Handling Complaints in Small and Specialist Institutions:the Role and Remit of the OIA

Susanna ReeceDeputy Adjudicator

29 June 2010

Establishment of the OIA

• Higher Education Act 2004

• Transitional scheme: March - December 2004

• Designated operator of student complaints scheme in England and Wales from 1 January 2005

• Replaced existing Visitor arrangements

• Provided for independent review across the sector

• Common system for all HEIs in England and Wales

2

Structure and Operation of the OIA

• OIA Board has 6 Directors nominated from the HE sector: AHUA, CUC, GuildHE, Higher Education Wales, NUS and UUK

• Remaining 8 Directors are independents, including the Chair, Ram Gidoomal, who replaced Prof. Norman Gowar in 2009

• Board has duty to preserve the independence of the Scheme and does not get involved in individual complaints

• Ruth Deech was the first Independent Adjudicator. Rob Behrens was appointed in May 2008 upon her retirement.

• Current Organogram is in the OIA’s 2009 Annual Report

• Pathway Review of the Scheme – report published Feb. 2009

3

Some Statistics (Annual Report 2009)

• 1007 complaints in 2009, a 12% increase on 2008 and a 37% increase on 2007. (537 cases in 2005, 586 in 2006, 734 in 2007 and 900 in 2008). 811 of these were found to be eligible.

• A tiny percentage of the student body but a capacity challenge for the OIA at a time of public sector financial constraints when complaint numbers are likely to rise

• Pathway Report Implementation Groups are looking at processes, remedies, publication and funding

4

Some Statistics continued

• Vast majority of cases (64%) relate to academic status

• Most common subject areas are medicine-related and law (240)

• 39% of complainants are postgraduates, compared to 23% of the student body as a whole

• 65% of complainants are over 25

• 75% of cases found not justified in 2009

• 5% Justified and 13% Partly Justified

• 24 cases from GuildHE institutions – small number of other cases where another HEI is the awarding body

5

OIA Scheme and Remit

• The OIA can look at any act or omission of an HEI (not AJ)

• The OIA Scheme Rules set out the approach the OIA takes to its role and remit. The current version is dated May 2008.

• The OIA is a review body - students must first have completed an HEI’s internal procedures (COP Letter Guidance May 2010)

• The approach taken is two-fold:• has the University correctly applied its regulations and followed

its procedures?• Was the University’s decision fair in all the circumstances?

• Court of Appeal ruling in the case of Siborurema (2007)

6

Academic Judgment/Professional judgment

• The OIA cannot interfere with the operation of an institution’s academic judgment:• Part 2 of the Higher Education Act 2004• Our Rule 3.2 states that we do not cover a complaint to

the extent that it relates to a matter of academic judgment

• Academic judgment is a decision about scholarship that only an experienced academic can make

• Professional judgment is a decision about professional standards that only an experienced professional can make

• Plagiarism and fitness to practise: we look at procedural issues and fairness not the underlying academic or professional decisions

7

OIA approach and process 1

• The OIA’s approach is not the same as a court’s. We don’t make legal findings, although we have regard to law and guidance (see disability)

• Our normal approach is to conduct a paper review of the complaint based on what has been considered within the HEI’s procedures

• We have not found it necessary to hold oral hearings, although we have the power to do so (Budd JR 2010)

• 50% of cases are resolved through our Fast Track procedure (without full review). A Preliminary Decision is made, upon which comments may be made by either party. This is followed by a Formal Decision Letter unless the representations made lead us to conduct a full review.

8

OIA approach and process 2

• After full review, a Draft Decision is issued, followed by a Formal Decision. At Draft Decision stage the parties may comment on:• Factual or material inaccuracies

• Practicality of any recommendations made

• Recommendations may be made where a complaint has been upheld in whole or in part

• In other cases we may make Suggestions or Observations

• Compliance with our recommendations is strongly encouraged – all HEIs have complied so far. We monitor compliance and will ask for evidence.

• Higher Education Advisory Panel

9

Some general issues that have led to Justified or Partly Justified outcomes after an OIA review

• Unreasonable delay

• Failure to follow procedures/regulations

• Failure to have regard for principles of natural justice (duty to act fairly)

• Student not made aware of all evidence to be considered.

• No proper records kept

• Guidance and regulations/procedures not clear

• Not having proper regard to student’s disability

10

Common Issues: Procedural Fairness

• Natural Justice – duty to act fairly• Nobody shall be a judge in his/her own cause• Hear the other side• Reasons for decisions

• Requirement of reasonableness

11

Common issues: disability

• OIA approach: not the same as a court’s. Looking to see that an HEI has an understanding of its obligations and can demonstrate that it has considered and applied them appropriately and fairly.

• Some helpful questions:• Is the student disabled?• If so, what provisions are we now applying to him?• Do those provisions place him at a substantial disadvantage?• What could be done to prevent that disadvantage?• Would it be reasonable for us to take those steps?

12

Common issues: disability disclosure

• HEIs must encourage disclosure

• Responsibility on student to disclose

• Late disclosure• Dyslexia• Mental health issues

• QAA Code: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/section3/Section3Disabilities2010.pdf

13

Current Issues: Placements

• Placement arrangements – what will the OIA look at?• Memorandum of agreement • Complaints handling arrangements• Clarity about responsibilities and procedures

• What happens when things go wrong on a placement?• Disability arrangements• Mentoring and learning outcomes• Fitness to practise

14

Current Issues: Informal Resolution

• Preference for earliest possible resolution at local level

• Local resolution encouraged• Is it compulsory• When is it inappropriate?

• Recognise when informal approaches are not working• Who decides?• Time scales?

• Informal does not mean unrecorded

• Potential to use mediation or other means of resolution

• Capturing complaints information – good practice and QAA code

15

Current Issues: Complaints Handling

• Relationship between complaints handling and disciplinary processes – staff/students

• Anonymity – of complaints/complainants

• Concluding remarks on good practice:• Encourage students to raise issues constructively and at

the appropriate time• Signpost processes and have clear pathways• Deal with issues in a timely manner• Accept that some cases will go all the way

16