TEACHING EXCELLENCE FRAMEWORK
KEELE UNIVERSITY RESPONSE
INTERNAL ‘GREEN PAPER’
INTRODUCTION
The Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) is a government scheme designed to assess the quality of teaching in all higher education institutions. All universities will be granted a ‘gold’, ‘silver’, or ‘bronze’ level award for the teaching quality across the institution.
The main aims of the TEF are:
· to provide clear information to students about where the best provision can be found
· to encourage providers to improve their teaching quality
· to help the UK drive productivity by ensuring a better match of graduate skills with the needs of employers and the economy
· to ensure better outcomes for all students, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds
What do we know about the TEF?
The TEF is currently in its second year of development.
In Year 1, Keele’s successful QA review (from 2014) meant that we were considered to have ‘met expectations’ allowing us to meet the threshold of TEF1.
TEF Year 2 assesses teaching quality, learning environment, and student outcomes across all institutions in England. The assessment is conducted by a panel of TEF assessors, who will look at a combination of TEF metrics and the University’s written submission. The metrics will be provided centrally by HEFCE, and the written submission is our opportunity to contextualise and explain that data, and set out our case for excellence.
Our submission will then be reviewed by a pool of assessors and a panel of experts to determine our rating.
The deadlines for the submission is in late January 2017 (final date to be confirmed), and awards will be announcing the following May.
For more information on the TEF, please refer to our TEF webpages at https://www.keele.ac.uk/aboutus/tef/
What will the TEF assessment look like?
Metrics
The TEF metrics will form the substantive part of the assessment. The metrics measure the Universities performance on parts of the NSS and Destinations of Leavers from Higher Education (DELHE) returns, as well as progression and retention data, and ‘splits’ these by specific student groups (such as BME students, those with disabilities, mature students, etc.), benchmarking our performance against similar institutions. Where the University’s performance is significantly different to the benchmark (+/- 2% variance) the metric is ‘flagged’ either positive or negative. A very significance difference (+/-3% variance) will be given a double positive or negative flag.
Initial indications are that Keele’s metrics will be reasonably positive, with a majority of positive ‘flags’ but final metrics will not be received until late October/early November 2016
Narrative
The narrative submission is intended to provide institutions with the opportunity to explain any ‘flags’ on their metrics report. It also provides an opportunity for institutions to address any areas relevant to the TEF assessment where the metrics do not provide the full picture.
Narratives should be no longer than 15 sides; the table provided in Annex A contains full details of the areas of assessment and Annex B provides examples of the types of evidence that might be included in the narrative. We do not have to use the full 15 sides for our narrative, nor do we need to provide additional evidence in areas where the metrics show strong performance – although we could choose to do so.
The narrative will be broadly formed around three themes (with TEF definitions below):
· Teaching Quality (TQ)
“includes different forms of structured learning that can involve teachers and academic or specialist support staff. This includes seminars, tutorials, project supervision, laboratory sessions, studio time, placements, supervised on-line learning, workshops, fieldwork and site visits. The emphasis is on teaching that provides an appropriate level of contact, stimulation and challenge, and which encourages student engagement and effort. The effectiveness of course design, and assessment and feedback, in developing students’ knowledge, skills and understanding are also considered. The extent to which a provider recognises, encourages and rewards excellent teaching is also included within this aspect.”
· Learning Environment (LE)
“includes the effectiveness of resources such as libraries, laboratories and design studios, work experience, opportunities for peer-to-peer interaction and extra-curricular activities in supporting students’ learning and the development of independent study and research skills. The emphasis is on a personalised academic experience which maximises retention, progression and attainment. The extent to which beneficial linkages are made for students between teaching and learning, and scholarship, research or professional practice (one or more of these) is also considered.”
· Student Outcomes and Learning Gain (SO)
“is focused on the achievement of positive outcomes. Positive outcomes are taken to include:
• acquisition of attributes such as lifelong learning skills and others that allow a graduate to make a strong contribution to society, economy and the environment,
• progression to further study, acquisition of knowledge, skills and attributes necessary to compete for a graduate level job that requires the high level of skills arising from higher education”
What do we need from you?
The TEF Steering Group is seeking contributions from colleagues to inform the narrative submission, to ensure that all examples of good practice can be captured and reflected in the narrative where relevant. In order to do that, all Schools are requested, through their Learning and Teaching Directors, to complete the questionnaire below.
The deadline for submission of the TEF submission is ‘late January’, so, as explained in previous TEF communications, deadlines for gathering information and for circulating drafts are necessarily tight. Responses are needed from Schools by November 21st. In due course, after all the responses have been fed into the drafting process, a ‘White Paper’ will be circulated for comment, in time for the submission to be made at the end of January in compliance with the deadline.
It should be noted that the TEF2 narrative should focus on institution-wide actions and initiatives, although since the next iteration of TEF is expected to be extended to include discipline-level assessments, collecting discipline-level information will also be of value to the steering group even if this is not the immediate focus.
What follows in this document is an internal consultation questionnaire. Please liaise with your School’s Learning and Teaching Director to contribute to your School’s response, in order to provide the TEF steering group with evidence and insight into best practice across the institution.
The deadline for School Learning and Teaching Directors to send completed responses to the Steering Group is Monday 21st November.
KEELE’S ‘GREEN PAPER’ TEF NARRATIVE CONSULTATION
These questions have been devised to ensure that the Steering Group gathers all the information needed for the TEF submission. Please provide as full answers as possible and where appropriate reference to available evidence to support your answers. All responses should be sent to Sheila Allen:
If you have any specific queries, please contact your Associate Dean for Learning and Teaching.
(Please consider, when completing this document, the documents provided at Annex A (TEF Assessment Criteria) and Annex B (Examples of Evidence).
Name of person completing the questionnaire:
School:
1. TEACHING QUALITYThe teaching quality element of the assessment will focus on the following four themes:
1. Student Engagement
2. Valuing Teaching
3. Rigour and Stretch
4. Feedback
With these in mind, please consider:
Q1c. What does your School think is meant by “outstanding stretch and rigour”, and how is it demonstrated in our course design and assessments?
Q1d. What would your definition of “an optimal level of contact time” be, and how does your School demonstrate it?
Q1b. What evidence can you point to within your School that demonstrates the University’s culture that it facilitates, recognises and rewards excellent teaching?
Q1a. How do you encourage students’ engagement and an active commitment to learning and study?
2. LEARNING ENVIRONMENT
The learning environment assessment covers
1. Resources
2. Scholarship, Research and Professional Practice
3. Personalised Learning
In this context please consider:
Q2a. How are independent study and research skills cultivated in our students?
Please highlight those areas where you feel that activity is sector leading)
Q2c. What examples could you highlight of outstanding physical and digital resources, and how can we show that they are consistently used?
Q2b. To what extent do students on your programme(s) have the opportunity to tailor/specialise their learning experience, thus gaining a “personalised learning experience”?
(Where possible, please provide a commentary on how this may impact on retention, attainment and progression outcomes.)
3. STUDENT OUTCOMES AND LEARNING GAIN
This section of the questionnaire specifically focuses on:
1. Employment and Further Study
2. Employability and Transferable Skills
3. Positive Outcomes for All
Q3b. Please provide examples of how you think your School’s academic programmes provide students with the necessary skills to move onto successful employment/further study outcomes?
Q3c. Please highlight where curriculum design in your School is influenced by or contributed to by partner organisations (such as regulatory bodies, businesses/employers, NHS etc)
Q3a. Can you please describe specific strategies in your School that are undertaken to ensure that all learning styles, student backgrounds and student demographics are catered for to enable students to achieve their best outcomes? Note: the TEF requires institutions to address student groups by gender, age, social & economic disadvantage, disability, ethnicity and whether they are home/international students.
Other comments
Based upon the criteria in Annex A, if you feel there is anything else that it would be useful to mention, please do so here.
4
Annex A
TEF Assessment Criteria
Aspect of QualityAreas of teaching and learning quality / Reference / Criterion /
Teaching Quality / Student Engagement (TQ1) / Teaching provides effective stimulation, challenge and contact time that encourages students to engage and actively commit to their studies
Valuing Teaching (TQ2) / Institutional culture facilitates, recognises and rewards excellent teaching
Rigour and Stretch
(TQ3) / Course design, development, standards and assessment are effective in stretching students to develop independence, knowledge, understanding and skills that reflect their full potential
Feedback
(TQ4) / Assessment and feedback are used effectively in supporting students’ development, progression and attainment
Learning Environment / Resources
(LE1) / Physical and digital resources are used effectively to aid students’ learning and the development of independent study and research skills
Scholarship, Research and Professional Practice
(LE2) / The learning environment is enriched by student exposure to and involvement in provision at the forefront of scholarship, research and/or professional practice
Personalised Learning
(LE3) / Students’ academic experiences are tailored to the individual, maximising rates of retention, attainment and progression
Student Outcomes and Learning Gain / Employment and Further Study
(SO1) / Students achieve their educational and professional goals, in particular progression to further study or highly skilled employment
Employability and Transferrable Skills (SO2) / Students acquire knowledge, skills and attributes that are valued by employers and that enhance their personal and/or professional lives
Positive Outcomes for All (SO3) / Positive outcomes are achieved by its students from all backgrounds, in particular those from disadvantaged backgrounds or those who are at greater risk of not achieving positive outcomes
Annex B
Examples of Evidence
Aspect / Possible examples of evidence / Potential Keele Examples /Teaching Quality (TQ) / · Impact and effectiveness of involving students in teaching evaluation e.g. collecting and acting on their feedback
· Impact and effectiveness of schemes focused on monitoring and maximising students’ engagement with their studies such as the UK Engagement Survey (UKES) and others
· Recognition of courses by professional, statutory and regulatory bodies (PSRBs)
· How the provider is achieving positive outcomes for students, whilst also successfully identifying, addressing and preventing grade inflation
· Quantitative information on teaching intensity, such as weighted contact hours22
· Impact and effectiveness of external examining
· Impact and effectiveness of teaching observation schemes
· Impact and effectiveness of innovative approaches, new technology or educational research
· Recognition and reward schemes, and their impact and effectiveness, including progression and promotion opportunities for staff based on teaching commitment and performance
· Quantitative information relating to the qualification, experience and contractual basis of staff who teach
· Impact and effectiveness of feedback initiatives aimed at supporting students’ development, progression and achievement / Ø SSLCs
Ø Module Evaluation process
Ø NSS action planning
Ø IQAs
Ø StARs
Learning Environment (LE) / • Impact and effectiveness of initiatives aimed at supporting the transition into and through a higher education course
• Quantitative information demonstrating proportional investment in teaching and learning infrastructure
• Use and effectiveness of learner analytics in tracking and monitoring progress and development
• Extent, nature and impact of employer engagement in course design and/or delivery, including degree apprenticeships
• Extent and impact of student involvement in or exposure to the latest developments in research, scholarship or professional practice (one or more)
• (For relevant providers) Evidence of Welsh medium provision contributing to students’ academic experiences
• Impact and effectiveness of initiatives aimed at understanding, assessing and improving retention and completion / Ø Mentoring scheme
Ø Learner Analytics ‘readiness’ exercise
Student Outcomes and Learning Gain (SO) / • Learning gain and distance-travelled by all students including those entering higher education part-way through their professional lives
• Career enhancement and progression for mature students
• Evidence of longer-term employment outcomes and progression of graduates including into highly-skilled employment
• Evidence and impact of initiatives aimed at preparing students for further study and research
• Evidence and impact of initiatives aimed at graduate employability
• Extent of student involvement in enterprise and entrepreneurship
• Number, impact and success of graduate start-ups
• Use and effectiveness of initiatives used to help measure and record student progress, such as Grade Point Average (GPA)
• Impact of initiatives aimed at closing gaps in development, attainment and progression for students from different backgrounds, in particular those from disadvantaged backgrounds or those who are at greater risk of not achieving positive outcomes. / Ø Employability activity –‘Co-curriculum’ and volunteering activities: ‘Be More’
Ø Strong relationship with Students’ Union
22 A weighted contact hours measure allows comparison between providers that deliver courses in different ways – for example, those that have high amounts of contact time with large class sizes and those that offer lower contact time and smaller class sizes.