>> Main report
>> Findings
ISBN 1 84482 472 1
The University of Bolton
Institutional Audit
NOVEMBER 2005
RG 216 11/05
Summary
Web site for The University of Bolton
Contents
Introduction
A team of auditors from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) visited the University of Bolton (the University) from 21 to 25 November 2005 to carry out an institutional audit. The purpose of the audit was to provide public information on the quality of the opportunities available to students and on the academic standards of awards.
To arrive at its conclusions the audit team spoke to members of staff throughout the University, to current students, and read a wide range of documents relating to the way the University manages the academic aspects of its provision.
The words 'academic standards' are used to describe the level of achievement that a student has to reach to gain an award (for example, a degree). It should be at a similar level across the UK.
Academic quality is a way of describing how well the learning opportunities available to students help them to achieve their award. It is about making sure that appropriate teaching, support, assessment and learning opportunities are provided for them.
In institutional audit, both academic standards and academic quality are reviewed
Outcome of the audit
As a result of its investigations, the audit team's view of the University is that:
- broad confidence can be placed in the soundness of the current management of the quality of its programmes and in the University's institutional-level capacity to manage effectively the security of its awards.
Features of good practice
The audit team identified the following areas as being good practice:
- the comprehensiveness of the web-based Quality Assurance Manual and associated documents and the guidance given to staff on implementing the procedures that these contain
- implementation of the University's Assessment Process Handbook
- the developments in e-learning and the validation and quality control of e-learning materials
- the ability to generate and process reliable data relating to retention, progression and achievement for all students and the guidance provided for staff on the interpretation of those data
- the induction of external examiners and the University procedures for considering their reports
- the proactive approach taken to the identification of support requirements for international students.
Recommendations for action
The audit team also recommends that the University should consider further action in a number of areas to ensure that the academic quality and standards of the awards it offers are maintained. It is advisable that the University
- review the extent to which departmental implementation of its policies and procedures is sufficiently consistent, in particular those relating to module evaluation and personal tutoring; and
- ensure that it continues to reflect creatively on the mechanisms for attaining student representation and involvement, especially at departmental boards of studies and senior University committees.
It would be desirable for the University to:
- attain greater consistency of routine industrial or employer liaison in vocationally relevant programmes; and
- develop an editorial policy for publishing material through the University website and a process for ensuring the implementation of that policy.
Outcomes of discipline audit trails
In the course of the audit three discipline audit trails were conducted in the following disciplines: Electronics including named awards in Electronic and Computer Engineering (HNC, HND, BEng, BEng (Hons) BSc (Hons), MSc Advanced Microelectronics and MSc Electronic Product Development, Mathematics including named awards in BA/BSc (Hons) Mathematics, and Psychology including named awards in BSc (Hons) Criminological and Forensic Psychology, MSc Psychology, and MSc Critical Psychology. The audit team found that the standard of student achievement in the above named awards is appropriate to the titles of the awards and their location within The framework for higher education qualifications (FHEQ). It also found that the quality of learning opportunities available to students is suitable for a programme of study leading to the awards.
National reference points
To provide further evidence to support its findings the audit team also investigated the use made by the University of the Academic Infrastructure. The Academic Infrastructure is a set of nationally agreed reference points that help to define both good practice and academic standards and includes the FHEQ, subject benchmark statements, guidance on programme specifications and the Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education. The findings of the audit suggest that the University has responded appropriately to the development of the academic infrastructure.
In due course the institutional audit process will include a check on the reliability of the information set published by institutions in the format recommended in the Higher Education Funding Councils for England (HEFCE), Information on quality and standards in higher education: Final guidance (HEFCE 03/51). The findings of the audit are that the University is alert to the standards for publishing Teaching Quality Information and is meeting the requirements set out in HEFCE documents 02/15 and 03/51.
Top