Strategy is informed by a CollectionDevelopment Strategy which provides aframework for the development of library andICT provision and by the institution's overallTeaching, Learning and Assessment Strategy. Inaddition, each of the six faculties has its owncustomised Learning Resources Strategy.Oversight of the implementation of thesestrategies lies with the Planning Board whichreceives regular reports from the LearningResources Consultative Group and theInformation Strategy Steering Group (ISSG).

103 Day-to-day provision of learning resourcesis managed by the Department of Learning andInformation Services (LIS) but a good deal ofspecialist technical and workshop provision isorganised within the faculties, particularly the

Faculties of Design and Technology. An annualLIS report is produced, which takes account ofstudent views expressed within the SES, and isconsidered by AAC as part of its role in theAR&E process. Confirmation of appropriateresource provision is central to the validation ofprogrammes both within the institution andthose provided collaboratively by its partners.The audit team was able to confirm from theminutes and other documentation it reviewed,and from what it heard, that these relativelycomplex arrangements for provision,monitoring and reporting worked well and thatthe University College was able to respond toany needs or problems that arose.

104 The High Wycombe and ChalfontCampuses each have a Learning ResourcesCentre (LRC) while the Wellesbourne Campusprovides a satellite library open during teachinghours. The LRCs are open for extensive hoursduring term. These hours are extended furtherwhen major assignment or dissertation datesapproach. Self-service book borrowing isavailable in each of the LRCs as are print andreprographic services. Each campus is linked tothe computing network from open-access areasand from PCs provided by the faculties. Somenetwork points are provided in studentresidences, including satellite broadband accessto all the student halls at Chalfont St Giles.External access to the University Collegenetwork is available to all students and staffincluding those at partner institutions.

105 The annual SES have indicated that amajority of students were satisfied with theLRCs except for design students on theWellesbourne Campus where there had beendissatisfaction with the range of books availablein the satellite library. The SES have alsoindicated approval of the technical andworkshop resources provided by the faculties.However, the SWS described concerns amongart and design students about access to, andthe quality of, equipment and workshop spaceand the availability of technicians. Theseconcerns were also expressed by some of thestudents met by the audit team. The UniversityCollege indicated it was aware of thesecriticisms but pointed out that art, design and


page 20

photographic resources had recently beenupgraded through substantial investment andthat access to workshop space was nowcentrally coordinated. The evidence obtainedduring the DAT of design programmessupported the University College's view that itsphysical resources are sufficient and support thehighly specialised nature of some of thefurniture making and conservation studies.

106 The minutes of the meetings of relevantboards of studies and the most recent AR&Ereports demonstrated that the student concernswere heard and considered by the UniversityCollege, if not always as quickly remedied asthe students might wish. To some extent theproblems of access to resources voiced by thestudents reflected a wider ongoing difficulty facedon the main High Wycombe Campus in thetimely production of timetables for the use ofteaching space (see paragraphs 140,168, and176). All student groups met by the audit teamexpressed varying degrees of frustration withthe accuracy and timeliness of personaltimetables. The University College was aware ofthese difficulties.

107 While taking into consideration theconcerns of students, the audit team is satisfied that the level of learning support resourcesprovided by the University College isappropriate to its provision.

Academic guidance, support andsupervision

108 Arrangements for academic support maybe carried out by individual personal tutors orcombined as part of broader academic tutoringcoordinated by lead academic tutors andsupported by skills tutors based in each faculty.These arrangements are set out in a series ofpolicy and guidance documents including theAcademic Tutor Policy. Staff understanding ofthese roles is supported by staff developmentopportunities and by the Academic TutorForum which helps to share good practiceacross the University College. The institutionaloverview of academic support arrangements ismaintained through the TLC which is able tomonitor the effectiveness of faculty

arrangements through faculty representatives,as well as reviewing faculty AR&E reports.

109 Academic tutor arrangements have aparticular focus on the support of first-yearstudents including the development of studyskills and managing the transition to HE throughspecified tutorial arrangements. Second-yearstudents receive support from a level (year)tutor or personal tutor. Third-year students aresupported by their dissertation tutor. Faculties arerequired to identify their arrangements and theseare described in the student handbooks. In Designthere is a close link between students and staffthrough studio-based teaching and learning. InLeisure and Tourism, first-year students havetimetabled sessions with their appointed academictutor. In Health Studies students were aware oftheir academic tutors and commented on thecomplications, when on placement, of contactingtutors who are not based at the placement site.

110 The arrangements for academic supportand guidance are informed by the work andresearch on retention which is in progress. Thishas identified key aspects of support for studentsincluding induction, the introduction of year-longmodules for first-year students, and the pilotingof other new modules designed to improvestudent attendance and engagement. Studentsinformed the audit team that they were aware ofinnovations to the curriculum and mentionedthat attention to the frequency assessment washelping them to learn better and monitor theiracademic progress. The team recognised goodpractice arising from the student retentionproject, in particular, its multifaceted action linesand use of performance indicators.

111 Research students are supported bysupervisors and the Central Research Unit.Research methods seminars during the initialperiod of registration provide guidance onstudy and in the Faculty of Leisure and Tourismthere is a one-day induction event for allresearch students. Research students can alsorequest presentation skills training andrehearsals for vivas. The audit team confirmedthat arrangements for research students haveaddressed the Code of practice, Section 1:Postgraduate research programmes.


page 21

112 Induction arrangements were found bystudents to be satisfactory. Students commentedon examples of good practice such as initial non-assessed group projects in Design, undertakenby all years, which helped students to makefriends across the course and understand thedemands of the second and third years of study.Students in Tourism and Health Studies foundinduction generally helpful as it provided a usefulfoundation to the first stages of study.

113 The SED suggested that the institution hasa 'culture of accessibility' with an open-doorpolicy for staff availability. It was reported to theaudit team that this system was under review inview of other changes such as the introductionof year-long modules and skills tutors.

114 The audit team learned that students at alllevels of study view these arrangementspositively and generally find academic staffhelpful in support of their studies. Theyappreciate the size of the institution and findthe open-door arrangements for accessing staffhelpful in giving them quick responses toproblems on assessment or other aspects ofprogress. Students' comments indicate thatlevels of support are not always consistentbetween faculties but overall support is viewedas appropriate. International students met bythe team commented on the friendliness ofacademic tutors and were positive in their viewsof academic guidance and support.

115 The audit team observed that manystudents were encouraged to undertake workplacements, and that there were detailed policiesand procedures for the management ofplacements. In meetings with students it wasconfirmed that these placements commonlyconferred many benefits, and some studentsmade links with employers that led to firm offersof employment. However, the team also notedthat provision of information for placementproviders could be improved (see also paragraph136). Accordingly, the team recognises thedesirability of the University College reviewingpractice and policy for placement learning toensure that all placement providers for studentsundertaking work-based learning required by aprogramme are suitably prepared, whether or

not the placement is arranged by the studentor the University College.

116 The audit team found that academicguidance is helpful to students, and studentsalso commented on the effectiveness of opendays in giving a good understanding of theacademic support context.

117 Student Services include the careersservice, counselling service, disabilities supportservices, student money advice and thechaplaincy. Student Services are based at theHigh Wycombe and Chalfont Campuses andmaintain a presence on the WellesbourneCampus. Information is set out in the StudentHandbook which combines University Collegeinformation with faculty and course information.

118 Students at the partner colleges areentitled to use the support services available toall University College students. The audit teamheard that disabilities' advisers visit the partnercolleges to make sure appropriate mechanismsare in place for the partnership students. TheCareers Service has worked in liaison withpartner colleges to support perceived studentneeds. The careers website provides subject andindustry sector-specific advice and links, as wellas a Student Curriculum Vitae Service allowingstudents to register details on-line.

119 Personal support and guidance is alsoprovided by the SU through the Advice andRepresentation Centre (ARC). The ARC providesa confidential and independent advice servicewhich covers, among other things, concernsrelating to finance, health, academic appeals andinternational support. Students reported thatthey were well informed of the different roles ofARC and the institution's Student Services. ARC isseen as able to provide quick advice from astudent perspective and offers additionalrepresentation to students with problems.

120 Research student support includes thefaculty research officers and the CentralResearch Unit which provides additionalpastoral care to supplement researchsupervision. Each faculty has in place anInternational Tutor who is a member of theInternational Tutors Group.


page 22

121 Staff met by the audit team commentedon the approach to student service provisionwhich starts before entry and continues withcareers advice after graduation. The pre-enrolment booklet, involvement with schools,and the website advice on job sectors related tofaculty subjects support this position. Feedbackon open days and discussion of pre-inductionsummer schools suggests that these aresuccessful mechanisms in supporting studentsat the start of their study period, helping togive a clear idea of the demands of student life.

122 The Disabilities Steering Group has been setup since the publication of the Code of Practice,Section 3: Students with disabilities and this has ledto modifications to services to support disabledstudents. The audit team heard that accessibilityof the campus sites is checked through regularinspections from the local authority.

123 The University College regards thesearrangements as effective and has used the SESand annual student performance data toestablish that the support is enabling studentgroups with different learning needs tosucceed. Results from the SES have led to anumber of changes including, for example,amendment of the administration of thehardship fund. In addition, Student Servicesconducts an AR&E review which engages withnational benchmarking and external bodies andit is also reviewed for effectiveness by amember of the AAC. This AAC review processhas also led to changes in working practicewith partner colleges, the expansion of webservices and additional support for staff indealing with students' mental health difficulties.

124 Arrangements for personal support areprovided through a partnership between facultiesand central services, mainly through StudentServices. The University College also sees theseservices as being key to the 'student-centredculture' of the institution. The establishment of thisculture was confirmed by students in meetingswith the audit team with students reporting thatmost tutors pay close attention to individualneeds. This, along with the proactive institutionalsupport listed elsewhere in this section, wasregarded by the team as good practice.

125 The University College is progressingimplementation of Personal Development Plans(PDP). A decision has been taken that allstudents will have access to PDP. A number oftools are available but the use andimplementation of these is left to the discretionof each of the faculties. The audit team notedsome inconsistencies in the understanding ofthe PDP implementation plans by staff in theDATs. The team recognises the desirability ofthe University College in ensuring greaterclarity and consistency, while allowing somemeasured diversity, in the rolling out of studentPDP across the institution.

Collaborative provision

126 At the time of the audit around 870students, a little over 10 per cent of theUniversity College's total numbers, were studyingat partner institutions in the UK. The majority ofthese, 492 students, were registered for full-timediplomas or undergraduate degrees, includingFDs. The remaining students were registered forpart-time diplomas and degrees, or for part-timepostgraduate, mainly professional, qualifications.The majority of students were studying at thefour FE colleges that the University Collegeregards as its 'strategic partners': Amersham andWycombe College, Aylesbury College, BerkshireCollege of Agriculture and East Berkshire College.In addition, 182 mature students were registeredpart-time at two overseas providers, the SzámalkOpen Business School in Hungary and theFachhochschule Osnabrück in Germany forelements of the Buckinghamshire BusinessSchool's Integrated Management Programme:the Certificate in Management, the Diploma inManagement Studies and the Master's inBusiness Administration.

127 Historically the University College hasestablished partnerships of three kinds; thosewith FE colleges in the region and designed topromote access and progression to HE; thosewith colleges both within the region andbeyond it with provision in the disciplinaryareas where the University College has arecognised excellence, notably in furniturestudies; and thirdly, partnerships with two localcolleges and three abroad delivering taught


page 23

programmes supported by theBuckinghamshire Business School.

128 The development of the institution's newStrategic Plan (2002-2007) was accompaniedby a refinement of its Collaborative ProvisionPolicy that was approved by Senate inNovember 2004. The primary focus is onbuilding strong relationships within theimmediate region of the University College inorder to encourage increased participation inHE, to assist structured progression from FE toHE, and to plan and develop new provision.This is the basis of the alliances with the fourstrategic partners. In addition, the UniversityCollege is currently developing further regionalstrategic links with Uxbridge and Bracknell andWokingham colleges. The institution iswithdrawing, or has withdrawn, fromcollaborative provision previously undertakenwith non-regional partners in the UK.

129 The August 2002 the QAA continuationaudit report commended the UniversityCollege's approach to managing quality andsafeguarding standards within its regionalpartnerships, but suggested an inconsistencybetween the then current international andcollaborative provision policy statements. At thetime the international policy indicated thepossibility of additional overseas partnershipswhile the collaborative policy limited these tothe maintenance of 'long-standing relationships'with overseas providers. Subsequentdevelopment of policy has restricted anyexpansion of overseas collaboration to activitiesthat support the University College's strategicplan. Consequently, although it continues toencourage a variety of international links andcontacts short of the provision of its awards,the University College has negotiated thephasing out of its joint teaching ofmanagement and business administration inHungary and Germany. Appropriate exitstrategies have been put in place.

130 The policies and procedures that ensurequality and standards where partners provideprogrammes validated by the University Collegeare detailed and very clearly articulated. Clearpolicy guidance is supported by detailed

memoranda of agreement, operations manualsand annual schedules governing the approvaland revalidation of awards and the monitoringof teaching, resources, and student progress andattainment in the partner institutions. Theoverarching principle is that quality managementarrangements are similar to those applied withinthe University College. The arrangements inplace were consistent with the recently updatedCode of practice, Section 2: Collaborativeprovision and flexible and distributed learning(including e-learning). Regular overview isprovided by the CPMG which hasrepresentatives from the partner colleges andfaculties and is chaired by the Assistant Directorfor Regional Development. Strategic issues areconsidered at annual bilateral joint boardsattended by governors and heads ofinstitutions. Detailed management of awards,including external examining, is conducted atfaculty level and staff from partner colleges attenddepartmental and faculty boards. Managers ofHE provision from the colleges are also activeon other University College committees such asthe AAC. The AAC also considers AR&E reportsfrom the faculties on modules and programmesdelivered by the partners, and also an annual self-audit report from the HE Manager in eachcollege. University College staff are involved inthe annual process of setting assignments forstudents in the partner colleges and in themoderation of assessed work. Operational day-to-day management of all these links andprocesses is overseen by the University College'sCPU headed by the Collaborative ProvisionManager. Staff from the partner collegesconfirmed that the CPU provided an accessiblesource of guidance and support.

131 The formal structure for managing andsupporting provision in the partner colleges isaugmented by a wide range of other contactsbetween staff at all levels. In both 2004 and 2003review workshops for all staff involved in thepartnerships were held at Missenden Abbey.These allowed discussion of detailed and minorprocedural problems. In addition, the audit teamsaw and heard evidence of a wide variety ofother contacts in areas such as staff development,subject and field level planning meetings, special


page 24

lectures attended by students and staff, informalmentoring and inductions of new partner stafffocused on resources available in the UniversityCollege. The team learnt of a number ofoccasions in recent years where problems hadarisen in the teaching of collaborativeprogrammes or in their resourcing. There wasevidence that the substantial formal and informallinks in place were able to respond quickly andappropriately. Students on collaborativeprogrammes at the partner colleges confirmed tothe team that they were aware of being studentsof the University College, and their entitlementsto use its learning resources and welfare systemseven though distance and time may preventthem from doing so frequently.

132 The care with which policy and procedurefor the management of collaborative provisionhad been constructed and the strength andeffectiveness of links at all levels with strategicpartners are regarded by the audit team asfeatures of good practice.

Section 3: The auditinvestigations: discipline audit trails

Discipline audit trails

Tourism, transport and travel133 The scope of the DAT comprised thefollowing provision in the Faculty of Leisure and Tourism:

BA (Hons) Air Transport with Pilot Training

BA (Hons) Air Transport with Commercial PilotTraining

BA (Hons) Airline and Airport Management

BA (Hons) Air Travel Management

HND Air Travel Management

FD Airline and Airport Operations (from 2004-05)

BA (Hons) International Tourism

BA (Hons) International Tourism withConference Management

BA (Hons) International Tourism with Air Travel

MSc Tourism Development and Management

BA (Hons) Travel and Tourism Management

BA (Hons) Travel and Tourism Managementwith Air Travel

BA (Hons) Travel and Tourism Management withConference Management

HND Travel and Tourism Management.

134 The DSED contained an AR&E report for2003-04 for the field of tourism and the MScTourism Development and Management, theinternal SED for a pilot PSR in 2005 in theDepartment of Tourism and programmespecifications for each programme. Progressionand completion data supplied by the PlanningUnit were incorporated in the AR&E reportswith an evaluative commentary. However, thepilot PSR SED was more descriptive in nature.

135 Programme specifications followed theinstitution's template and were clear andcomprehensive, taking account of appropriateexternal reference points, including the Subjectbenchmark statement for hospitality, leisure, sportand tourism, and for the BA (Hons) Air Transportwith Commercial Pilot Training the requirementsof the pilot's licence issuing bodies. The auditteam noted that they also reflected the principlesof the FHEQ and of the Foundation Degreequalification benchmark, although the names ofthese awards and some of the terms weresometimes used incorrectly. The institutionrequired reference to these in programmespecifications but the team noted a number ofinstances where requirements were not followed.The team noted that the design and content ofthe programmes was consistent with the aim ofenhancing student employability.

136 Institution-wide discussions on mappingthe Code of practice to University Collegeprocedures had taken place and the results ofthis were communicated to departmental staff.The audit team noted that the systems andprocedures for programmes generally reflectedthe precepts of the relevant sections of theCode, although there was a possibility that partof the section of the Code in relation toplacement learning may not necessarily be met


page 25

fully. In a meeting institutional staff told theteam that students on the BA (Hons) Travel andTourism Management programme had to findtheir own placement, with this being approvedby the Department prior to commencement,and a student on this programme confirmedthat this was the case. However, theinstitution's own Placement Learning Policystates that 'where a faculty secures a placementon behalf of a student' it is the responsibility ofthe faculty to ensure that placement providersare aware of their responsibilities. The team wasof the view that the policy did not ensure thatplacement providers would be sufficientlyinformed of their responsibilities where studentson this type of programme find their ownplacement (see also paragraph 115).

137 The audit team saw evidence of theeffective operation of internal mechanisms inthe approval of new programmes, although theinstitutional requirements for the provision ofinformation in validation documentation werenot always fully met.

138 The audit team had access to recentexternal examiners' reports for all programmes.Reports are considered by the Department and aresponse is sent to each of the externalexaminers. The reports are also considered at theDepartmental Board and reflected in aninstitutional summary report compiled by theAcademic Registry. In general, reports are highlypositive and the responses showed that therehad been a full engagement with the externalexaminers' comments. There have beenproblems with the timely submission of someexaminers' reports, but these have beenaddressed. The team saw several examples ofexternal examiners contributing to discussion ofproposed changes to programmes. The minutesof departmental and faculty committees showedthat there was serious and detailed discussion ofrelevant issues. Even where extremecircumstances had necessitated the appointmentof a new external examiner very quickly, therewas evidence that the institution's publishedprocedures had been followed. Overall, the teamwas able to confirm the effective operation ofthe external examiner system.

139 There is a clear assessment policy which isapplied in all programmes, articulates with theCode of practice, Section 6: Assessment of studentsand is appropriate to the nature of theprogrammes. Examples of assessed workreviewed by the audit team met the standardsdefined in the programme specifications withclear evidence of internal verification of marks. Inall cases, the standard of student achievementwas found to be appropriate to the level of theprogrammes and their position within the FHEQ.

140 The student handbooks for the programmescontained much helpful information and studentsexpressed the view that they were useful.Students were generally satisfied with theinformation made available to them and feltinformed about programme and assessmentrequirements and their own performance andprogress. However, they were dissatisfied with thelateness of provision of timetables and the timetaken to gain feedback on some assessments (seealso paragraphs 106, 168).

141 Students have access to appropriatelearning resources, with library provision at boththe Wellesbourne and main campus sites andaccess to a range of appropriate on-lineresources. The information technology resourcesoffered by the Faculty complement thoseprovided by the institution. Some members ofstaff are using the VLE to support teaching andlearning and students value this. The UniversityCollege has acknowledged that more needs tobe done to encourage greater use of the VLEacross the institution and in its FE partners.

142 Academic and personal support is providedin a number of ways as students progressthrough their programmes. Undergraduatestudents are allocated a personal tutor and intheir first year meet with them once a week.Second-year students expressed the view thattimetabled tutorials were not a required featureof their programme, but they had access to apersonal tutor if requested. Third-yearundergraduates are allocated a dissertationtutor. The SU Advice and Representation Centrewas appreciated by students as a source ofreferral to faculties or specialist staff forassistance in academic and non-academic


page 26

matters, including counselling, maths supportand essay writing skills. The University College'sretention project has been supported by theDepartment with a pilot of the attendancemonitoring system positively received by bothstaff and students. There is evidence that theplanned actions are leading to improvement inthe retention and progression of students.

143 Approaches to gaining student feedbackat module level vary from module to module.Although staff maintain that students prefer avariety of methods to collect feedback, themultiplicity of methods does not appear to beinformed by a single set of values and there is a possibility that opportunities for highlightingissues which affect a range of modules may be missed. Students appreciated theapproachability of most staff and felt that theirconcerns could often be dealt with informally.Nevertheless, there is a formal Faculty StudentStaff Liaison Committee and evidence of issuesraised being addressed effectively. Students arealso represented on the Faculty Board. Tourism,travel and transport students felt thatparticipation in the SES was worthwhile, withinformation being provided to them onchanges arising from the survey.

144 Overall, the audit team was satisfied thatthe standard of student achievement in theprogrammes covered by the DAT is appropriateto the titles of the programmes and theirlocation within the FHEQ; and the quality ofthe learning opportunities is suitable for theprogrammes of study in tourism, transport andtravel leading to the named awards.

Furniture studies and fine art145 The provision included in the DAT forFurniture Studies and Fine Art is part of theportfolio of courses in the Faculty of Design and included:

MA Furniture Design and Technology

MA Furniture Conservation and Restoration

BA (Hons) Furniture Conservation and Restoration

BA (Hons) Furniture Design and Craftsmanship

BA (Hons) Contemporary Furniture and RelatedProduct Design

BA (Hons) Applied Furniture Studies

HND Furniture Studies

BA (Hons) Fine Art.

146 The BA (Hons) Applied Furniture Studies,which has been available to provide level 3progression for HND entrants, is closing shortlyand has revised the final year of teaching forthe remaining students. Other provision isbeing made available to allow students fromHNDs to progress to another appropriate finalyear of degree study.

147 The DSED was set out as a brief overviewdocument supported by the Faculty AR&Ereport for 2003-04, course AR&E reports for2003-04 and the internal SED for a PSR offurniture in 2004-05. The overview documentbriefly described the aims of the provision andwas helpful in providing a very detailedindexing of the supporting reports.

148 Programme specifications were availablefor all the programmes of study in the DAT andmade reference to the FHEQ and Subjectbenchmark statement for art and design.Courses which were developed prior to thesubject benchmark have subsequently beenmodified with learning outcomes confirmed asappropriate. A familiarity with benchmarks wasevident in discussion with staff.

149 The main issues identified during subjectreview in October 1999 have led to thedevelopment of a set of core learning outcomes,the Faculty Qualifying Statements. These havebeen developed through the Faculty Teachingand Learning Working Group and usedeffectively in recent revalidations. Staff havecommented on the usefulness of this structurefor developing new modules and establishingparity between courses. Students confirmed agood understanding of the statements.

150 The Faculty Registrar has been active ingiving consideration to the Code of practice. Thishad led, for example, to a change in appointinglead external examiners from HE backgrounds towork, as part of small teams, with externalexaminers from commercial backgrounds.


page 27

151 Progression data are reviewed as part ofthe AR&E process. These show that studentprogression is generally satisfactory. Evidencefrom the course committee meetings and theAR&E reports indicated that the statisticalanalysis of student performance informeddecision-making.

152 There are many opportunities for staff andstudents to offer views on the courses. Thecourse committees are well attended by staffand show that student issues are resolved.Students reported that informal contact withstaff was often effective in addressing studentconcerns in a timely fashion. Coursecommittees and other staff-student contacts areeffective in involving students with the qualitymanagement of their courses. Students wereaware of the SES but were unable to identifychanges resulting from the surveys.

153 Staff are familiar with the AR&E processwhich forms a basis for action planning duringthe year. Module reports are produced bytutors bringing together analysis of studentperformance, student feedback and staffperspectives. Student feedback on modulesincludes qualitative comments which provideadditional detail on specific areas forenhancement. For instance, on the BA (Hons)Furniture Design and Craftsmanship studentscommented on the need for more writtenfeedback and this was then acted upon.

154 The furniture subject area has recentlypiloted the institution's PSR. Staff reported thatthis had engendered reflection on theperformance of the area and the need forbetter external promotion of the work of theDepartment to external audiences. Staff wereuncertain that the process as it stands hadadded value to existing review and evaluationmechanisms. Staff stated that they had not yethad a chance to feedback on the process toother colleagues across the institution.

155 A sample of external examiner reportsfollowed a common format which identifiedareas for consideration and indicated thedegree of improvement recommended.External examiners' reports, which were foundto be generally positive, are given consideration

within the AR&E process with responsesprepared by course leaders.

156 Examples of assessed work seen by theteam matched the programme specificationstandards. Faculty assessment criteria have beendeveloped alongside the generic learningoutcomes and assessment strategies are set outin the handbooks. The students reported thatassessment processes are well understood andthat additional advice on assessment of theirperformance was easily accessible to themthrough contact with tutors. Assessmentapproaches were explained as part of inductionand fine art students had found the discussionof assessment criteria on induction useful totheir understanding of marking.

157 Assessment weightings are agreed acrosscourses and these are clearly signalled tostudents. Marks are given as numbers,percentages or bandings which are then addedtogether to form a single number or lettergrade. In the BA (Hons) Furniture Conservationand Restoration a letter grade is given for thework as a whole, broadly derived from the lettergrades for each weighted criterion. The Facultymay wish to consider these small variances ofpractice of using both number and lettergrades. For example, the audit team discoveredthose students receiving letter-based marks aremore likely to have marks rounded up or downand this may affect the grade and subsequentlevel classifications of borderline students.

158 Resources feature regularly in coursecommittee meetings, evaluations and externalexaminer reports. The audit team formed theview that in the main the courses are effectivelyrun within the resources available. Concernsraised in the past in fine art had beensatisfactorily resolved with students. The SWShad drawn attention to the resources for designand there has been some student dissatisfactionevidenced in module feedback questionnaireson the BA (Hons) Furniture Design andCraftsmanship. The Faculty has recentlyproduced a Learning Resources Strategy 2005-08 and has a Faculty Computer ManagementGroup to give additional consideration tocomputing needs. The Faculty may wish to


page 28

consider further how, as part of generalresource planning, it engages with studentsmaking specific comments on feedbackconcerning resources.

159 The audit team was satisfied that thequality of learning opportunities available tostudents is suitable for programmes of studyleading to the named awards and that thestandard of student achievement in theprogrammes is appropriate to the titles of theawards and to their location within the FHEQ.

Sociology, criminology and policing160 The scope of the DAT comprised provisionwithin the field of sociology and criminology(including policing), delivered by theDepartment of Human Sciences, which issituated within the Faculty of ASSH. Themodules provided by the field contributed tofollowing honours degrees:

BSc (Hons) Criminology

BSc (Hons) Sociology

BSc (Hons) Policing

BSc (Hons) Criminology and Sociology

BSc (Hons) Sociology with Criminology.

161 Sociology or criminology can also betaken in combination with psychology either asa joint, major or minor subject. Social Policy isalso available as a minor subject withcriminology or sociology. Programmespecifications were provided for single honoursdegrees in each of the three core disciplines:criminology, sociology and policing, and forcriminology or sociology taken as joint, majorand minor routes in combined degrees.

162 Together these programmes recruited 62students in 2003-04. All were taught entirely onthe High Wycombe Campus of the UniversityCollege and none of the programmes wasdelivered by collaborative partners. In addition,a BA (Hons) Citizenship had recently beenapproved but had not recruited students at thetime of the audit.

163 The DSED produced for the DAT consistedof the most recent AR&E field report ofcriminology, sociology and policing for the

academic year 2003-04, together with thedocumentation recently prepared for a periodicreview of the programmes in the field which wasdue to take place early in 2005. The material forthe periodic review included a 20-page accountand evaluation of the programmes provided.The degrees in criminology and sociology hadlast been validated in 1998 and the BSc (Hons)Policing in 2001.

164 The programme specifications had allbeen revised in October 2004 in preparation forthe periodic review and included tables thatmapped the learning outcomes associated withthe 43 modules offered within the field. Theywere consistent with the FHEQ and had beendesigned to take account of the relevantbenchmark statements, principally those forsociology and for social policy andadministration. The BSc (Hons) Policing hadalso been developed in consultation with theWest Mercia Constabulary and the ThamesValley Police Service taking account of theirstandards for professional training. At the timeof the audit a benchmark statement forcriminology had not been published by QAAbut the specification had been drawn up in thelight of a draft statement produced by theBritish Society of Criminology.

165 A high proportion of the studentsrecruited to these programmes were from theregion and many combined their full-timestudies with paid employment or hadsignificant family responsibilities. A notablefeature of the recent history of theseprogrammes and the modules that comprisedthem had been changes designed to reducethe numbers of students who withdraw beforecompleting their degrees. While retention ratesin the University College compare well with thesector, in 2002-03 12 per cent of students inthe Department of Human Sciences withdrewincluding up to 25 per cent from some of theprogrammes examined here. The Departmenthad responded by playing a major part in theUniversity College's retention project includingusing one of its first-year modules as a pilot totest ways of enhancing student progression.The findings of the retention project hadpointed to the importance of varied and


page 29

appropriate assessment procedures, particularlyin the first year of an undergraduate degree.Largely as a consequence, for 2003-04, revisedassessment procedures had been approved for19 of the modules in this field. Additionally,from 2004-05 it was planned to convert all first-year modules to year-long rather thansemester-long formats in order toaccommodate the more frequent and formativeforms of assessment the retention project hadrecommended. It was clear to the audit teamthat these innovations reflected a proactiveengagement with the enhancement of teachingand learning methods. The documentationshowed that the external examiners were awareof and supported the changes being made.

166 The AR&E process was informed byprogression data provided by the MISDepartment. However, in 2004 these had notbeen made available until October and it wasnot clear to the audit team if significant usecould have been made of data in the reviewprocess. The Faculty had set up a workinggroup to examine the presentation and use ofstatistical information. The AR&E report for thefield included commentaries from convenors ofmodules which took account of the findings ofmodule feedback questionnaires completed bystudents. These commentaries variedconsiderably in length and in the aspects ofprovision they addressed. The AR&E report alsoconsidered comments from external examinersand included responses to any suggestions orcriticisms made. The team reviewed theexternal examiners' reports for the last threeyears and found in them overwhelmingapproval of the standards of student attainmentand the quality of the curriculum.

167 Examples of student work made availableto the audit team confirmed that, on occasion,work of a very high quality is produced,particularly among the student dissertations.Assessment methods were diverse, including onsome modules, a significant weighting given tostudent presentations. Plans for increasedemphasis on the development of skills werewell advanced as part of the introduction ofPDP. From 2005-06 a core first-year module

would focus particularly on group working,time management, independent research,reflection on personal change and othertransferable skills.

168 The quality of the programme and moduledocumentation provided to students was high.The students met by the audit team were clearabout coursework assignments andexaminations and the assessment criteria used.However, the students described some caseswhere assessment handbooks (in criminology)had been issued so late in a semester thatdeadlines had to be extended. The students alsoreported a case where the absence of a lectureron a level 2 module had meant no teaching wasprovided for several weeks. However, the mostsignificant concern of students at the time ofthe audit were delays within the ASSH in issuingcorrect student timetables at the beginning ofthe second semester. It was reported thattimetables were inaccurate, that times werealtered and rooms were changed withoutnotification or had been double-booked. Thestudents of the Faculty had organised a petitionwith the help of the SU. The academic staff metby the team confirmed this account andindicated that the Faculty had responded byappointing a timetable manager to deal withproblems which were mainly attributed to newtimetabling software. At the time of the audit itwas clear that senior management staff wereaware of the problems which had arisen as aconsequence of the timetabling delays andinaccuracies. The team recognises theadvisability of rapidly progressing solutions thatwere currently being planned.

169 All the teaching of these programmes tookplace on the High Wycombe site. The LRCprovided sufficient study space and access tocomputer terminals. A dedicated FacultyLibrarian sits on the Board of Studies for thesedegrees and communicates student concerns tothe LRC. Students' views on learning resourceswere monitored by module-level questionnairesand by the annual institutional SES, and at first-year level by special focus groups as part ofthe retention initiative. Student representativeswere members of the Board of Studies which


page 30

met three times a year. The documentationindicated that inadequate library stock hadbeen a regular student complaint. This difficultyhad been partly alleviated by specifying coretexts for popular modules and the greater useof on-line sources. A significant number ofjournals was available on-line and the moduleswithin the field were increasingly supported by material available in the VLE. Studentconcerns about uneven attendance by otherstudents had led to the development of anAttendance Support Strategy which was to beimplemented in 2005-06.

170 The documentation and the meetingswith students confirmed that the system ofacademic tutors worked well when needed.Students found the academic staff accessibleand were also ready to use the ARC and othersupport services.

171 Arrangements for mentoring those in theirfirst year of teaching and for peer reviewamong all staff were well-established. New staffwere required to take the PgCert in Learningand Teaching in Higher Education and therewas evidence that most staff participated in awide range of development courses. TheDepartment of Human Sciences had justemerged from a lengthy period without apermanent head and, consequently,arrangements for regular staff appraisal hadbeen neglected for at least two years. At thetime of the audit a new Head of Departmenthad been appointed and had made the re-introduction of appraisals a priority.

172 Overall, the audit team was satisfied thatthe standard of student achievement in theprogrammes covered by the DAT wasappropriate to the awards and their locationwithin the FHEQ; and that the quality of thelearning opportunities was suitable for theprogrammes of study leading to awards insociology, criminology and policing.

Section 4: The auditinvestigations: publishedinformation

The students' experience of publishedinformation and other informationavailable to them

173 A distinguishing feature of the UniversityCollege, described in the SWS and confirmedduring the audit team's meetings with students,was the extent to which students expected andreceived guidance on institutional facilities andprocedures, course requirements, assessmentfeedback and other information personally fromacademic staff or via email. This was in part aconsequence of the workshop-based character ofmany of the programmes and of the relativelysmall size of the University College, but alsoreflected an established culture of accessibilitysubscribed to by many staff. At the same timethe ARCs, run by the SU on both High Wycombeand Chalfont Campuses, which were well linkedto the institution's student services provision,were commonly used for a very wide range ofinformation needs. This personal approach tothe provision of information had clearly created apattern of expectations among students which,to some extent, explained the relatively fewcomments they provided on the quality ofinformation published in hardcopy or on theUniversity College website.

174 The University College had developed anexplicit Communications Policy which wasregularly reviewed and monitored by the ISSG.This approach to the management anddissemination of information was evident notonly in a comprehensive, orderly and accessiblestructure of policy and proceduraldocumentation available in hardcopy andelectronically, but also in the handbooks andcourse guides available to students. Thestudents commented favourably on the contentand clarity of the Student Handbook, availablein two forms, one for the University Collegeand the other for students at partnerinstitutions. This is supplemented by separatefaculty handbooks and by programme and


page 31

module guides. The students met by the auditteam were aware of assessment requirementsand criteria, communicated to them invariously named assessment 'schedules','handbooks' or 'details', although there were afew cases, particularly in ASSH, where thesehad appeared slightly late in the semester.

175 The students met by the audit team andthose whose views were reported in the SWSwere overwhelmingly positive about theamount and quality of the written informationthey had received about their courses and theoperation of the University College, both beforearrival and once in course. Most were aware ofthe growing availability of information on thewebsite and particularly on the VLE, butrelatively few were as yet using this facilityroutinely. Some students were aware of theexistence of programme specifications butindicated they found the programme guidesprovided by their faculties fulfilled their needs.The fact that many students said they rarelyconsulted the University College's range ofpublications was viewed by the team as areflection of the thoroughness of the face-to-face guidance provided by staff.

176 A key concern of students, described inthe SWS and reported to the audit team at itsmeetings with students, was timetabling (seeparagraphs 106, 140, 168). Students of theUniversity College are provided with personaltimetables. New students usually receive thesesome weeks before arrival but a significantproportion of returning students had onoccasion found their timetables were inaccurateor had only been able to obtain them someweeks into a semester. This had led to someconfusion and attendance difficulties. Followingsignificant timetable difficulties at thebeginning of the second semester in 2005students in ASSH had organized a petition ofcomplaint. Senior management was well awareof the problem and were taking steps to ensureit did not recur. The team advises the UniversityCollege to continue to monitor the steps it hastaken to produce timetables sufficiently inadvance that it allows students to plan workand family commitments.

Reliability, accuracy and completenessof published information

177 The University College has adopted asystematic and planned approach to thefulfilment of the requirements of HEFCE'sdocument 03/51, Information on quality andstandards in higher education: Final guidance, forthe publication of information on teachingquality on the HERO TQI website. In 2003 anAcademic Information Coordinator wasappointed, part of whose responsibilities is toensure that staff are aware of the publicationrequirements and that the data would beavailable and appropriately entered onto the TQIsite. At the time of the audit the institution hadprovided entry, progression, achievement anddestination data for its programmes togetherwith summaries of external examiners' reportsand of quality review events. It was already in aposition to provide links to its programmespecifications and it was clear that the UniversityCollege would be able to meet the developinginformation requirements. The necessity ofentering information within the framework of theJAC's subject groupings presented a number ofdifficulties. For example, lead external examinershad to be selected to write the summaries forgroupings of degree programmes, and in otherareas the very small numbers on programmesundermined the anonymity and usefulness of theprogression data. It was clear to the audit teamthat the University College's systematic andplanned approach to the publication ofinformation had ensured that it was more thanmeeting HEFCE requirements and that userscould rely on the information provided.


page 32

Findings

Findings178 An institutional audit of BuckinghamshireChilterns University College (the UniversityCollege) was undertaken during the weekcommencing 18 April 2005. The purpose of theaudit was to provide public information on thequality of the University College's programmesof study and on the discharge of itsresponsibility as a UK body awarding taughtdegrees on its own behalf and that of itscollaborative partners. As part of the auditprocess, according to the protocols agreed withthe Higher Education Funding Council forEngland (HEFCE), the Standing Conference ofPrincipals and Universities UK, three disciplineaudit trails (DATs) were carried out. This sectionof the audit summarises the findings. Itconcludes by identifying features of goodpractice revealed by the audit, and in makingrecommendations to the University College forenhancing current practice.

The effectiveness of institutionalprocedures for assuring the quality of programmes

179 In the institutional self-evaluation document(SED) the University College outlined itsapproach to quality assurance and standards. Itrecognised the professional commitment of allstaff as the cornerstone to maintaining highquality and standards. It stated that its qualitypolicy is based around principles which reflect aculture of continual review and enhancement;alignment with recognised standards andestablished codes of practice; engagement withthe wider academic and professionalcommunity; and a partnership between itsfaculties and centrally-provided services. Theseprinciples are met through rigorous validationprocedures for new programmes and the annualmonitoring and periodic review of academiccourses and student support areas. Studentviews and opinion are captured through theannual student experience survey (SES), studentevaluation of modules and programmes; focusgroups and staff-student liaison meetings; andthrough representation on committees withinfaculties and the institution. The framework for

quality and standards for collaborative provisionis exactly the same as that for University College-based provision. The Collaborative ProvisionManagement Group maintains an oversight of allcollaborative arrangements.

180 The University College has acomprehensive, thorough and well-defined setof clear documentation that defines proceduresassociated with governance, policy, regulation andquality. The audit team recognised good practicein the clarity, thoroughness, interrelatedness,management and presentation of documentationthat supports the deliberative processes of theUniversity College (see paragraph 238).

181 Senate has the primary responsibility forestablishing and overseeing standards of theUniversity College's awards and the quality ofits provision. Much of the work required todischarge this responsibility is devolved toSenate's subcommittees, and the AcademicAudit Committee (AAC) in particular. TheTeaching and Learning Committee (TLC)advises Senate on teaching, learning,assessment and related enhancements. Eachfaculty is represented on Senate and itssubcommittees. Quality and standards atfaculty level are the responsibility of facultyboards that formally report to Senate.

182 The audit team found that the committeestructure is appropriate for monitoring qualityand standards. Sometimes, the communicationbetween committees takes time, which gives animpression of slowness in decision-making. Whilerecognising the value of consensus building theteam recommends acceleration of the decision-making process (see paragraph 239).

183 The University College regards validation as'key in the setting of appropriate standards forprogrammes of study'. It is a requirement thatthe documentation for validation addressalignment with the appropriate subjectbenchmark(s), The framework for higher educationqualifications in England, Wales and NorthernIreland (FHEQ) and professional bodyrequirements. The first stage of the approvalprocess is for an outline proposal to besubmitted to the appropriate faculty board,


page 34

which looks at strategic fit, major resourcerequirements and evidence of demand.Approved proposals are submitted to theAcademic Planning Committee (APC). Proposalsapproved by APC are referred back to the facultyfor the development stage. Supportingdocumentation is scrutinised by an audit panelprior to a validation event. Validation panels arechaired by a senior member of the UniversityCollege from a faculty not involved in theproposed programme. The panel also includes amember of AAC, another member of staff from afaculty with no involvement in the programme,and two members external to the UniversityCollege. Successful validations are recommendedto AAC (then to Senate) for approval.

184 The audit team found that there had beena large number of recent validations, which wasinevitable, given that many programmes hadbeen validated in 1999 when the modularstructure was changed, and were now due forrevalidation. Also the institution's decision tomove to year-long modules for year oneincreased the volume of validations. The teamdid find examples of approvals for joint awardswhere it had not been possible to convene theCombination Planning Panel. An institutional2003-04 annual report on validation and reviewprepared for AAC indicated that the lateness ofconvening panels was an issue that in somecases led to incomplete panel formation, but nopanel met without at least one external memberand written feedback from another. Overall, theteam found validation and review to be rigorousand thorough but would recommend thedesirability of the University College addressingthe problem of incomplete membership andlate convening of panels (see paragraph 240).

185 The annual review and evaluation (AR&E)process incorporates module reports withstatistics showing student attainment,observations on issues affecting attainment,student feedback, external examiners' reportswith course or field leader responses and therationale for any proposed changes to theprogramme. Reports go to faculty boardswhich summarise and evaluate issues from theindividual reports. Faculty board summaries,

together with the report of the designatedindependent AAC auditor for the faculty arepresented to AAC, along with reports on somecentral services that have a close interactionwith students. Finally, an institutional AR&Ereport is submitted to AAC, where institutionalissues are discussed and themes identified forfocus in the following year.

186 The audit team found the AR&E process tobe rigorous, thorough and well conceived,although timeliness of submission of somereports was an issue. The lateness of submissionof some AR&E reports was flagged up in theinstitutional AR&E report for 2003-04. Theteam recommends that the University Collegecontinue to find appropriate ways of ensuringthe timeliness of key events in the annualmonitoring process (see paragraph 240).

187 Periodic subject review (PSR) was proposedin 2003-04 and was piloted in two subject areas,tourism and furniture, in 2004-05. The intent ofthe PSR is to complement existing processes byadding value through a more explicit focus onexternality, the external engagement of staff andpedagogic developments in the discipline. TheAAC has already reviewed the process and hasproposed an amended process forimplementation in 2005-06 to provide morefocus on the original 'added-value' intent.

188 Through the DATs and other informationmade available, the audit team found theperiodic review process to be in a state oftransition, but moving towards a model thatwould, indeed, complement the otherprocesses of approval, monitoring and review.

189 The University College regards externalinput as a key element in its internal reviewprocesses. As noted above, external advisers andreviewers are involved in validation and review.The audit team learned from meetings with staffand from minutes that programme level reviewoften incorporates substantial elements ofexternality, including the use of externalexaminer reports and external academicopinion. The reviews also include informationon trends in industry and professional areas andthis reflects a concern for ensuring the

Institutional Audit Report: findings

page 35

employability of students. Through its analysisof policy documents and many examples ofapproval, annual and periodic review, the teamconcluded that external participation is, indeed,fundamental to curriculum development,monitoring and review, and that it is highlyvalued by the institution.

190 Opportunities for student representationare available at institutional and course levels.The Student Representation Policy sets out keyprinciples including stating the value placed oninformal methods for resolution of problems.Care is taken by the institution in its planning toconsult with students and this was recognisedand commented upon in the students' writtensubmission (SWS). At programme level studentshave representatives on course committees.Minutes seen by the audit team indicatedconsideration of student matters at this leveland also in departmental and faculty boards.

191 The audit team found that the take up andeffectiveness of student representation variesbetween faculties but, overall, students reportedmany examples of positive working with staff, forexample, through the secondment of a Students'Union (SU) officer to the School of ContinuingProfessional Education (SCPE) to work on theretention project addressing attendance.

192 Arrangements for collecting feedback fromstudents include the annual SES which has beendesigned by external consultants with inputfrom staff and students from the institution.Two surveys had been completed by theexternal consultants prior to the audit, and inthe last survey questionnaires were sent to bothUniversity College and collaborative partnerstudents. Survey results are distributed tofaculties and administrative departments andthe responses are tracked by the StudentSatisfaction Steering Group and Planning Board.

193 Students perceive feedback mechanisms aspositive and in meetings they commented ondiffering forms of feedback including meetingswith staff, student representative meetings andinformal contact with academic staff. Studentconcerns raised in these ways were oftenresolved rapidly. Students met by the auditteam generally felt well informed about module

and course changes, although they commentedon the different approaches to module andcourse feedback between faculties.

194 Graduates and employers are involved incurriculum development through validationprocesses, professional networks and links tocourses. The use of industrial and professionalbenchmarking is widespread, with employersand professional bodies contributing toprogramme design and being involved in theassessment and teaching of some programmes.Professional bodies, including the Nursing andMidwifery Council, General Social Care Council,British Psychological Society and the Law Societyalso accredit or recognise many UniversityCollege awards, and recent review informationconfirms that their requirements are carefullyconsidered during validation and updating ofprogrammes. Institutional guidancerecommends that sector skills requirements andnational occupational standards are also used,where relevant, as external referents, and theaudit team found evidence of discussion of thesein minutes of validation and faculty meetings.

195 The audit team found that the view of astudent-centred organisation and culture wasconfirmed in comments from staff, students anddocumentation. Good practice (see paragraph238) was reflected through effectivecollaboration and consultation with students andthe helpfulness and accessibility of academic,administrative and support staff. The team wassatisfied that feedback from students, graduatesand employers was making a positive contributionto assurance of quality and standards.

196 At the time of the audit around 870students, a little over 10 per cent of theUniversity College's total numbers, werestudying at partner institutions in the UK. Themajority of these, 492 students, were registeredfor full-time diplomas or undergraduatedegrees, including Foundation Degrees (FDs).The remaining students were registered forpart-time diplomas and degrees, or for part-time postgraduate, mainly professional,qualifications. The majority of students werestudying at the four further education collegesthat the University College regards as its


page 36

strategic partners: Amersham and WycombeCollege, Aylesbury College, Berkshire College ofAgriculture and East Berkshire College. Inaddition, 182 mature students were registeredpart-time at two overseas providers, theSzámalk Open Business School in Hungary andthe Fachhochschule Osnabrück in Germany, forelements of the Buckinghamshire BusinessSchool's Integrated Management Programme:the Certificate in Management, the Diploma inManagement Studies and the Master's inBusiness Administration.

197 The policies and procedures that ensurequality and standards where partners provideprogrammes validated by the University Collegeare detailed and very clearly articulated. Clearpolicy guidance is supported by detailedmemoranda of agreement, operations manualsand annual schedules governing the approvaland revalidation of awards and the monitoringof teaching, resources, student progress andattainment in the partner institutions. Theoverarching principle is that quality managementarrangements are similar to those applied withinthe University College. The arrangements inplace were consistent with the recently updatedCode of practice for the assurance of academicquality and standards in higher education (Code ofpractice), Section 2: Collaborative provision andflexible and distributed learning (including e-learning), published by QAA. The care withwhich policy and procedure for themanagement of collaborative provision had beenconstructed and the strength and effectivenessof links at all levels with strategic partners areregarded by the audit team as features of goodpractice (see paragraph 238).

198 A comprehensive Staff Development Policyseeks to ensure that the quality of teaching ismaintained through the employment of well-trained and motivated staff. The StaffDevelopment Committee is the institution-wideforum for policy setting with regard to staffdevelopment, and for monitoring theeffectiveness of the development opportunitiesoffered. SCPE is the institution's central service fortraining and development of all staff. A largerange of workshops and seminars is available toboth University College and partner college staff.

SCPE delivers a Postgraduate Certificate inLearning and Teaching in Higher Educationwhich is compulsory for all new staff who do nothold a teaching qualification. The team foundthat take-up of the events arranged by SCPE wasextensive. Faculties and departments also arrangetheir own, subject-focused, developmentactivities and there is evidence of a strongcommitment to the development of staff at alllevels. The team noted the work of the SCPE inpromoting staff development as good practicewhich contributed to the culture of enhancementwithin the University College (see paragraph 238).

199 Arrangements for staff appraisals are clearlylaid out in the institution's appraisal handbookand the SED noted that progress has beenmade in addressing the 2002 continuation auditsuggestion that the University College keepsunder review its capacity to deliver appraisals toall staff. As a result, two faculties have widenedthe definition of appraisers to increase thenumber of staff to potentially act in this role.However, one group of staff told the audit teamthat they had not been appraised for 20 months(see also paragraph 171), and records showedthat in one faculty less than half of all staff hadan appraisal in 2003-04. The audit teamrecommends the University College to considermeasures to ensure that the policy on appraisalis consistently applied across the institution (seeparagraph 239).

200 A peer observation scheme is in place,although the institution has concerns about itscurrent ability to monitor the level of activity.The audit team was told that implementationof peer observation activity varied from facultyto faculty, and from department to department.The team learned of departments where peerobservation procedures focused on teamteaching activities, but in other cases itappeared that staff were left to arrange peerobservation in an ad hoc manner. The teamrecommends the University College ensuresthat the peer observation system works in away that will retain the flexibility of the currentsystem but will enable greater dissemination ofdemonstrable good practice between faculties(see paragraph 240).


page 37

201 The findings of the audit suggest thatthere can be broad confidence in the soundnessof the University College's, and its collaborativepartners', current and likely future managementof the quality of its academic programmes.

The effectiveness of institutionalprocedures for securing the standardsof awards

202 The SED referred to a framework forensuring standards of provision of the UniversityCollege which includes the setting of appropriatestandards at validation; the monitoring of theachievement of standards by external examiners;the monitoring of standards during the AR&Eprocess; and the annual consideration of studentperformance by Senate.

203 The SED noted that the Code of practice is'embedded' in its policies and procedures andminutes of both institutional and facultycommittees show awareness of the Code. TheAAC monitors institutional use of the AcademicInfrastructure, including the Code, andrecommends changes in practice and policywhere appropriate. Staff met by the audit teamexplained that this has led to changes inguidance and procedures, such as workingpractices for the accreditation of prior learning.The Academic Registry produces clear policy,guideline and procedural documents thatreflect the spirit of the Code.

204 Programme specifications, which arepresented at validation, make explicit referenceto subject benchmarks and the audit teamfound examples clearly designed to reflect therelevant benchmark statements. Minutes ofvalidation meetings showed appropriatediscussion of subject benchmark alignment. Thespecifications for programmes were also foundto be consistent with the principles of theFHEQ, although the team noted that theterminology used was sometimes inaccurate.

205 The institution's policy is that an externalexaminer is appointed to every award. A leadexaminer is also appointed for a group ofawards, for the purposes of summarising agroup of external examiner reports for the

Higher Education and Research Opportunities inthe UK (HERO) Teaching Quality Information(TQI) site. Individual faculties are responsible forsourcing and nominating external examinerswithin procedures and guidance set by theUniversity College. The audit team was able toconfirm that institutional procedures for theappointment of examiners are complied withalthough a number are appointed late. Theteam would recommend continuing attentionto ensuring the timely appointment of all itsexternal examiners (see paragraph 240).

206 External examiners submit written reportsusing a well-structured pro forma and reportsseen by the audit team showed clear agreementthat assessment and student achievement wereof a suitable standard when compared to otherinstitutions and the FHEQ. Responses to externalexaminer reports are created by seniordepartmental or faculty staff and these showdue attention to examiners' comments. Theteam noted that issues raised by examiners arealso discussed at departmental and facultyboards and action is taken where appropriate.The Academic Registry compiles a thoroughsummary for AAC of external examiner reports,identifying common themes requiringinstitutional action and points of good practice.Through meetings with staff, and scrutiny ofexternal examiner reports and minutes ofmeetings across the University College, theteam was able to confirm that externalexaminers were valued and that they played animportant part both in the assurance of qualityand maintenance of standards

207 The University College's Planning Unit, partof the Management Information ServicesDepartment, provides comprehensive data onstudent admissions, progression and attainmentand makes these available for the AR&E processand in a variety of other ways including theUniversity College's intranet. Statistics are availableon progression within programmes and acrossyear groups for students at the University Collegeand those studying for its qualifications at partnercolleges. Regular reports are made to Senate inwhich student admissions and progression aremonitored and profiled in terms of entry


page 38

qualifications, ethnicity, gender and disability,among other areas. The Planning Unit alsoannually reports a range of teaching and learningperformance indicators benchmarked againstthose of a comparator group of six selecteduniversities and against Higher Education StatisticsAgency norms; a feature contributing toenhancement that the audit team regarded asgood practice( see paragraph 238).

208 The audit team is able to confirm that thequality and range of statistics produced by theUniversity College make a significant contributionto the management of quality and themonitoring of standards but would recommendthat the University College seek ways to take fulladvantage of the information provided by thePlanning Unit (see paragraph 240).

209 Overall, the audit team has confidence inthe current and likely future management ofacademic standards of the awards of theUniversity College including those delivered byits collaborative partners.

The effectiveness of institutionalprocedures for supporting learning

210 The Learning Resources (LR) Strategy wasdeveloped in 2003 following an internal reviewof the existing teaching and learninginfrastructure that had indicated areas whereimprovements were desirable. In addition, eachof the six faculties has its own customised LRStrategy. Overview of the implementation ofthese strategies lies with the Planning Boardwhich receives regular reports from theLearning Resources Consultative Group and theInformation Strategy Steering Group.

211 Day-to-day provision of learning resourcesis managed by the Department of Learning andInformation Services (LIS) but a good deal ofspecialist technical and workshop provision isorganised within the faculties, particularly theFaculties of Design and Technology. An annualLIS Report is produced, which takes account ofstudent views expressed within the SES, and isconsidered by AAC as part of its role in theAR&E process. The audit team was able toconfirm from the committee minutes and otherdocumentation it reviewed, and from the

evidence it heard, that the University Collegewas able to respond to resource needs.

212 Arrangements for academic support tostudents may be carried out by individualpersonal tutors or combined as part of broaderacademic tutoring coordinated by leadacademic tutors and supported by skills tutorsbased in each faculty. These arrangements areset out in a series of policy and guidancedocuments including the Academic TutorPolicy. The arrangements have a particularfocus on the support of first-year studentsincluding the development of study skills andmanaging the transition to HE.

213 Arrangements for academic support andguidance are informed by the work and researchon retention that is in progress and which hasidentified key aspects of support for students,including induction and course design such asthe introduction year-long modules for first-yearstudents. The institutional overview of academicsupport arrangements is maintained through theTLC which is able to monitor the effectiveness offaculty arrangements through facultyrepresentatives, as well as reviewing facultyAR&E reports. The audit team recognised goodpractice in the student retention project, inparticular, its multifaceted action lines and use ofperformance indicators (see paragraph 238).

214 The audit team heard that students at alllevels of study view these arrangementspositively and generally find academic staffhelpful in support of their studies. Theyappreciate the size of the institution and findthe open door arrangements for accessing staffhelpful in giving them quick responses toproblems on assessment or other aspects ofprogress. The team recognised that thiscontributed to a student-focused culture whichembraced a number of features of good practice(see paragraph 238).

215 Arrangements for personal support areprovided through a partnership betweenfaculties and central services, mainly throughStudent Services. These services are also seen askey to the student-centred culture of theinstitution and include the careers service,counselling service, disabilities support services,


page 39

student money advice and the chaplaincy.Student Services are based at the HighWycombe and Chalfont Campuses and maintaina presence on the Wellesbourne Campus.Information is set out in a student handbookcombining University College information withfaculty and course information.

216 Students at the partner colleges areentitled to use all the support services availableto University College students. For example, thedisabilities advisers visit the partner colleges tomake sure appropriate mechanisms are in placefor the partnership students, and the CareersService has worked in liaison with partnercolleges to support perceived student needs.

217 Personal support and guidance is alsoprovided by the SU through the Advice andRepresentation Centre (ARC). The ARC providesa confidential and independent advice servicewhich includes concerns relating to finance,health, academic appeals and internationalsupport. Students reported that they were wellinformed of the different roles of ARC and theinstitution's Student Services. ARC is seen asable to provide quick advice from a studentperspective and also offers additionalrepresentation to students with problems.

218 The University College is progressingimplementation of Personal DevelopmentPlanning (PDP). A decision has been taken thatall students will have access to PDP. A numberof tools are available but the use andimplementation of these is left to the discretion ofeach of the faculties. The audit team noted someinconsistencies in the understanding of the PDPimplementation plans by staff and recommendsthat the University College ensures greater clarityand consistency, while allowing some measureddiversity, in the rolling out of student PDP acrossthe institution (see also paragraph 240).

219 While taking into consideration theconcerns of students, the audit team is satisfiedthat the level of learning support resourcesprovided by the University College isappropriate to its provision.

Outcomes of discipline audit trails

Tourism, transport and travel220 The Faculty of Leisure and Tourism offers awide range of provision at differing levels andthe audit focused on the following awards: BA(Hons) Air Transport with Pilot Training; BA(Hons) Air Transport with Commercial PilotTraining; BA (Hons) Airline and AirportManagement; BA (Hons) Air TravelManagement; HND Air Travel Management; FDAirline and Airport Operations; BA (Hons)International Tourism; BA (Hons) InternationalTourism with Conference Management; BA(Hons) International Tourism with Air Travel;MSc Tourism Development and Management;BA (Hons) Travel and Tourism Management; BA(Hons) Travel and Tourism Management with AirTravel; BA (Hons) Travel and TourismManagement with Conference Management;and HND Travel and Tourism Management.Programme specifications followed theinstitution's template and were clear andcomprehensive, taking account of appropriateexternal reference points, including the Subjectbenchmark statement for hospitality, sport,leisure and tourism, and for the BA (Hons) AirTransport with Commercial Pilot Training therequirements of the pilot's licence issuingbodies. Overall, the audit team was satisfied thatthe standard of student achievement in theprogrammes covered by the DAT is appropriateto the titles of the programmes and theirlocation within the FHEQ; and the quality of thelearning opportunities is suitable for theprogrammes of study in tourism, transport andtravel leading to the named programmes.

221 The student handbooks for theprogrammes contained much helpfulinformation and students expressed the viewthat they were useful. Generally students felt wellinformed about programme and assessmentrequirements and their own performance andprogress. They also expressed satisfaction withthe effectiveness of representation and thequality of support and feedback from staff atboth course and individual levels. The audit teamnoted that placement arrangements did not


page 40

ensure that placement providers would besufficiently informed of their responsibilitieswhere students find their own placement. Theteam recommends that the University Collegereview practice and policy for placementlearning (see paragraph 240).

222 The audit team had access to recent externalexaminers' reports for all programmes. In general,reports are highly positive and the institutionalresponses showed that there had been a fullengagement with the external examiners'comments. There have been some problemswith the timely submission of some examiners'reports, but these are being addressed.

Furniture studies and fine art223 The Faculty of Design has a wide portfolioof courses and the DAT covered programmesleading to the awards of: MA Furniture Designand Technology; MA Furniture Conservation andRestoration; BA (Hons) Furniture Conservationand Restoration; BA (Hons) Furniture Design andCraftsmanship; BA (Hons) ContemporaryFurniture and Related Product Design; BA (Hons)Applied Furniture Studies; HND Furniture Studies;and BA (Hons) Fine Art. Programme specificationswere available for all the programmes of study inthe DAT and made reference to the FHEQ andSubject benchmark statement for art and design.The audit team was satisfied that the quality oflearning opportunities available to students issuitable for programmes of study leading to thenamed awards and that the standard of studentachievement in the programmes is appropriate tothe titles of the awards and to their locationwithin the FHEQ.

224 There are many opportunities for staff andstudents to offer views on the courses. Thecourse committees are well attended by staffand show that student issues are resolved.Students reported that informal contact withstaff was often effective in resolving studentconcerns in a timely fashion. Coursecommittees and other staff-student contacts areeffective in involving students with the qualitymanagement of their courses. Overall, studentsmet by the audit team expressed satisfactionwith the support they received, however, there

was some concern over support and resourcesfor the design element in courses. The Facultyhas recently produced an Learning ResourcesStrategy 2005-08 and has a Faculty ComputerManagement Group to give additionalconsideration to computing needs. The Facultymay wish to consider further how it engageswith students and responds to various studentneeds in taking forward these developments.

225 A sample of external examiner reportsfollowed a common format which identifiedareas for consideration by programme teams.The audit team found that external examiners'reports were generally positive and that theywere reviewed within the AR&E process withresponses prepared by course leaders.

Sociology, criminology and policing226 The Department of Human Sciences issituated within the Faculty of Applied SocialSciences and Humanities (ASSH) and the DATfocused on programmes leading to thefollowing awards: BSc (Hons) Criminology; BSc(Hons) Sociology; BSc (Hons) Policing; BSc(Hons) Criminology and Sociology; and the BSc(Hons) Sociology with Criminology. Theprogramme specifications had all been revisedin October 2004 in preparation for the periodicreview and included tables that mapped thelearning outcomes associated with the 43modules offered within the field. They wereconsistent with the FHEQ and had beendesigned to take account of the relevantbenchmark statements, principally those forsociology and for social policy andadministration. The BSc (Hons) Policing had alsobeen developed in consultation with the WestMercia Constabulary and the Thames ValleyPolice Service taking account of their standardsfor professional training. At the time of the audita benchmark statement for criminology had notbeen published by QAA, but the specificationhad been drawn up in the light of a draftstatement produced by the British Society ofCriminology. Overall, the audit team wassatisfied that the standard of studentachievement in the programmes covered by theDAT was appropriate to the awards and their


page 41

location within the FHEQ; and that the qualityof the learning opportunities was suitable forthe programmes of study leading to awards insociology, criminology and policing.

227 A high proportion of the students recruitedto these programmes were from the region andmany combined their full-time studies with paidemployment or had significant familyresponsibilities. A notable feature of the recenthistory of these programmes and the modulesthat comprised them had been changesdesigned to reduce the numbers of studentswho withdraw before completing their degrees.The Department had responded by playing amajor part in the University College's retentionproject including using one of its first-yearmodules as a pilot to test ways of enhancingstudent progression. It was clear to the auditteam that these innovations reflected aproactive engagement with the enhancement ofteaching and learning methods.

228 The quality of the programme and moduledocumentation provided to students was high.The students met by the audit team were clearabout coursework assignments and examinationsand the assessment criteria used. However, thestudents described some cases where assessmenthandbooks (in criminology) had been issued solate in a semester that deadlines had had to beextended. However, the most significant concernof students at the time of the audit concerneddelay within the ASSH Faculty in issuing correctstudent timetables at the beginning of thesecond semester (see paragraph 239). It wasreported that timetables were inaccurate, timeswere altered and rooms were changed withoutnotification or had been double-booked. Theteam advises the University College to continueto monitor the steps it has taken to producetimetables sufficiently in advance so that it allowsstudents to plan work and family commitments.

229 AR&E reports considered comments fromexternal examiners and included responses to anysuggestions or criticisms made. The audit teamreviewed the external examiners' reports for thelast three years and found in them overwhelmingapproval of the standards of student attainmentand the quality of the curriculum.

The use made by the institution of theAcademic Infrastructure

230 The audit team found that the UniversityCollege had been engaging effectively with theAcademic Infrastructure. The SED stated that theCode of practice, published by QAA, is'embedded' in its policies and procedures andminutes of both institutional and facultycommittees show awareness of the Code. TheAAC monitors institutional use of the AcademicInfrastructure, including the Code, andrecommends changes in practice and policywhere appropriate. Staff explained to the teamthat this has led to changes in guidance andprocedures, such as working practices for theaccreditation of prior learning. Responsibility forcomplying with external referents is devolved tofaculties, supported by accurate guidance fromthe Academic Registry. The Academic Registryproduces clear policy, guideline and proceduraldocuments that reflect the spirit of the Code,although there is opportunity for the placementlearning policy to be further developed in thisrespect (see paragraph 240).

231 Awards are defined in the institution'sstandard programme specifications and theaudit team found that these are appropriatelydesigned and written in a way that studentswould understand, although not all studentsseen by the team were familiar with them. Thespecifications make explicit reference to subjectbenchmarks and the team found thatprogrammes within the scope of DATs wereclearly designed to reflect the relevantbenchmark statements. Minutes of validationmeetings showed appropriate discussion ofsubject benchmark alignment. The specificationsfor programmes were also found to beconsistent with the principles of the FHEQ.

The utility of the SED as an illustrationof the institution's capacity to reflectupon its own strengths andlimitations, and to act on these toenhance quality and standards

232 The SED prepared for this audit provided aclear, accurate and comprehensive outline ofthe University College's framework for quality


page 42

assurance, maintenance of standards, andsupport of student learning. The SED statedthat the University College believes that it has astrong framework and robust procedures formanaging its quality and standards which'reflect: a culture of continual review andenhancement; alignment with recognisedstandards and established codes of practice;engagement with the wider academic andprofessional community; and partnershipbetween faculties and central services'.

233 The audit team's findings support the viewexpressed in the SED and give rise to overallbroad confidence in the way in which quality andstandards were being assured by the UniversityCollege and its capacity for self-evaluation.However, it is the opinion of the team that theSED did not sufficiently emphasise the strengthsand good practice of the institution.

Commentary on the institution'sintentions for the enhancement ofquality and standards

234 The SED identified as plannedenhancements the introduction of a PSR processwith greater focus on the 'subject'; greater focuson the 'programme' as a unit of management,rather than the 'field', to give a clear focus tostudent issues; and improvements to theeffectiveness of the academic planning process. Italso noted plans for changes to the control ofcollaborative provision, alongside those forimproved links with regional schools and collegesto support raising aspirations and participation.Also included in the plans for enhancement weregreater accessibility and timeliness of data toassist in the annual review process; improvedelectronic document management; andimproved internal communications to address theissue of information overload. The audit teamtook particular note of the institution's plans for arange of measures aimed at further developingthe comprehensive strategy for student retention,including the implementation of a year-longstructure for first-year students. The team wasalso told of the application for University Title,and of major campus redevelopment intended toenhance the student experience.

235 The audit team noted through the SEDthat the University College undertook extensivemonitoring of its performance in relation toexternally and internally set benchmarks andused this information to seek improvements. Italso supported staff in implementingimprovements through a programme of well-attended staff development activities. The teamconcluded that the institution's approachrepresented good practice and exemplified aculture of enhancement and that the plannedactions, once implemented, would substantiallycontribute to enhancing quality and standards(see paragraph 238).

Reliability of information

236 Students met by the audit teamcommented favourably on the content andclarity of the Student Handbook, available in twoforms, one for the University College and theother for students at partner institutions. This issupplemented by separate faculty handbooksand by programme and module guides. Studentviews reported in the SWS were overwhelminglypositive about the amount and quality of thewritten information they had received abouttheir courses and the operation of the UniversityCollege both before arrival and once in course.

237 The University College has adopted asystematic and planned approach to the fulfilmentof the requirements of HEFCE 03/51, Informationon quality and standards in higher education: Finalguidance, for the publication of information onteaching quality on the HERO TQI website. In2003 an Academic Information Coordinator wasappointed, part of whose responsibilities was toensure that staff within the institution were awareof the publication requirements and that the datawould be available and appropriately enteredonto the TQI site. At the time of the audit theinstitution had provided entry, progression,achievement and destination data for itsprogrammes together with summaries of externalexaminers' reports and of quality review events.It was already in a position to provide links to itsprogramme specifications and it was clear thatthe University College would be able to meet thedeveloping information requirements. It was


page 43

clear to the audit team that the UniversityCollege's systematic and planned approach tothe publication of information had ensured thatit was more than meeting HEFCE requirementsand that users could rely on the accuracy,integrity, completeness and frankness of theinformation provided.

Features of good practice

238 The following features of good practiceacross the University College were identifiedduring the audit:

i the clarity, thoroughness, interrelatedness,management and presentation ofdocumentation that supports thedeliberative processes of the UniversityCollege (paragraphs 29, 60, 180)

ii the student retention project, in particular,its multifaceted action lines and use ofperformance indicators (paragraphs 84,110, 142, 165, 213)

iii the student focused culture to support thedevelopment of students through, forexample: representation, consultation andcollaboration with the Students' Union,the open-door policy of academic staff,the tutoring system, the proactiveinstitutional support mechanisms, and theextent and usage of the StudentExperience Survey (paragraphs 75, 77,103, 114, 123, 124, 195)

iv the culture of enhancement with, forexample, benchmarking of the UniversityCollege performance, the work of theSchool of Continuing ProfessionalEducation, and the extensive uptake of staffdevelopment opportunities (paragraphs 36,82, 92, 96, 198, 207, 235)

v the depth and scope of relationship at all levels with strategic further educationcollege partners that contributes to themanagement of the quality of learningand securing of standards (paragraphs 132, 197).

Recommendations for action

239 The University College is advised to:

i ensure that the University College's policyon appraisal is consistently applied acrossthe University College (paragraphs 88,171, 199)

ii determine how to speed up thedeliberative process without destroyingthe consensual approach to managingchange (paragraphs 33, 182)

iii continue to monitor the steps it has takento ensure the timeliness and accuracy oftimetables produced for all students acrossthe University College (paragraphs 106,140, 168, 176, 228).

240 It would also be desirable for theUniversity College to:

i consider ensuring that the peerobservation system works in a way that willretain the flexibility of the current systembut will enable greater dissemination ofgood practice within and between faculties(paragraphs 95, 200)

ii use the full range of information producedby the Planning Unit and other sourcesmore extensively and consistently acrossthe institution to monitor student progressand achievement and match supportappropriately (paragraphs 83, 166, 208)

iii ensure greater clarity and consistency (whileallowing some measure of diversity) in therolling out of student Personal DevelopmentPlanning across the University College(paragraphs 125, 218)

iv continue to find appropriate ways ofensuring the timeliness of the appointmentof external examiners; the production ofannual review and evaluation reports; andthe convening of the Joint CombinationPanels in validation schedules (paragraphs43, 47, 184, 186, 205)

v review practice and policy for placementlearning to ensure that all placementproviders for students undertaking work-based learning required by a programmeare suitably prepared, whether or not theplacement is arranged by the student orthe University College (paragraphs 115,136, 221, 230).


page 44

Institutional Audit Report: appendix

page 45

Appendix

Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College's response to theaudit reportThe University College welcomes QAA's finding that broad confidence can be placed in thesoundness of the current and future management of the quality of the institution's programmesand the academic standards of its awards.

The University College is very pleased by the high number of positive comments within the report.These included: the thorough way in which we had responded to the last audit; our capacity formonitoring the impact of developments; the planned enhancements such as the periodic reviewprocess; improvements to the accessibility of data for the annual review process; the appropriatenessof the learning support resources; and the comprehensive strategy to improve student retention.

The University College was also very pleased to have a number of areas identified as examples of goodpractice including: the student-centred culture; the overall culture of enhancement with extensivereference to external benchmarking; the very successful collaboration with FE partner colleges; theclarity and thoroughness of University College documentation; and the student retention project.

The institution fully accepts the findings of the report and will take all appropriate actions on therecommendations, some of which, the report acknowledges, were already being addressed. In anumber of areas improvements have already been achieved. These recommendations will be thesubject of discussion and action in the University College in 2005/06.

The University College was pleased that the audit team reported that the institution's systematic andplanned approach to the publication of information had ensured that it was more than meetingHEFCE requirements and that users could rely on its accuracy, integrity, completeness and frankness.

The University College would like to thank the audit team for their professionalism at all stages andfor the constructive and courteous atmosphere created for all meetings throughout the conduct ofthe audit and also for the constructive manner in which all correspondence was conducted.

RG

153 08/05

Documents

Buckinghamshire Chilterns University College · The audit process Institutional audits are carried out by teams of academics who review the way in which institutions oversee their