Foreword
1 This is a report of an institutional review of the University of Wales Institute, Cardiff (UWIC) undertaken by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). QAA is grateful to UWIC for the willing cooperation provided to the review team.
2 The review was carried out using an institutional review process approved by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC), the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW), Universities UK (UUK), and the Standing Conference of Principals (SCOP). The process is described in QAA's Handbook for academic review. The process was introduced in 2002 following completion of QAA's process of continuation audit, which was itself a revised version of the original national academic quality audit programme that began in 1991 under the auspices of the CVCP's Academic Audit Unit and was subsequently taken over by the Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC) in 1992.
3 Institutional review addresses the ultimate responsibility for the management of quality and standards that rests with the institution as a whole. It is concerned particularly with the way an institution exercises its powers as a body able to grant degrees and other awards. It results in reports on the degree of confidence that may reasonably be placed in an institution's effectiveness in managing the academic standards of its awards and the quality of its programmes.
Introduction
4 The University of Wales Institute, Cardiff was established in 1976 under the title of the South Glamorgan Institute of Higher Education, an amalgamation of four colleges. In 1990 it changed its name to the Cardiff Institute of Higher Education and in 1992 became a Higher Education Corporation and an Associated Institution of the University of Wales (the University). In 1993, the Institute secured Privy Council approval for the award of taught degrees. The Institute was admitted to the University of Wales as a 'university college' in 1996, changing its title to the University of Wales Institute, Cardiff. Subsequent to the current review visit, it was agreed that UWIC should become a 'constituent institution' of the University of Wales, and the University was taking the action required to give effect to that decision. UWIC's vision is to be a 'premier provider of vocational education and professional training'.
5 UWIC holds its own taught degree awarding powers in abeyance and its degree programmes lead to the awards of the University of Wales. Its status as a University of Wales university college gives it full membership of the University of Wales Court, Council and major committees. Within the University of Wales academic framework, UWIC exercises responsibility for its own validation and review events, reporting on the outcomes to the University of Wales. UWIC has devolved authority to offer University of Wales research degrees. Before UWIC became a full member of the University of Wales, UWIC research students were registered with the Open University (OU). A small number of students who are completing research degrees are still registered with the OU. UWIC intends to apply for its own research degree awarding powers but has stated that it will continue to award University of Wales research degrees. At sub-degree level, UWIC confers some of its own awards and operates a number of awards under licence from external awarding bodies such as Edexcel.
6 UWIC is based on four teaching campuses, all within the boundaries of the city of Cardiff. In February 2002, approximately 8,000 students were registered with UWIC, of whom 77 per cent were full-time. Eighty five per cent of students were studying on undergraduate programmes, 13 per cent on taught postgraduate programmes and 2 per cent on research degree programmes. Twenty three and a half per cent of full-time students, and 93.1 per cent of part-time students, are over 21 on entry. The gender balance of the student body is 54 per cent female and 46 per cent male. UWIC 's academic work is divided between nine schools: Applied Sciences; Art and Design; Business; Education; Health and Social Sciences; Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure Management; Sport, PE and Recreation; Product and Engineering Design; and, Lifelong Learning. The schools range in size from Lifelong Learning with 373 students, to three schools with over 1,000 students each. UWIC also has a research and consultancy centre, the National Centre for Product Design and Development Research (PDR). In 2002, UWIC employed 840 full-time staff, of whom 334 were academic, and 849 part-time staff of whom 418 were academic.
7 UWIC also offers programmes in collaboration with 15 partner institutions. Two of the partners are in Spain and Ireland, although UWIC has not admitted any new students to those programmes since 1999-2000. All other partners are based in Wales.
8 A brief guide, facts and figures for 2002, prepared by UWIC, is attached as appendix 1. A list of UWIC's collaborative partnerships, current at September 2002 is attached as appendix 2.
The review process
9 UWIC provided the review team with a self-evaluation document (SED). Key documents provided with the SED included: the 2002-03 undergraduate prospectuses (full and part-time), Postgraduate and Research Opportunities Prospectus, Corporate Strategic Plan, Learning and Teaching Strategy, Research and Enterprise Strategy, and the Academic Handbook. The team had access to the 1996 HEQC quality audit report and the 2002 overseas partnership audit report of UWIC's link with the Fundacion San Valero, Spain.
10 The review team comprised Professor I Jamieson, Dr P Marsh, Professor G Roberts, reviewers, and Mrs S Applegarth, review secretary for the briefing visit, and Mr G Wade, review secretary for the review visit. The review was coordinated for QAA by Ms A K L Crum, Assistant Director, Institutional Review.
Briefing visit
11 The review process began with a briefing visit to UWIC on 13 and 14 May 2002. At the briefing visit a number of documents referenced in the SED were made available to the review team. The team asked UWIC to make available for the review visit a small number of documents in addition to those cited in the SED. During the briefing visit the team met the Principal, senior staff with responsibility for quality assurance, and a group of student representatives. The team used the briefing visit to clarify certain aspects of UWIC's quality assurance arrangements and to identify themes for further exploration during the review visit.
12 The SED identified a significant management reorganisation and strategic reconfiguration which UWIC had embarked upon. The review team was, therefore, particularly interested to explore the views of staff and students on the changes, the extent to which the changes were perceived to be effective, and the effect of their implementation on quality and standards.
13 The review team identified a number of themes to explore with staff and students during the review visit. These included the range and use made of management information, the role and function of the Academic Standards Committee (ASC), the arrangements for collaborative provision, and the extent to which the UWIC Learning and Teaching Strategy was underpinned by staff development activity.
Review visit
14 The review visit took place between 18 and 20 June 2002. During the visit the review team conducted six meetings with academic staff from each of UWIC's nine schools; members of the Research and Enterprise Board and the Learning and Teaching Board; a representative group of students, including elected officers of the Students' Union; and senior management staff.
Developments since 1996
15 In 1996 UWIC participated in a quality audit conducted by HEQC. The report commended UWIC on a number of its practices including: the development of its quality assurance systems; its commitment to the improvement of services to students as evidenced by the production of a Student Charter and the award of the Charter Mark; the quality of its academic staff and student handbooks coupled with the effective introduction of a Staff Development and Appraisal Scheme; and the general culture within UWIC of openness, transparency and attention to student concerns.
16 The report also invited UWIC to give further consideration to a range of matters, including the removal of documentary inconsistencies between general and course-specific assessment regulations, and the introduction of a clear institutional strategy for staff development, including the production of clear criteria for successful completion of probationary service. UWIC has undertaken significant managerial changes, one consequence of which has seen a stronger involvement of staff across the institution with the implementation of its quality assurance procedures. In particular, the designation of directors of learning and teaching within each school has effectively reduced the extent to which the system was dependent on a 'small number of key individuals' at the time of the 1996 report (see below, paragraph 32). The 1996 report invited UWIC to consider its policy for internal audit. The team was informed that a new school review method is being developed for implementation in 2002-03 (see below, paragraph 37).
17 The report also invited UWIC to take a number of steps to address apparent shortcomings in its framework for collaborative provision including, in particular, its overseas activity. The review team considered that UWIC has satisfactorily addressed many of these matters in the intervening period by clarifying committee responsibilities and lines of reporting. It is also applying more rigid criteria to its collaborative provision and has established closer links between this provision and its internal quality assurance procedures. This has led to the application of stricter criteria to the development of further collaborative provision, including the prohibition of provision involving assessment in languages other than English or Welsh. The team noted that the programme of implementation of the recommendations emanating from the 1996 report continued at the present time (see below, paragraphs 64 to 68)
18 The SED stated that UWIC had participated in eight subject reviews since 1996. All of the provision included in those reviews was found to be at least satisfactory, and the majority was rated as excellent. UWIC has also been assessed by 11 professional and statutory bodies in relevant disciplines, with the provision being identified as satisfactory or better in each case. It has also been assessed twice by Estyn, in relation to its further education provision and its courses in Initial Teacher Training. The Estyn reports record a high quality course provision and high levels of student attainment.
19 A number of themes were identified within the subject reports and the review team noted that the adequacy of the library provision was raised within several. Specifically the provision was identified as being disappointing in terms of the range and currency of stock in a small number of reports. The team noted that UWIC is taking positive steps to improve its learning infrastructure through the development of learning centres, but the team was not made aware of any specific steps being taken to improve the provision of library texts generally. In relation to collaborative provision, UWIC has responded to a perceived weakness in its validation process by including a library representative on the preliminary visit to the franchised institution (see below, paragraphs 53 and 67).
20 The review team considers that the broad thrust of UWIC's responses to the 1996 quality audit report and subsequent subject reviews have been appropriate and have led to a programme of change which is being properly and carefully implemented. The pace of change has quickened over the latter part of the period since the audit and is linked critically to the process of managerial change both centrally and within schools. Elements of that process remain to be completed and their results to become embedded within UWIC's practices.
QAA's Code of practice: adherence
21 The SED indicated that adherence to the precepts in the Code would be 'a matter for scrutiny within the new internal audit system and will also be dealt with as an issue for successful review/validation of new courses'. ASC established a working group in October 2000 to coordinate the UWIC response to the Code. The SED acknowledged that work remained to be carried out to 'embed the Code through staff development and other activity'.
22 The working group applied a common process to each section of the Code involving the identification of examples of non-adherence and seeking to rectify such examples by a process which has led to a series of amendments to the UWIC Academic Handbook. A paper prepared for the institutional review describing the working methods of the group indicated that individuals with specific expertise are co-opted to join the core group membership to discuss particular sections of the Code. The group also seeks to identify and disseminate good practice through awareness-raising sessions within staff development workshops. The working group has set itself a target to complete its tasks by 2004.
23 In April 2002 the Programme Specifications Scrutiny Group was established. The main remit of this group is to 'review and advise upon all Programme Specifications to ensure that they comply with the QAA's requirements'. Whereas the role of the original working group is to ensure that UWIC's regulatory framework adheres to the precepts of the Code, the role of the scrutiny group is to ensure adherence at the level of individual programmes. The review team was informed that this new group would seek to ensure that adherence at the programme level is achieved at a faster pace than would be the case if amendments awaited the normal periodic review process.
24 The papers of the Code of practice working group show that UWIC is fully committed to this work and the review team considers that it has adopted a comprehensive approach to its task. In terms of incorporating the Code into UWIC's formal regulations, the team noted that there is considerable adherence. The team considers that UWIC is aware of the challenge of embedding its policies at school and programme level, and is developing appropriate mechanisms to monitor progress. However, the team would wish to encourage the working group to complete its tasks and, in particular, to consider whether a completion date earlier than 2004 could be achievable.
Institutional approach to quality management
25 The SED indicated that UWIC's strategic development has been, and remains, strongly influenced by the context of the higher education system in Wales. This is reflected in UWIC's relationship with the University of Wales and in its engagement with the education, economic and social agenda being developed by the National Assembly for Wales. The Assembly has embarked upon plans to use education as an agent of social and economic regeneration, seeking to develop a knowledge-based economy in which education institutions contribute to the stimulation of enterprise and the building of social capital. As part of this strategy, in 2002 the Assembly reported on its review of the higher education structure in Wales, embracing the position of individual institutions and the federal University of Wales.
26 In discussion with the Principal and other senior staff, the review team heard that UWIC strongly identified with the social and economic regeneration role of higher education which was a central element in the Assembly's strategy. The team also noted that UWIC is a leading partner in many innovation and capacity-building schemes, such as Help Wales and the formation of teaching companies. The Principal believed that this role, which matched UWIC's emerging long-term strategy, could best be pursued if UWIC remained an autonomous institution and an equal member of the federal University of Wales, collaborating with other institutions in areas of mutual benefit.
UWIC vision, mission and academic principles
27 The UWIC vision, formulated in December 2000, is to be a 'premier provider of vocational education and professional training'. From this vision emanates a mission with six key elements: to build on established centres of excellence in particular areas of professional and vocational education and training; to provide education and training opportunities that are accessible, flexible and of the highest quality; to provide a culture within which applied research and enterprise will flourish; to develop world class levels of performance in sport; to contribute to the social, cultural and economic prosperity of an increasingly global community, with particular focus upon the needs of Wales; and, to take advantage of UWIC's location in the capital city of Wales through working in close partnership with local, national and international communities.
28 The vision and mission have been reinforced by a set of academic principles, agreed by Academic Board in February 2002, following a period of consultation. The principles are intended to set a clear context for policy development and for the construction of a new academic plan, as well as providing staff with a statement of values which will inform UWIC's future activity. The SED identified the following key aspects of the academic principles: the aspiration to become the leading enterprise and vocational university for Wales and particularly Cardiff; the intention to match national and international standards in learning and teaching, and research and enterprise; the desire to enhance and monitor academic quality and standards as priorities for all academic areas; and, the commitment to define new approaches to widening participation, accompanied by a commitment to social responsibility, partnership and capacity-building.
29 From its meetings with staff drawn from across the institution, the review team identified a shared understanding of the developing mission, vision and academic principles. This understanding was expressed in numerous articulations of the strength of UWIC's commitment to vocational programmes; opportunities for work-based and practice-based learning in the curriculum; concern for students and their future employability and the application of knowledge to the practical needs of key employment sectors through applied research, enterprise, consultancy and the formation of teaching companies. It was clear to the team that UWIC had taken considerable care in reformulating its strategic direction under the leadership of the Principal during the three years since his appointment. As a consequence, UWIC now has a clear set of values and an emerging organisational culture upon which to base its major programme of policy development and implementation.
Organisational change
30 As a corollary to the development and refinement of the mission, vision and strategic priorities, UWIC has undergone considerable organisational change during the last three years. In August 1999, a new academic structure of nine schools was introduced. In September 2001, UWIC restructured its institutional management, replacing the previous Directorate with a Principal's Management Board (PMB) comprised of: the Principal, the Vice-Principal (Academic); the Director of Planning and Human Resources; the Director of Collaborative Developments; the Secretary and Registrar; and, the Director of Finance. Six assistant principal posts were also created with thematic briefs covering: learning and teaching; research and enterprise; staff development; space planning; academic support; and, information strategy. The assistant principals, together with PMB, constitute an Academic Management Forum. A broader Senior Management Team, which additionally includes the heads of school and central units, assists PMB in implementing UWIC's corporate policies.
31 The review team heard from senior staff that the management restructuring had been designed to: improve cross-campus communication; create an enhanced sense of academic community; improve the focus on teaching and learning, and academic quality; and, facilitate policy implementation. The team was told that advice had been taken from an external management consultancy and the proposals had been debated within UWIC, with implementation taking place on a staged basis between 1999 and 2002. It was noted that the previous structure had tended to inhibit communication between managers and staff, as well as lacking mechanisms for translating corporate policy and priorities into action.
32 The school structure was also revised, with identified directors of learning and teaching, and research and enterprise in each school. These directors work alongside the assistant principals with associated institutional responsibilities. The review team was told that this had helped to increase the extent to which staff in the schools engaged with the key academic matters central to UWIC's strategic development. This was confirmed in the team's discussions with a range of staff who believed that the management changes had improved communication and were raising awareness of key institutional priorities.
Management of quality and standards
33 In parallel with the changes to the organisational and management structure, UWIC has also engaged in the review and amendment of its constitutional and committee framework, although this process remains to be completed. UWIC acknowledged in its SED that there was 'overlap' in its committee structure and the review team learnt that a working group, chaired by the Vice-Principal (Academic), had drafted a paper 'UWIC's Academic Structure: Proposals for Change' which would be presented to Academic Board in June 2002. In addition to addressing the overlap between committee responsibilities, the paper identified the rationale for these changes as being to clarify the distinction between quality development and quality assurance responsibilities, and to increase the focus on institutional responsibility for maintaining academic standards. The latter aim would be addressed by creating a new Academic Standards Board as a full committee of Academic Board. The team also heard that a proposal to amend the membership of Academic Board was planned and was currently undergoing consultation.
34 The SED identified Academic Board as the 'key body with responsibility for academic quality matters'. It currently operates with three main committees reporting to it: the Learning and Teaching Board, the Research and Enterprise Board, and the Graduate College Board. The Learning and Teaching Board carries explicit responsibility, on behalf of Academic Board, for quality assurance and the maintenance of standards across all taught programmes. In addition, its terms of reference include responsibility for all matters relating to the learning environment, collaborative provision, student recruitment and admissions, and staff development. It has two sub-committees: ASC, which carries operational responsibility for validation, monitoring and periodic review of all internal taught programmes; and, the Collaborative Provision Committee which carries similar responsibilities for those programmes delivered through collaborative arrangements. The Research and Enterprise Board, in keeping with UWIC's emphasis on vocational excellence, is responsible for the combined development of academic research and its application, as well as for enterprise and consultancy activities. The Graduate College Board has a specific remit for the oversight of all aspects of UWIC's research degree procedures from initial registration to examination.
35 The heads of school have primary responsibility for all matters concerning the schools' operation, including the maintenance of quality and standards. In addition to school level committees, the heads are supported by school management teams comprising two elected members of staff in addition to the school directors of: learning and teaching; research and enterprise; and, graduate studies. The School of Life Long Learning has a slightly different structure to reflect the fact that it is a lead body. Heads of school are ex officio members of Academic Board, while the directors of learning and teaching, research and enterprise, and graduate studies are ex officio members of their respective Academic Board sub-committees.
36 From its discussions with staff, the review team concluded that the committee structure was well-understood and, despite some overlap in responsibilities as acknowledged by UWIC, appeared to be working effectively. The existence within UWIC of an openness policy, whereby there is a presumption that all committee papers should be available to the academic community unless there is good reason for this not to be the case, appeared to have contributed to the extent to which the staff met by the team seemed knowledgeable about matters relating to quality assurance. Although it is too early to be certain of the impact of the proposed changes, the team considered it likely that the proposed new structure would bring about the benefits identified by UWIC.
School review
37 During the review visit, the review team heard from senior staff that a new school review process had been developed, and that the first such review would take place in October 2002. UWIC already has a periodic review mechanism (see below, paragraph 52) but this focuses on programmes and, the team was told, UWIC wanted to develop a process to consider the operation of schools on a more holistic basis, to include management and financial, as well as academic, matters. Specifically, the team was told that the process would consider the extent to which schools reflect UWIC's strategic priorities. The team noted the intention that the process would include individuals external to UWIC and that reports of the reviews would be considered in the first instance by the Learning and Teaching Board. The team was interested in the development of this new process but UWIC may wish to reconsider the proposed reporting mechanism if the aspiration for a holistic approach is to be realised.
Research degrees
38 The SED stated that, prior to the institution's membership of the University of Wales, its research students were registered with the OU. Currently, a small number of students are registered with the OU, the remainder having completed or transferred registration to the University of Wales. The SED indicated that UWIC had now 'gained responsibility for approving research degree candidates on the basis of its quality assurance systems and practices which were approved by the University of Wales'. The SED went on to state that, over time, UWIC's systems had been 'refined and enhanced to reflect identified good practice as part of a systematic process in preparation for submission of an application for Research Degree Awarding Powers'.
39 Responsibility for the oversight of all research degrees within UWIC is vested in the Graduate College Board, which includes two members nominated by the University of Wales Validation Board and one external member approved by the UWIC Academic Board. The Graduate College Board receives recommendations and reports on research students' progress from the directors of graduate studies in each school. The quality assurance procedures relating to research students are set out comprehensively in the Academic Handbook and these arrangements are communicated to students via the Research Student Handbook.
40 The SED indicated a desire to develop further the 'research culture' at UWIC. In part, this was being addressed by efforts to increase the number of staff with research supervisory experience. A number of the academic staff met by the review team confirmed that they were identified as active researchers or supervisors, and that they were given a time allowance to pursue their activities within their annual workload allocation. Most of those students who met the team were familiar with the Research Student Handbook. They were generally positive about their experience and the support provided by UWIC, although there appeared to be some variation between schools regarding the accommodation and IT facilities provided. A number of students noted that they had been supported in attending, and presenting papers at, external conferences, in some cases the support had taken the form of a full-time bursary. Meetings with supervisors were said to be frequent and there was easy access to the relevant director of graduate studies if problems occurred beyond the expertise or authority of the supervisor. However, the team heard that the opportunity for contact with other research students varied between schools. The team noted that there did not appear to be a specific mechanism at the level of the institution to identify research student opinion. In order to meet its own aspirations regarding the development of a research culture, UWIC is invited to consider the desirability of developing a mechanism to identify and respond to research student needs in order to ensure parity of experience across UWIC.
Quality enhancement
41 The SED indicated that the UWIC Learning and Teaching Strategy had 'explicit aims and objectives in respect of quality enhancement'. The Strategy identifies a set of principles related to learning approaches (such as deep, reflective and inclusive learning), which the SED stated underpinned learning and teaching at UWIC. As has been noted, each school has a director of learning and teaching whose task it is to promote these principles and develop appropriate learning, teaching and assessment strategies within the schools.
42 The SED stated that the Learning and Teaching Board and the Learning and Teaching Support Unit (LTSU) had an explicit responsibility to 'encourage enhancements in the quality of learning and teaching'. LTSU has responsibility for managing the Teaching and Development Fund which is intended to support the implementation of the Learning and Teaching Strategy through a competitive bidding process. A particular feature of the work of LTSU is its arrangements for the partial secondment of staff from the schools. The SED claimed that this made good use of the experience of staff and was also an effective means of providing support to schools and encouraging school-based initiatives. In discussion with the review team, staff were able to produce numerous examples of teaching developments which exemplified the principles of the Learning and Teaching Strategy.
43 Staff in LTSU have specific expertise in student survey work and recently have conducted surveys on study skills, student withdrawal and a range of matters related to overall student satisfaction. The review team considered that this work helped to support the SED claim that UWIC placed students at the centre of its activities. LTSU has specific responsibility for implementing UWIC's programme of electronic learning, based around the Blackboard software platform. Following consideration of the documentary material provided and its discussions with staff, the team came to the conclusion that LTSU was making a significant contribution to the enhancement of learning and teaching across UWIC. The introduction of the Blackboard programme was highlighted by staff and students as having been particularly well-managed by LTSU, a view shared by the team.
44 The SED also stated that the development of a clear model of the 'UWIC academic' would 'assist in standard setting and provide a baseline approach for defining high calibre staff and targeted staff development'. The review team noted that the work on defining the 'UWIC academic' was of recent origin and was only just beginning to be discussed more widely across the institution.
45 The Staff Development Unit (SDU) was established in 1999 and makes regular reports to the Learning and Teaching Board. The SDU annual report indicates that there is an increasing take up of a range of staff development events designed to support the Learning and Teaching Strategy, although the SED acknowledged that the take up of the voluntary Institute of Learning and Teaching accredited programme is relatively low. The SED indicated that it would 'become policy' for all new staff without a relevant teaching qualification to undertake the programme. The review team considered that such a step would support UWIC's commitment to excellence in learning and teaching and would therefore encourage UWIC to proceed with this policy.
46 The SED also acknowledged that there was 'no consistent approach or standard of peer observation'. The review team noted that the development of peer observation is a high priority for SDU, and a number of projects with the aim of developing a strategy have been launched within schools. The team believed that it would be desirable for UWIC to proceed with the development of peer observation in order to acquire accurate and reliable information about the embedding of the approaches set out in the Learning and Teaching Strategy.
Welsh language
47 The SED stated that UWIC had a range of strategies, including a Welsh Development Plan, which related to its central commitment to learning and teaching quality. Under the terms of the Welsh Language Act (1993) UWIC is required to develop a Welsh Language Scheme. The Scheme, which was in draft form at the time of the current institutional review, proposes the establishment of a Use of Welsh Committee to ensure that new policies and initiatives within UWIC are consistent with the Scheme. The Welsh Development Plan, a parallel document produced by UWIC for HEFCW, states that 'it remains to be worked through as to how the Use of Welsh Committee will relate to the quality systems as they exist at present'. The team noted that the constitution of the proposed Committee also remained to be defined.
48 Located in the capital of Wales, and having a distinctive vocational mission, UWIC is well-placed to develop its Welsh-medium provision in response to local and national needs. The review team noted that student involvement in the development of UWIC's policies in relation to Welsh-medium provision had not been specified and that those students met by the team appeared to be largely unaware of UWIC's policy in this area. UWIC is, therefore, encouraged to complete and progress the implementation of its Welsh Language Scheme in support of its mission.
Commentary on the awarding body function
49 As noted earlier, the UWIC Academic Board and its committees have overall responsibility for the academic standards of awards, exercising devolved authority from the University of Wales but operating within an academic regulatory framework established by the University. The SED indicated that the participation of UWIC staff in the committees of the University helped to provide a 'safeguard' with respect to the assurance of quality and standards by enabling the comparative discussion and evaluation of quality and standards matters. The SED went on to list a range of measures which contributed to the security of academic standards at UWIC including the University's involvement in the validation and external examiner processes. It was clear from the SED that UWIC placed considerable value upon its involvement with the University of Wales as a means of providing an additional dimension of quality assurance and an external focus to its own institutional procedures.
50 UWIC's internal quality and standards procedures are overseen by the Learning and Teaching Board, to which ASC and the Collaborative Provision Committee report. Between them, these bodies establish the framework within which programmes of study are approved, monitored, reviewed and assessed. The committees receive the reports of all validation and review events, annual monitoring reports from schools, and external examiners' reports, and report to Academic Board on the operation, quality and standards of UWIC programmes.
51 UWIC's regulations and procedures for assuring quality and standards are set out in the Academic Handbook. This document provides definitive guidance to all staff on the procedures operated by UWIC under its enabling authority from the University of Wales and is available in both a loose-leaf binder and electronically via the intranet. The Handbook is updated regularly by the Academic Registry and the Academic Office. The review team noted that it provides detailed guidance on a comprehensive range of UWIC's procedures. In the view of the team, the Handbook provides a sound basis from which academic staff can develop and define academic programmes using consistent principles, nomenclature, and definitions of accepted practice.
Programme approval, monitoring and review
52 The SED stressed the importance UWIC placed on the course approval, monitoring and review systems. The Academic Handbook contains detailed information on the procedures themselves, which incorporate internal and external peer review. It is usual practice to have external members on validation panels in addition to a member from the University of Wales. In the case of vocational courses, validation and review panels are required to include a relevant industrial or professional member as well as an academic member external to UWIC. The validation and review documentation made available to the review team provided evidence that a reasonable level of scrutiny was being applied, but the team noted the comment within the SED that UWIC considered it needed to improve the self-critical nature of its review documentation.
53 As part of its consideration of the outcomes of validation, review and annual monitoring activity, ASC carries out an annual review of these processes, with specific matters being highlighted for further exploration. The report by ASC on matters arising from the 2000-01 validation schedule identified two significant themes. First, that a number of validation events were being scheduled to take place late in the academic year with the consequent difficulty of ensuring the fulfilment of any validation conditions before the commencement of the programmes. This had applied to a franchise programme proposal where subsequent monitoring and external examiners' reports were highly critical of the effectiveness of the programme's operation. Although UWIC took active steps with the partner college to address the matters of concern, this experience raised the question of whether the original validation had been carried out in sufficient time for the response to the conditions to be embedded in advance of the programme commencing.
54 The second significant theme identified by ASC was that validation panels were frequently concerned about learning resources, especially library and IT resources, and that these concerns appeared to be expressed in increasingly strong terms. The review team also noted the report of one validation event where the programme under scrutiny had not been approved in part because of a lack of existing library resources or dedicated staff expertise. UWIC's procedures require initial consideration to be given to the learning environment and resources in advance of proposals proceeding to validation. Therefore, the team considered that the resourcing shortfall in this case should have been identified prior to the validation stage.
55 The review team considers that ASC is able to identify matters requiring further action and that it plays an important role in seeking to ensure the consistency of application of UWIC's procedures across the schools and collaborative partners. Nonetheless, it is recommended that UWIC should ensure the timeliness and consistent application of its approval and validation procedures on all occasions, in particular making sure that matters relating to learning resources and the learning environment are addressed at an early stage (see above, paragraph 19).
56 An annual course report (ACR) must be produced for each course during the autumn term for submission to the Academic Office in the spring term. The ACRs follow a pro forma provided by UWIC and summarise all relevant information about course performance during the previous year, including application, progression and completion rates, and demographic information relating to the student population. Course teams are also required to highlight matters raised in validation and review reports, by the external examiners and, where appropriate, by professional body reports, as well as reporting on the action points from the previous ACR.
57 The ACRs seen by the review team were comprehensive and analytical, although the team noted that a number of course leaders highlighted the difficulty they experienced in gaining access to accurate course-specific monitoring information from the student record system. These difficulties were confirmed in discussion with the team. The SED had indicated that an ASC working group was focusing on the need to improve the 'quality and range of statistical data and its analysis'. As part of the work of this group, UWIC is asked to consider the desirability of developing its management information system such that data is easily accessible to course leaders for the purpose of producing ACRs.
58 Once completed, ACRs are scrutinised in the school learning and teaching committees. The schools produce summaries of the ACRs and these, in turn, are considered by ASC. ASC itself produces a summary of institution-wide matters for consideration by the Learning and Teaching Board. From its analysis of the summary reports available and the minutes of the relevant committees, the review team came to the view that this system is capable of identifying important matters in order to assure the quality and standards of UWIC's programmes and awards.
Assessment
59 The key features of the UWIC assessment system were set out in the SED, along with an analysis of the progress made towards responding to the QAA Code of practice in this area. The Academic Handbook defines the assessment regulations and a range of related matters including the processes for the conduct of examinations and examination boards, marking arrangements, and the conduct of appeals. Generic assessment criteria are also specified in the Academic Handbook which provide the context for the development of course specific assessment procedures, which require approval during validation and review.
60 While the guidance in the Academic Handbook is both detailed and explicit, UWIC acknowledges that there is still work to be done to strengthen, and ensure the consistency of, assessment practice. UWIC is addressing this through the work of a specially convened group which represents all the directors of learning and teaching, and which reports to the Learning and Teaching Board. In addition, LTSU has run staff development workshops focusing on assessment. The review team learnt that the working group was requiring all schools to produce their own assessment guidelines by the end of 2001-02. These school guidelines are required to be in line with the framework set out in the Academic Handbook and applied to specific practice appropriate to particular curricula, such as those incorporating work-based learning.
61 The review team considered that this work was positive but also noted a number of instances where assessment practice was not currently in line with institutional expectations, many of which were identified by ASC in its review of matters arising from the validation and review schedules. For example, ASC noted that a common theme identified in reports was the need to improve the linkage between the specification of learning outcomes, content and assessment methodology and criteria. In particular it was noted that some learning outcomes were at variance with the academic level intended. Given the significance of consistency in assessment practice to the security of academic standards, UWIC is urged to complete its work on the formulation and implementation of assessment guidelines. The team considered that this would ensure consistency and clarity of practice between schools, and between school practice and institutional policy.
62 External examiner nominations are approved by ASC and the Learning and Teaching Board under procedures laid down in the Academic Handbook. Examiners for the University of Wales awards use a standard pro forma and UWIC is in the process of devising further guidance for all of its external examiners on the matters to be included in their reports. The University of Wales pro forma invites comment on the comparability of UWIC award standards; external examiner reports are sent directly to the University of Wales Registry before being forwarded to UWIC for comment where they are scrutinised at school and institutional levels. The Learning and Teaching Board devotes a considerable part of one of its meetings to the methodical analysis of the external examiners' reports and the school learning and teaching committees' responses to them. The Learning and Teaching Board reports to ASC which, in turn, submits an overview report to the UWIC Academic Board and to the University of Wales on the key matters raised.
63 The review team noted that the most recent ASC overview report on external examiners' comments highlighted several areas of good practice which had been commended by the examiners. There was also comment on the inconsistency of practice in double marking and moderation, confirming similar evidence gathered by other UWIC procedures (see above, paragraph 61). Those external examiner reports considered by the team included comment on matters relating directly to academic standards as well as comments suggesting areas where the quality of courses or performance of students could be enhanced. The team was satisfied that UWIC gave serious consideration to the external examiners' reports and had sound mechanisms at all levels for identifying and acting upon the matters raised.
Collaborative provision
64 The UWIC approach to collaborative provision is defined in a policy statement, last revised in May 1999, which is included within the Academic Handbook. The approach is to apply the same procedures for assuring quality and standards to programmes offered in partnership with other institutions as UWIC does to 'home' provision. The SED indicated that the organisational arrangements have recently been amended to support a more strategic approach to collaborative provision. A strategic review of partnership activity is being undertaken currently and a new post of Director of Collaborative Developments has been established within the Principal's Management Board. The Collaborative Provision Committee, which reports to the Learning and Teaching Board, exercises oversight of the approval and quality assurance arrangements for collaborative provision. The Committee provides for representation of partner colleges as well as UWIC staff. UWIC currently has relationships with 15 partner colleges all of which have the right to attend the Committee. However, it was acknowledged by UWIC in discussion with the review team that attendance by partner college representatives was often disappointing.
65 The SED indicated that all collaborative provision was 'governed by individual Memoranda of Course and Financial Agreement' which were comprehensive in nature. Clear guidance on the quality assurance of collaborative provision is provided in the Academic Handbook. UWIC has checked its procedures against the QAA Code of practice and some adjustments are in the process of being implemented to ensure adherence with the Code's precepts.
66 Once approved, collaborative courses are subject to the cycle of annual monitoring and periodic review which is part of UWIC's standard quality assurance procedures. In addition, UWIC appoints a moderator who acts on behalf of UWIC's Academic Office and who is normally drawn from the school associated with the collaborative course. Moderators act as a link between UWIC and the collaborative partner, advising on regulatory and quality assurance arrangements, checking on the standards of assessment being applied, monitoring staffing arrangements, attending a minimum of one course committee meeting, and liaising with the external examiner. The review team had noted the report of a staff development event where some moderators had indicated that their work was not always valued. However, the moderators with whom the team met did not accept this view of their role. They pointed to the fact that moderation was included in their annual workload calculation (although the allocation could vary between schools), that they received staff development and supported each other, and that they had ready access to the Academic Office and the Director of Collaborative Developments if they needed advice and support in their dealings with partner institutions. The team also learnt that a moderator handbook was being developed to assist new moderators in carrying out their role.
67 From its analysis of documentation and meetings with staff, the review team concluded that substantial effort had been made to systematise and strengthen the quality and standards assurance of collaborative provision, drawing upon the good practice embodied in the QAA Code. The team observed however that a range of difficulties persisted. For example, the low attendance of partner institutions at the Collaborative Provision Committee; the lateness of some validation events for collaborative provision, with subsequent difficulties for the maintenance of course quality (see above, paragraph 53); and, references in ASC minutes to the concern of a validation panel about the institutional commitment of a particular partner, followed by reference to the persistence of significant resourcing questions after validation. The team considered that these examples raised some doubts about the absolute security of the quality and standards of UWIC's collaborative provision.
68 In discussion, senior staff expressed their determination to carry through their strategic review of collaborative provision and to concentrate on a relatively small number of close relationships with the aim of increasing participation and focusing on regional priorities. This approach was intended to result in stronger institutional relationships at senior management level which, in turn, would support a more effective embedding of UWIC's quality assurance procedures at programme level. Noting the positive progress made so far, it is advisable for UWIC to complete its review of collaborative provision to ensure that effective strategic partnerships are developed whereby the institution's thorough quality and standards assurance processes are adhered to fully in all cases.
Research degrees
69 The Graduate Studies Board has oversight of research degrees within UWIC. The Board monitors student progression and completion rates, and the review team noted that planned developments in management information systems would improve this process (see above, paragraph 57). From its consideration of documentation and its discussions with staff and students, the team noted that the procedure for approving transfers from MPhil to PhD registration relied on a report from the candidates' supervisors, together with a short report on progress from the candidate direct to the Graduate Studies Board. While the Board did include a broad membership, the team questioned whether it received sufficient information to make an informed decision on transfer. For example the process did not appear to involve a formal written or oral presentation by the candidate to individuals with relevant research experience who were external to the supervisory team. The team considered that, broadly, UWIC's procedures for assuring research degree standards and quality are adequate and secure. However, UWIC is invited to consider the desirability of reviewing its procedures for MPhil to PhD transfers to consider whether such decisions are made on the basis of adequate information.
Use of external benchmarks
70 The SED highlighted UWIC's desire to improve its capacity for generating and analysing management information in relation to quality and standards, particularly at school and programme levels. Currently, UWIC requires its schools to consider the HEFCE benchmarking information - such as that relating to student retention and progression and award classification - as part of the annual monitoring process. The analysis is reported to Academic Board annually, allowing for comparisons of performance between schools and programmes.
71 The SED also indicated that, in the last year, UWIC had commenced work on an external 'Benchmarking Project' to collect data from a range of institutions that could be used to 'improve management and academic performance and inform decision-making'. At the time of the review, two volumes of data had been produced at institutional and school level respectively. Work on producing a third volume, to focus on support services, was underway. The information compares the performance of UWIC against a specially selected group of 18 competitor institutions as well as other groupings of English and Welsh higher education institutions. This information is considered in a number of forums, including the Principal's Management Board, Academic Board and school management teams. The review team came to the conclusion that the comparative data is both extensive and of high quality. It was clear that it enabled UWIC to develop an informed view of its performance against other comparable institutions.
72 The Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) and the QAA coordinated subject benchmarking exercise have been addressed in a number of ways at UWIC. Three members of academic staff were given part-secondment to LTSU to support work on the FHEQ and subject benchmarking, in addition to their involvement with the implementation of measures relating to the QAA Code of practice. As a result, UWIC and the University of Wales credit and award systems were matched against the FHEQ, and programme teams are now required to map their programmes against the relevant Subject benchmark statements incorporating these into programme specifications at the time of initial validation or periodic review.
73 The ASC report on matters arising from the 2000-01 validation and review schedule noted that many programmes had conditions attached requiring that programme specifications should be developed. The review team noted that a standard pro forma for programme specifications had been trialled during 2000-01, although the team observed that currently there still seemed to be debate on its general introduction such that it was not yet in operation across UWIC. The ASC report recommended that good practice in producing programme specifications should be disseminated more widely and that ASC should monitor the situation to ensure that the introduction of programme specifications would keep pace with the agreed timetable. The ASC report also noted that some difficulties had been experienced in validations of programmes where Subject benchmark statements had not been published or where the programme spanned more than one benchmark statement. ASC had recommended that good practice in relation to subject benchmark responses should be more widely disseminated. The team would endorse ASC's desire to ensure greater consistency in the application of programme specifications and Subject benchmark statements during programme validation and review.
74 The review team noted that UWIC has a strong external involvement in its processes, for example the use of external members in validation and review panels, as well as the additional external perspective provided by the extensive professional body accreditation and employer involvement in UWIC's programmes. Professional and statutory body reports are initially received within the relevant school but are subsequently scrutinised by ASC. The SED observed that UWIC was awarded the Cabinet Office Charter Mark in 1995 and this was renewed in 1998 and 2001. The team saw clear evidence that the principles of Charter Mark status were influential in determining the standards of service achieved in UWIC.
Commentary on UWIC's three-year development plan
75 The SED displayed a mature and self-critical approach to the review of its procedures for assuring quality and standards with due acknowledgement of the value of the external reassurance provided by membership of the University of Wales. The meetings the review team held with staff and students confirmed the view, set out in the SED, that the academic community was reflective and aware of current matters relating to quality and standards. The SED outlined UWIC's three-year development plan including an indication of those responsible for overseeing the various elements of the plan and a timescale within which the elements should be achieved. Overall, the team considered that UWIC was undertaking a critical self-evaluation of its structures and processes, and was generally taking appropriate steps to address perceived limitations and build upon strengths.
Summary
76 The University of Wales Institute, Cardiff was originally established in 1976 from an amalgamation of four colleges. In 1993, the Institute secured Privy Council approval for the award of taught degrees and, in 1996, it was admitted to the University of Wales as a university college. Its institutional vision is to be a 'premier provider of vocational education and professional training'. Its mission statement refers to building centres of excellence; to accessible, flexible and high quality education and training; to the development of applied research and enterprise; to the development of world class levels of performance in sport; to its contribution to social, cultural and economic prosperity internationally and within Wales; and, to the fostering of partnerships based on its capital city location.
77 UWIC holds its own taught degree awarding powers in abeyance and its degree programmes lead to the awards of the University of Wales. Within the University framework, UWIC exercises responsibility for its own validation and review events, reporting on the outcomes of these to the University. UWIC has devolved authority to offer University of Wales research degrees.
78 The pace of change since the previous quality audit in 1996 was initially slow. This has undoubtedly accelerated since the arrival of the new Principal in 1999, and particularly during the last two years as senior management restructuring has been completed. This was accompanied by a major review of the wider organisational and committee structure, replacing a previous faculty-based structure with a flatter organisational framework which devolves more responsibilities to individual schools. The new structure attracts widespread support from school staff at all levels.
79 Since 2001, UWIC has engaged upon a wide ranging policy review, covering all major areas of activity but with a particular focus on formulating and revising policies for learning and teaching; research and enterprise; collaborative partnerships; and, student recruitment and assessment. UWIC notes a previous problem in securing consistency of policy implementation, and this policy review was designed both to clarify UWIC's key corporate objectives and to ensure that the mechanisms to achieve their implementation are explicitly specified. There is much evidence to suggest that the process of change is being effectively managed and that policy changes are being clearly communicated, debated and implemented. The recent clarification of the emerging pattern of higher education in Wales has helped to remove much of the contextual uncertainty around UWIC's development, and UWIC is now proceeding to address its key priorities and develop its distinctive mission with confidence and a strong sense of corporate direction.
80 Within the University of Wales framework, UWIC is effectively discharging its duties as an awarding body. Overall there is evidence that UWIC is capable of setting and defining appropriate academic standards and that it is engaged in the significant review of its procedures. This self-reflective approach has identified the work that is currently underway to strengthen, and ensure the consistency of, assessment practice. External examiners' reports are scrutinised carefully at school and institution-level; there are well-understood processes for identifying action points and matters of institutional significance.
81 UWIC has secure procedures for identifying matters of significance arising from validation and review events. These procedures have identified difficulties in the operation of the programme approval and validation processes relating to the timeframes within which validation events are scheduled and the extent to which resourcing matters are considered as part of programme approval. Effective scrutiny of the operation of these processes, as well as the annual review process, is carried out by ASC. These arrangements apply both to 'home' and collaborative provision. The scrutiny mechanisms dovetail with those of the University of Wales, without reducing the responsibility of UWIC to assure itself of the quality of its provision.
82 UWIC is currently undertaking a strategic review of its collaborative activity, and has expressed the intention of fostering closer strategic alliances with partner institutions. UWIC is encouraged to continue with its work in this area, in particular to ensure this provision is aligned fully with UWIC's existing, thorough quality and standards assurance processes.
83 UWIC has significant external involvement in its processes, including external membership of validation and review panels, as well as professional and statutory body, and employer engagement with its provision. It makes extensive and detailed use of external benchmarks, including developing a set of its own external benchmark information in order to compare its performance against a group of similar institutions across a wide range of indicators. It has adopted a detailed and methodical approach to ensuring adherence to the QAA Code of practice, including the identification of a plan for the embedding of related policy developments within schools and its collaborative partners.
84 UWIC has set itself a significant agenda of policy development and change which will address the need to create greater consistency of procedure and action at school and course level. Progress is being made in tackling major matters, such as assessment practice and the quality and standards of courses offered in collaborative provision. The findings of the review support overall confidence in the University of Wales Institute, Cardiff as an effective institution able properly to discharge its academic obligations as a responsible higher education institution and qualifications awarding body.
Action points
85 As the University of Wales Institute, Cardiff continues to develop its procedures for the management of the quality of its provision and for the security of its awards, it should consider the advisability of:
i ensuring the timeliness and consistent application of its programme approval and validation procedures on all occasions (paragraph 55);
ii completing its work on the formulation and implementation of assessment guidelines to ensure the consistency and clarity of practice between schools and with institutional policy (paragraph 61);
iii completing its review of collaborative provision to ensure that effective strategic partnerships are developed whereby UWIC's quality and standards assurance procedures are adhered to fully in all cases (paragraph 68);
86 UWIC should also consider the desirability of:
iv reviewing the planned reporting mechanism for the proposed school review process to ensure that it is appropriate to the intended aims of the new process (paragraph 37);
v meeting its own aspiration to develop a research culture by ensuring the parity of experience of research students across UWIC (paragraph 40);
vi proceeding with the implementation of mechanisms in support of the Institute of Learning and Teaching Strategy, such as the requirement for staff with limited teaching experience to complete the ILT-accredited certificate and the introduction of peer observation of teaching (paragraphs 45 and 46);
vii completing and progressing the implementation of its Welsh Language Scheme in support of its mission (paragraph 48);
viii developing its management information system to ensure course-specific data is easily accessible for the purpose of producing annual course reports (paragraph 57); and
ix reviewing its procedures for MPhil to PhD transfer to consider whether transfer decisions are made on the basis of adequate information (paragraph 69).
Appendix 1*
University of Wales Institute, Cardiff -facts and figures 2002
*As supplied by University of Wales Institute, Cardiff
History
UWIC was established in September 1976 under the title of South Glamorgan Institute of Higher Education. It was the amalgamation of four colleges: Cardiff College of Education, Cardiff College of Art, Cardiff College of Food Technology and Llandaff College of Technology. In 1990 the Institute changed its name to Cardiff Institute of Higher Education. On 1 April 1992, the Institute became a Higher Education Corporation and was an Associated Institution of the University of Wales. In 1993 the Institute secured Privy Council approval for the award of taught degrees. It was admitted to the University of Wales as a University College in April 1996, changing its title to University of Wales Institute, Cardiff.
Mission Statement
- To build on established centres of excellence in particular areas of professional and vocational education and training.
- To provide education and training opportunities that are accessible, flexible and of the highest quality.
- To provide a culture within which applied research and enterprise will flourish.
- To develop world class levels of performance in sport.
- To contribute to the social, cultural and economic prosperity of an increasingly global community, with particular focus upon the needs of Wales.
- To take advantage of UWIC's location in the capital city of Wales through working in close partnership with local, national and international communities.
Academic Structure
UWIC has nine academic schools:
- School of Applied Sciences
- Cardiff School of Art & Design
- UWIC Business School
- Cardiff School of Education
- School of Health and Social Sciences
- Welsh School of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure Management
- School of Sport, Physical Education and Recreation
- School of Product and Engineering Design
- School of Lifelong Learning
In addition UWIC has one other academic centre, the National Centre for Product Design and Development Research (PDR), which offers research and consultancy in the fields of product design, development and manufacture.
Number of students (headcount)
| School |
Year
|
||
|
Jun-00
|
Jun-01
|
Feb-02
|
|
| Applied Sciences |
737
|
862
|
910
|
| Art & Design |
896
|
983
|
968
|
| Business |
1,095
|
1,262
|
1,408
|
| Education |
445
|
1,044
|
1,002
|
| Health & Social Sciences |
962
|
898
|
1,041
|
| Hospitality, Tourism & Leisure Mgnt. |
878
|
737
|
741
|
| Sport, PE & Recreation |
768
|
983
|
1,081
|
| Product & Engineering Design |
130
|
505
|
522
|
| PDR |
n/a
|
n/a
|
2
|
| Lifelong Learning |
871
|
263
|
373
|
| Total |
6,782
|
7,537
|
8,048
|
Student characteristics
These figures are a headcount for February 2002.
| No. of Students | ||||
| Gender |
Full-time
|
Part-time
|
Total
|
|
| Male |
2,702
|
964
|
3,666
|
|
| Female |
3,478
|
904
|
4,382
|
|
| Total |
6,180
|
1,868
|
8,048
|
|
Mature Students
These figures are a headcount for February 2002.
Proportion of full-time undergraduate population aged 21 or over on entry: 23.5 per cent Proportion of part-time undergraduate population aged 21 or over on entry: 93.1 per cent
Domicile
These figures are a headcount for February 2002.
| Level of study |
Origin
|
|||
|
UK
|
Other EU
|
Overseas
|
Total
|
|
| Undergraduate |
6,616
|
72
|
179
|
6,867
|
| Postgraduate (Taught) |
935
|
19
|
82
|
1,036
|
| Postgraduate (Research) |
112
|
0
|
33
|
145
|
| Total |
7,663
|
91
|
294
|
8,048
|
Institutional Staff 2002
|
Full-time
|
Part-time
|
|
| Total number of staff employed by the Institution |
840
|
849
|
| Number of academic/research staff |
334
|
418
|
Appendix 2*
University of Wales Institute, Cardiff - Collaborative provision
*As supplied by University of Wales Institute, Cardiff
| College | Course | Date of formal agreement | Type of collaboration |
| Bridgend College | Diploma in Social Work |
1991
V 1994 MM 1996 R 1999 R |
Franchise |
| HNC Design for Interactive Media | 2000 V | Moderation1 | |
| HND Design for Interactive Media | 2000 V | Moderation1 | |
| HNC Sports Development & Coaching | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HND Sports Development & Coaching | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| Coleg Ceredigion | HNC Engineering (Electrical) |
1992
V 1998 R 2000 R/M |
Franchise |
| HNC Engineering (Mechanical) | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| Coleg Glan Hafren | BA (Hons) Broadcast Media with Popular Culture | ||
| Coleg Gwent | HNC Building Technology & Management |
1995
V 2000 MM |
Franchise |
| Coleg Powys | HND Health Fitness & Holistic Therapies Management | 1999 V | Franchise |
| HNC Health Fitness & Holistic Therapies Management | 1999 V | Franchise | |
| Coleg Menai | HND Hospitality Management | 2000 V | Franchise |
| HNC Hospitality Management | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Salon Management | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HND Culinary Arts Management | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Culinary Arts Management | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HND Technology of Food | 22/6/2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Technology of Food | 22/6/2000 V | Franchise | |
| Merthyr Tydfil College | HNC Health & Social Care | 2000 V | Franchise |
| HND Health & Social Care | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| Neath Port Talbot College | HNC Computing | 1996 V | Franchise |
| HND Health & Social Care | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Health & Social Care | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HND Sports Development & Coaching | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Sports Development & Coaching | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Broadcast Media | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HND Broadcast Media | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Engineering (Electrical) | 2002 V | Franchise | |
| HND Engineering (Electrical) | 2002 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Engineering (Mechanical) | 2002 V | Franchise | |
| HND Engineering (Mechanical) | 2002 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Building Technology & Management | 2002 V | Moderation1 | |
| HNC Building Technology & Management | 2002 V | Moderation1 | |
| Pembrokeshire College | International Foundation Certificate with option streams in Business and Computing (Dual Award) | July 2000 V | Moderation1 |
| Swansea College | HNC Business Studies | 1999 V | Franchise |
| HND Business Studies | 1999 V | Franchise | |
| HND Health & Social Care | 1998 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Health & Social Care | 1998 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Leisure & Sports Management |
1998
V 2000 MM |
Franchise | |
| HND Tourism Management |
1999
V 2000 MM |
Franchise | |
| HNC Tourism Management |
2000
V 2000 MM |
Franchise | |
| Ystrad Mynach College | HNC Building Technology & Management | 1997 V | Franchise |
| HNC Computer Studies |
1993
V 1998 R |
Franchise | |
| HNC Engineering (Mechanical) | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HND Health & Social Care | 2000 V | Franchise | |
| HNC Health & Social Care | 1999 V | Franchise |
1UWIC Validated Courses in receipt of HE in FE funding hence UWIC provide a moderation service to these courses.
Overseas franchises
| College | Course | Date of formal agreement | Type of collaboration |
| Limerick Senior College | Diploma in Tourism |
1996
V 2000 R |
Franchise |
| Hong Kong University | MSc Environmental Risk Management | 2002 V | Moderation |
Overseas franchises - No intake for courses from 1999-2000
| College | Course | Date of formal agreement | Type of collaboration |
| FSV, Zaragoza | BA (Hons) European Administration with Modern Languages |
1995
V
(BA) 1999 R |
Franchise |
| BA (Hons) Industrial Design |
1994
V
(Cert) 1995 V (BSc) 1998 R |
Franchise | |
| BSc (Hons) Business Information Systems |
1994
V 1997 R 1998 MM |
Franchise | |
| BSc (Hons) Environmental Risk Management |
1994
V
(Cert) 1995 V (BSc) 1996 R 2000 R |
Franchise | |
| BSc (Hons) Technology Management |
1993
V 1997 R 1998 MM |
Franchise | |
| Diploma in Maintenance Engineering |
1991
V 1996 R 2000 R |
Franchise |
Top
QAA updates
QAAtweets
QAAtube