University Teaching, Learning and Student Experience Committee
25 May 2011 – Document H
Newcastle University
University Teaching, Learning and Student Experience Committee
25May 2011
QAA 2009 Institutional Audit – Action Log
- Purpose
- The purpose of this paper is to provide members of UTLSEC with the opportunity to monitor progress that has been made by the institution in addressing the recommendations made by the 2009 QAA Institutional Audit team,as well as other issues identified both by the University and the Students’ Union during the course of preparations for the Audit.
- Background
- The report from the Institutional Audit of December 2009 provided the University with five recommendations for action. Three recommendations were classed as “advisable” and referred to matters that the Audit Team believed had the potential to put quality and/or standards at risk and required preventive or corrective action. These related to institutional oversight of local implementation, personal tutoring, and institutional oversight of collaborative provision. The two "desirable" recommendations, on learning technologies and sharing of exemplary practice, referred to matters that the audit team believed had the potential to improve the quality of learning opportunities and/or further secure the academic standards of awards.
2.2An action log is being maintained for the tracking of progress against the recommendations by QuILT (attached as Appendix I). The log provides evidence of substantial progress, and gives either an indication of how the University is measuring the effectiveness of changes already made, or of how the impact of a proposed measure will be evaluated.
2.3The University will need to be able to evidence substantive progress on these recommendations by the time of the mid-cycle review, which is expected to take place three years after the Audit, i.e. in late 2012. The mid-cycle review will serveas a short healthcheck on our continuing management of academic standards and quality of provision. QuILT aims to have an initial discussion about the mid-cycle review with QAA at a forthcoming meeting with the University’s QAA Institutional Liaison Officer, which is being planned to take place in July, and will in due course report to UTLSEC on the format of the review and preparations for it in more detail.
- Recommendations
- UTLSEC is invited to comment on the content of the action log and the progress made since the Audit.
Dr Simon Meacher
Senior Development Officer
QuILT
(T: 3969)
May 2011
QAA Institutional Audit 2009Action Log /
1RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION THAT WERE ADVISABLE
1.1Review the effectiveness of Internal Subject Review as a means of reporting on the consistency of local implementation of University policies / The revised ISR process (introduced September 2010) incorporates a pre-visit review of QA compliance. A reporting template assists with the systematic reporting and recording of the local implementation of policies.
QuILT will undertake an evaluation of the revised process in July 2011 and report on its findings to UTLSEC.
1.2Give high priority to the development and implementation of a revised system for personal tutoring / A new University Framework for Personal Tutoring was introduced in 2010 on an ‘opt-in’ basis, following consultation with FTLSECs and FEBs. Implementation of the Framework becomes a formal requirement in 2011/12 and will be supported by an online training module for personal tutors (delivery Summer 2011, funded by UTLSEC), training sessions for personal tutors and a senior tutors discussion forum (commenced in Autumn 2010, provides informal feedback on implementation of the framework), and the provision of case studies to promote good practice.
Academic units are to be asked to report on progress with implementation of the framework as part of Annual Monitoring and Review in Autumn 2011.
1.3Strengthen oversight of collaborative provision:
- Fit between overall strategy and vision and set of partnerships not apparent
- Range of types of arrangement suggested a reactive rather than strategic approach
- Enhance staff awareness of definition and different categories of CP
- University should assure itself that the position of INTO provision in the University’s categorisation of CP is correctly indicated
- Address variability in tracking actions from annual monitoring
- Ensure appropriate engagement of CP students in QA processes
- Review processes by which oversight of published information is exercised
Since the audit, the Transnational Education and Student Experience (TEASE) Group has been established with a remit to consider what the standard Newcastle student experience is, the infrastructure and services required to support it, and to consider how it might be developed transnationally both for current developments in South East Asia and future potential developments elsewhere.The standard Newcastle student experience must be the same academically and in terms of opportunity. There may not be the same identical provision in each place but it must be equivalent and appropriate to context and deal with the practicalities of distance, time zone, culture & legislative framework.
To date the TEASE Group has enhanced the student lifecycle grid developed as part of the partner approval for the Singapore Institute of Technology. The grid considers all aspects of the student lifecycle and asks how these will be provided in an off-campus context to ensure all students have access to an appropriate Newcastle experience. The grid has also been considered and developed in relation to the NUMed provision.
2RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION THAT WERE DESIRABLE
2.1Extend, as widely as possible, opportunities for students to benefit from the University’s investment in learning technology / General
The e-Learning Steering Group staged a ‘blue-skies’ thinking meeting (‘BEACH’) in November 2010 to address both 2.1 and 2.2. The main outcome is the development of institutional principles on e-Learning which focuses on six key areas indentified at the BEACH event, being areas that will have a positive impact on the student experience.
By September 2012*, the University is committed to providing all students with the opportunity to utilise a range of opportunities for e-learning, including:
- A designated set of materials, including clear information about learning, assessment and skills, for each module within a VLE;
- An e-portfolio as a method of recording and reflection;
- *and by 2013, access to all formal lectures via the ReCap lecture capture service.
The University currently has 50 lecture/seminar rooms equipped with ReCap and there are 35 individual projects using personal capture software.
Dissemination
Academic units where usage of ReCap is low have been contacted by the ReCap Steering Group and offered support and advice regarding how the system may be used within their discipline where appropriate. Members of the Steering group have attended School meetings or teaching away-days to discuss requirements and barriers to use. At the end of the 2010/11 academic year all academic units will be provided with a report outlining general developments and institution-level usage of ReCap as well as school-specific figures.
The ReCap Steering Group presented at the 2010 Teaching & Learning Conference, and will present again at the 2011 event.
Evaluation
The use of both ReCap in lecture theatres and also the pilot of the personal capture software are being evaluated using online surveys to staff and students. During the summer vacation focus groups will be held with staff users to investigate further how the technology is being used, problems and concerns.
Blackboard
The major project since 2010 has been raising awareness and delivering demonstrations relating to the migration to Blackboard version 9.1 (Bb9) in July 2011.
Dissemination
All academic units have been invited to attend Bb9 demonstrations and in the majority of cases these have been well attended. Issues that have arisen from these meetings will be followed up next academic year once Bb9 is operational.
A range of new staff training workshops are being developed around the new tools available in Bb9 as well as for new users, and these will be differentiated for academic and professional support staff. Training materials will also be available online where appropriate.
In addition, in 2011/12 an ‘eLearning network’ of staff using virtual learning environments/learning technologies will be established with the explicit intention of sharing good practice.
Evaluation
Throughout 2011/12, the Blackboard Steering Group will monitor the effectiveness of the embedding of Bb9.
Each Bb9 training session will be evaluated via a questionnaire/feedback opportunity, the outcomes of which will inform the iterative development of the workshops.
2.2Strengthen arrangements for sharing and embedding practice which the University has identified as exemplary
- The audit team found that celebration of achievements in T&L was relatively limited
In place of a single-day teaching and learning conference, The University staged a week-long series of events in June 2010 in an attempt to increase access. The theme of the week was student engagement. The week-long format will again be applied in July 2011 with an overall theme of ‘what we’re good at’.
QuILT is following up examples of exemplary practice identified through the VCs Distinguished Teacher Awards with the aim of developing case studies for wider dissemination.
The ‘Just One Thing’ campaign, being staged in 2010/11, sought to engage academic staff to identify, undertake and evaluate one measurable change in assessment activity at module level. Examples will build a corpus of activities of proven impact, and lead to a better idea of what kind of enhancement is achievable.
The second stage in the redevelopment of the QuILT website will include details of all centrally funded projects (UTLSEC Innovation; cross-cutting transition etc.), publishing reports, and showcasing cases of exemplary practice identified through the ‘Just One Thing’ and VCs Awards, for example; and will also provide central access to work previously undertaken by CETLs.
QSSC now compiles an annual report of exemplary practice identified in ISRs. Recent examples of exemplary practice are posted on the QuILT website. A database of exemplary practice is also being established.
The Learning and Teaching seminar series has been relaunched in 2010/11 with an enhanced focus on showcasing exemplary practice and more targeted dissemination.
Efforts to disseminate exemplary practice in the use of learning technologies have seen a marked increase in QuILT staff being invited to School meetings and T&L away-days. See 2.1 above for more detail.
A new email Learning and Teaching Newsletter has been introduced aiming to promote development and funding opportunities, promote internal and external dissemination, and to highlight teaching- and learning-related news.
An institutional project on ‘Enhancing Teaching, Learning and the Student Experience through Recognition and Reward’ is currently underway. The project aims to oversee the development of an agreed university evidence base for achievement in teaching, learning and the student experience, and will advise UTLSEC on future institutional policy and practice in support parity of esteem for teaching.
A university-wide network for internationalisation in transnational and e-learning (UNITE) has been established, and is designed to support staff in the context of the growing importance of internationalisation and e-learning in Higher Education. The project seeks to bring together experience from around the university. It will then go on to support new and current projects with a series of workshops, and finally advise on the strategic direction the university should take regarding e-learning to support internationalisation.
3FURTHER POINTS WITHIN THE REPORT REQUIRING THE UNIVERSITY’S ATTENTION
3.1 Communication of assessment expectations to students / A set of institutional principles of assessment and feedback is being developed. This will be disseminated to all academic units and students following consideration by UTLSEC in June 2011.
3.2 The inclusion of marking criteria in all degree programme handbooks / The University’s guidelines for degree programme handbooks now make this requirement explicit.
3.3 The language of the University’s policies relating to assessment and appeals / The Student Progress Service is currently consulting with faculties and services on proposed changes to the Academic Appeals Procedure for use from September 2011 onwards. SPS has been liaising with the Students’ Union in order to address concerns about wording raised in the Student Written Submission and to improve the procedures accordingly.
The University’s policies and procedures relating to assessment will be the subject of an integrated review in 2011/12 being led by QuILT.
3.4 Consistency of local reporting and monitoring by FTLSEC / QuILT and Faculty Quality Teams have enhanced their shared understanding of institutional expectations through the development of a quality management calendar. The Quality Liaison Group meets on a monthly basis and helps to clarifythe role of Faculties in monitoring the implementation of policies. The University has also introduced single reporting templates for FTLSEC summaries of external examiners’ reports and AMR.
3.5 Increase student awareness of Right-Cite webpages / QuILT will update the pages in July 2011 and relaunch them in time for the 2011/12 academic year.
3.6 External examiners often understood the boxes asking for exemplary practice and commendations to be invitations to comment upon the efficacy of BoE processes and as such they were limited in their usefulness in disseminating good practice / Will be addressed as part of a broader review of external examining arrangements in line with national recommendations following the publication of a report by Universities UK. QuILT, together with the Faculty Quality Teams, will consider how to revise institutional external examining policy, with a first round of consultation due to take place with FTLSECs in Autumn 2011 (with a view to implementation of a revised policy in Autumn 2012).
4FURTHER POINTS IDENTIFIED BY THE UNIVERSITY DURING ITS PREPARATIONS FOR AUDIT WHICH REQUIRE ATTENTION
4.1 Representation
Student Written Submission (SWS) noted some issues with students being able to attend or being given notice of boards of studies
SWS recommended the following:
Practical provisions must be made for ‘hard-to-reach’ groups of students to have their voice heard; this could be through Virtual Learning Environments such as Blackboard.
To make the student voice on University committees more representative, more of them should have members appointed from the wider student body rather than just Union Society officers. Student representatives should be full, not tokenistic, participants in relevant decision-making groups and should receive sufficient support to enable them to fulfil this role effectively.
Full training must be provided, as agreed at the University Teaching and Learning Committee in July 2009, to ensure that student members of Internal Subject Review teams are able to be effective.
Attention should be paid to the processes for selection of students for ISR teams, to ensure they are as fully representative as possible of the student body as a whole, not hand-picked by staff. These could be course reps who sit on SSC and therefore already hear the views of a wide range of students. / New Student Representation scheme requires student attendance at all BoS: these will be course representatives (including the student Chair of Staff-Student Committees). Attendance will be monitored. By 2011/12, all academic units will be expected to implement the new scheme.
Participation of students studying part-time, via distance learning, on collaborative programmes etc. is being monitored as part of evaluation of the new scheme in 2011 (paper to be considered by UTLSEC in May 2011).
The University will seek to include wider representation from students on working and project groups. A sub-group of UTLSEC will be established in 2011/12 to support academic units to review the effectiveness of current approaches to student engagement.
After some initial difficulty in finding volunteers, 4 out of 6 ISRs during 2010/11 will have had student reviewers, each one briefed by QuILT and the Chair of QSSC.
Student ISR team members are current course reps from within the same faculty as the provision being reviewed.
4.2 Optional modules
SWS called for increased promotion and acceptance of elective modules. This should include the Career Development Module and Students into Schools, which have not always been allowed due to their less traditionally academic nature / The Careers Service is working with academics to promote the availability and value of the modules, and is committed to a wide range of activities relating to promoting the modules to students (further detail available on request). Intended major theme of CS annual plan for 2010/11 was ‘Academic Liaison’, including development of web-related material for academics on theme of supporting student employability.
For September 2012 the University will expand the range of opportunities available to students so that every student will have the opportunity to participate in additional activity, including additional career development and enterprise modules. QuILT will lead on the provision of practical and brief guides to co-curricular provision for tutors and students.
4.3 Personal tutoring
SWS stated that Union Society was keen to see the following incorporated in review of personal tutoring:
- The introduction of institution wide guidelines laying out the minimum amount of contact students can expect and including clear role descriptors for personal tutors.
- Initial contact between a tutor and tutee should come from the tutor, to create confidence in their willingness to commit to the role, and the first meeting should be informal, to minimise the chance of students feeling nervous about approaching their tutor in future.
- Personal tutors should, wherever possible, remain the same throughout a student’s programme of study, to enable a good relationship to be built and informed guidance and support to be given.