Foreword
1 This is a report of an academic quality audit of Napier University (the University) undertaken by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). QAA is grateful to the University and its partner institutions for the willing co-operation provided to the audit team.
2 The audit was carried out using a revised process approved by the former Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC), and endorsed by HEQC's successor body, QAA. The modified process has been introduced following completion in 1997 of the original national academic quality audit programme which began in 1991 under the auspices of the CVCP's Academic Audit Unit (AAU) and subsequently taken over by HEQC in 1992. The principal purpose of this revised process is to offer an opinion on the extent to which individual institutions are discharging effectively their corporate responsibilities for the academic standards and quality of their awards and associated programmes of study. The process takes as its starting point the assumption that institutions have appropriate quality assurance policies and procedures in place, and also assumes that they can provide convincing evidence that these are working to good effect. The audit checks the extent to which this is the case and that the methods used are sufficiently reliable to continue to provide stakeholders with the necessary assurances for the future. The audit process focuses on four main topics: the institution's quality strategy; academic standards; the learning infrastructure; and internal and external communications.
3 It was agreed that the audit report would inform the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) which would consider the report in lieu of conducting a separate annual monitoring exercise of the University's discharge of its responsibility in relation to SQA provision. As a pilot arrangement, the National Board for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting in Scotland (NBS) observed the audit process and agreed, with QAA and the University, that it would consider formally the audit report to determine whether it might be used to inform the NBS institutional approval process, in lieu of a separate exercise.
Method and process
4 The primary source of documentary information and evidence used by the audit team about the University's quality assurance arrangements was its Analytical Account (the Account). The University also supplied a number of supporting documents, including the University Quality Assurance Handbook, September 1997 and April 1999; the Annual Plan, June 1998; the Strategic Plan, 1998-2002; 'Promoting a Learner Focus - Napier's Strategy for Learning, Teaching and Assessment' March 1999; the Staff Handbook, 1995; the Part-time and Flexible Learning Prospectus, for entry in 1999-2000; the Full-time Undergraduate Prospectus for 1999 entry; and the Postgraduate/Postexperience Prospectus for 1999 entry. Other documents available to the team were the HEQC academic audit report of 1993 and the 1996 report of the HEQC overseas partnership audit of the University and Hong Kong University; the University's documents made available on its web site; and the published reports of the teaching quality assessments (TQA) carried out by the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC).
5 At a briefing meeting held to discuss the University's submission, the audit team considered the University's Account, and proposed a programme of meetings for a visit to the University. The team visited the University from 7 to 11 June 1999. For the duration of the visit, the University made available to the team a base room containing the documents referred to in its Account, and the additional items of information requested by the team at its briefing meeting. The team held a total of 16 meetings with staff and students of the University. These meetings, together with the documents supplied by the University, provided the information, examples and evidence upon which this report is based.
6 The University's Account was drafted by the Quality Enhancement Department (QED) and its development involved 'wide consultation with staff and students through formal communications channels...discussion with key staff and open dialogue'. The Account was structured in five main sections:
- Developments since the last audit;
- Institutional quality strategy;
- Standards of programmes and awards;
- Learning infrastructure; and
- Internal and external communication.
7 The audit team comprised Professor B W Collins, Professor I M Jamieson and Professor G E Taylor, auditors; and Mr R A Platt, audit secretary. The audit was co-ordinated for QAA by Ms A K L Crum, Assistant Director, Institutional Review Directorate.
8 A brief guide, Napier University - facts and figures 1999, prepared by the University, is attached as appendix 1. A list of the University's collaborative partnerships is included as appendix 2.
The context for the audit
9 Napier University was granted University status in 1992. The University subsequently merged with the Lothian College of Health Studies and the Scottish Borders College of Nursing. The University operates on five main campuses in the south and west of Edinburgh and also operates a number of smaller campuses within the city, West Lothian and the Borders. For the majority of its courses, the University has adopted a two-semester system; courses in the Faculty of Health Studies are taught throughout the year, over three trimesters.
10 The University is organised into five faculties: Arts and Social Sciences; Engineering; Science; the Napier University Business School (the Business School); and Health Studies. Courses are offered at undergraduate and postgraduate level within the following subject areas: Built Environment; Business; Civil Engineering and Transport; Communication Arts; Computing and IT; Electronic and Electrical Engineering; Hospitality, Nursing and Midwifery; Science and Mathematics; and Social Science. Undergraduate and postgraduate degree programmes in all five faculties are credit-rated according to the SCOTCAT framework and are offered in a modular format.
11 A significant number of awards are offered through collaborative partnerships, listed in appendix 2. The Faculty of Arts offers programmes in Mauritius and Belize as well as part-time, consortium-based MSc and diploma courses in Local Economic Development. Provision by the Faculty of Engineering includes delivery at further education colleges at Lauder and Clackmannan and the Faculty of Science franchises courses to the University of Hong Kong. The Business School offers undergraduate programmes through partnerships in Hong Kong and postgraduate programmes in Mauritius, Hong Kong and South Africa. At the time of the current audit visit, QAA was also conducting an audit of the University's business and management provision in South Africa.
12 The Faculty of Health Studies offers a number of programmes leading to registration with the UK Central Council for Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting. Degree, diploma and certificate courses in Studies for the Church in the Community are also offered through the associated Scottish Churches Open College and its study centres throughout Scotland. In addition, a range of part-time and flexible learning programmes is offered. This includes both open and distance learning using specially developed materials which students can follow at their own pace.
The 1993 audit and the University's response
13 The 1993 HEQC audit report commended several aspects of the University's quality assurance arrangements, including: a highly developed quality assurance structure; a clearly-defined administrative unit with a prescribed remit for quality assurance; mechanisms for monitoring the supervision of research students; the innovative work of the Educational Development Unit (EDU); the support services provided for students; the procedures for the appointment of external examiners; and the procedures for student feedback and links to professional and other bodies.
14 The 1993 report also invited the University to give further consideration to a number of matters. The University's Account dealt with the most important of the matters raised in the 1993 report by offering a brief commentary on action taken. The audit team was persuaded by the University's claims for the effectiveness with which it had addressed many of the matters raised in the 1993 report, in particular: the effectiveness of the new annual review of units and programmes; its mechanisms for obtaining student feedback; its arrangements for the provision of information for prospective overseas students; its approach to equal opportunities matters; its policy in relation to the teaching loads of newly-appointed staff; the induction of new staff; and its approach to staff development.
15 The 1993 report had also invited the University to consider three other matters: clear standards and codes of practice for devolved quality assurance procedures; the development of guidelines relating to assessment practice; and the effectiveness of its practices relating to certain aspects of its dealings with external examiners. Although the audit team believed that significant progress had been made on all of these matters, it was not entirely satisfied that all the relevant procedures were in place and working effectively.
The University's quality strategy
The University's 'Vision'
16 The Account indicates that the University's quality strategy is embedded and is led by the strong and pervasive 'Vision' of what Napier University is aiming to become. The University's 'Vision' takes the form of a statement, the philosophy behind which pervades many of the University's activities. It indicates that the University will be: 'a world class modern university'; 'focused on students and helping them to realise their full potential'; and 'the life-long learning university in south east Scotland'.
17 The University's 'Vision led' quality strategy was developed by the Corporate Management Team (the University's senior executive committee), membership of which includes: the Principal and Vice-Chancellor; the Vice-Principal; the Secretary and Registrar; the Head of Academic Development; the Head of Learning Resources; the Director of Strategic Planning; the Business Director; and the deans of the five faculties. The strategy was debated extensively by the Academic Board, the University Court and the University Students' Association.
18 The broad 'Vision' of the University is translated into a number of specific strategies and principles. These included: a Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy which focuses on the development of students as autonomous learners; a commitment to lifelong learning, which embraces strategies relating to AP(E)L and CATS; a commitment to preparing students for employment; a belief in the model of 'the reflective practitioner' for all of its professional staff; a customer focus for its activities; and finally a principle that the ownership and responsibility for core tasks should be as close to the point of delivery as possible. From its meetings with staff it became clear to the audit team that these strategies and principles had been widely disseminated and were accepted across the University.
19 In discussion, the Corporate Management Team (CMT) described itself as a 'learning team' and there was evidence that significant efforts had been made to analyse and plan for the changes that would be necessary to achieve its goals. The audit team noted that external management consultants had been employed to assist the University in identifying potential barriers to change. Consultants had also been engaged in a strategic staff development initiative entitled 'Delivering the Action' which had involved CMT and all heads of department in high-level management training. The University has also recently committed to the Investors in People (IiP) programme which the team considered to be consistent with the University's stated belief that its human resources (in both academic and support roles) are central to the delivery of its quality strategy. The team found evidence of CMT's 'learning' approach in action. For example, the Staff Development and Career Review Scheme (SDCR) was revised to better reflect and meet the requirements of the 'Vision' (see below, paragraph 65). The team would therefore commend CMT for its self-reflective approach and for the effective manner in which it has sought to engender a University-wide commitment to its distinctive strategy.
20 The fact that the University has invested in a special initiative to manage the many changes which are being undertaken has, in the view of the audit team, facilitated the change process. During the visit, however, significant numbers of staff commented on the extent of change being undertaken. In its discussions with staff and students, the team learnt that some strains were beginning to show; for example in the interface between the University's plans for increased flexible learning provision and the available IT infrastructure (see below, paragraphs 55 and 56). The team, therefore, came to the view that the University may need to exercise caution in balancing its desire to change against its capacity to implement it. Furthermore, despite the significant progress made in formulating and disseminating the strategies for realising the University's 'Vision', it did not appear to the team that full thought had been given to the benchmarks that the University would be required to meet if it was to claim truly to be a 'world class modern university'.
Quality management structures
21 The University has moved from a position where quality assurance was the prime responsibility of the centre, most notably QED, to a situation where much responsibility is devolved to the faculties. The Account indicated that this was a deliberate decision by CMT who believed that ownership and responsibility for quality matters must lie 'as close to the point of delivery as possible'. At the time of the audit visit, the University was revising the structure of some of its senior academic committees and was in the final stages of the process of devolving to its faculties responsibility for quality control.
22 The Academic Board has ultimate authority in quality matters and is itself subject to the authority of the University Court. The Academic Board has wide representation, with its members drawn from throughout the University and there is cross membership with CMT. While the Academic Board has overall responsibility for the quality of academic work within the University, it discharges this responsibility to a considerable extent through its Quality and Standards Committee (QSC). This Committee has a specific remit 'to review the monitoring or auditing, as appropriate, of faculty departmental and programme activities to establish the extent to which quality enhancement is taking place and standards are being maintained'. QSC itself has sub-committees to oversee the auditing and monitoring function, staff development and the devolved authority granted to the University by SQA for the quality assurance of SQA provision at the University (see below, paragraph 34).
23 Within the University's organisational structure, the Academic Development Group (ADG) has responsibility for both the quality control and quality enhancement of academic activities at the University. Its head is an assistant principal and a member of CMT. ADG consists of four departments, the last two having direct responsibility for matters relating to quality:
- Continuing Professional Development;
- Napier University: Flexible (NUFlex) venture;
- Educational Development Unit; and the
- Quality Enhancement Department.
24 QED has four areas of responsibility. The first is the management and delivery of projects that enhance the quality of provision and the student experience. The second is supporting the faculties' delivery of devolved responsibility for quality and standards, for example, through participation in the faculty boards and quality committees. The third is the interpretation of the external agenda for quality and standards in higher education and leadership within the University for these developments. The fourth is the management of the internal audit and monitoring procedures on behalf of QSC. The audit team formed the view that this department provided an important leadership role in the University's quality strategy that was recognised both in documentation and by many of the staff it met.
25 EDU has a role of equipping academic and support staff to deliver and improve the University's quality strategy. It has been particularly important in promulgating support and training in relation to the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy and more generally in the dissemination of good practice. The approach and the activities of the Unit were widely praised by all those the audit team met (see also below, paragraph 67).
Devolved authority
26 The role of the faculty boards is now central to the operation of quality and standards assurance processes in the University. The role of the Academic Board and QSC is to set the overall framework and to monitor and audit that the faculties are discharging their duties properly. Within that framework each faculty is encouraged to develop its own strategies for quality assurance and enhancement.
27 The regulatory framework is set out in the University Assessment Regulations, including arrangements relating to the appointment of external examiners and the common modular framework. A comprehensive Quality Assurance Handbook provides user-friendly information to staff on the major features of the quality assurance and enhancement system.
28 The membership of the five faculty boards comprises the heads of each department, representatives of the academic support staff and students, and cross representation from other faculty boards. Importantly, each board has a representative from QED. Each faculty board has a quality sub-committee which is central to the quality control process and these sub-committees also have representatives from QED. Within the faculties, the quality sub-committees have responsibility for overseeing the annual reviews of modules and programmes at both undergraduate and postgraduate level (see below, paragraph 31).
29 The Audit and Monitoring Sub-Committee of QSC has responsibility for the 'monitoring or auditing as appropriate, of faculty, departmental and programme activities to establish the extent to which quality enhancement is taking place and standards are being maintained'. This Sub-Committee pays close attention to the routine quality control procedures of the faculties as well as initiating specific audits of academic and support activities University-wide; these audits are then managed on behalf of QSC by QED. While there are variations in practice between the faculties, the internal audit reports made available to the audit team appeared to be both rigorous and comprehensive, covering a wide range of points relevant to the quality of the University's provision. The team would, therefore, commend the University on the extent and rigour of its internal auditing procedures.
30 All the staff met by the audit team emphasised the benefits of the devolved structure. Key benefits were identified as a higher level of participation in, and ownership of, the quality assurance arrangements. While, in general, the devolved policy appears to have worked well, there remain some inconsistencies in practice between faculties that the team did not consider could be justified by differences in academic focus alone. For example, the team noted significant variation in practice over the treatment of external examiners, and of research students (see below, paragraph 33). In discussion, senior staff acknowledged this and indicated that the devolved structure was still in the process of 'bedding down'. The University is advised to review practice under the devolved structure to assure itself that good practice between faculties can be shared and that any differences in practice can be justified (see below, paragraph 40).
Programme review
31 In a process monitored by QSC, modules and programmes are reviewed at faculty level on an annual basis against specified performance indicators (see below, paragraph 41). Previously there had been some dissatisfaction about the reliability of certain of these indicators, but the audit team was told that this had improved with the introduction of a new student record system.
32 In addition to the annual reviews, all programmes and departments are subject to quinquennial reviews carried out by panels appointed by QSC. The audit team noted that panel membership included representatives of other faculties and individuals external to the University. Overall the team considered that the review process for taught provision appeared to be both rigorous and comprehensive but there were two reservations. First, as acknowledged in the Account, in some areas the 'quality systems are bureaucratic processes rather than opportunities for enhancement'. In relation to this the team noted that annual reviews for certain programmes appeared to have been written to a mechanistic formula. Second, in its discussions with staff the team learnt of some concerns about the overall burden of review. In addition to external scrutiny (including that by PSBs), modules and programmes are reviewed annually, and programmes and departments are subject to quinquennial review, in addition to the ad hoc audits carried out under the auspices of QSC. The University is invited to consider whether some streamlining of these processes might be possible.
Research students
33 Although the research student population has increased in recent years the University still has a relatively small number of research students. Responsibility for monitoring their progress has been devolved to the faculties, and the faculty research committees now consider students' proposed research plans and approve supervisory teams. The audit team found variations between the faculties in the practice of reviewing the progress of research students, including identifying one student who was towards the end of the registration period and who had never undergone a formal review. The team concluded that the process of review for research students was less secure overall than that for students on taught programmes, although good practice in annual monitoring was evident in those faculties with a longer history of research supervision. In some faculties the number of research students is modest and the team considered that this might have contributed to some unhelpful informality in the review of their progress. The Research Students' Handbook, which focuses primarily on the regulatory framework, was last produced in 1993 and, in the team's view, is in urgent need of comprehensive review and updating to ensure that a consistent approach can be adopted within the devolved structure.
Scottish Qualifications Authority
34 The University has devolved authority from SQA to offer specific awards and validate specified units and group awards. The SQA Sub-Committee has oversight of the University quality assurance procedures for SQA awards alongside an explicit quality enhancement role. The audit team noted some concerns which had been raised by SQA external verifiers in their regular reports. There appeared to be a consistent, recent pattern of SQA placing 'holds' on the certification of awards, meaning that students could not receive SQA awards until the University had undertaken required action in specified areas. The team noted that many of the holds related to inconsistencies between departments in relation to the internal verification of awards. The team also noted that there was evidence to suggest that the University was not paying sufficient attention to the training needs of staff involved in writing SQA units (particularly in relation to the specification of assessment criteria) or to arrangements for the assessment of SQA awards.
Externality
35 All validation and review activities involved individuals external to the University drawn from other universities, the professions or industry, as appropriate. Because one focus of the University 'Vision' concerns the employability of students (assisting students 'to realise their full potential' both personally and professionally), the University could be expected to have particularly good linkages with relevant industrial and professional communities. The audit team found a number of examples of this, such as an initiative with the Scottish University for Industry involving 11 programmes, and extensive links with FE colleges. The team found that all departments had some links with appropriate industrial or professional bodies but rather more of these than might have been expected appeared to be on the basis of informal contacts between individuals. The team would recommend that the University reviews the links between its departments and industry to determine whether the most effective liaison structure is being employed.
Quality enhancement
36 The identification and dissemination of good practice can be seen as a shared activity between ADG - which contains both EDU and QED - and the faculties and departments. QED is charged with 'developing the University's framework for the assurance of standards of all awards and the quality enhancement of all provision at Napier'. It has an important role not only in supporting the quality strategy in the faculties and departments but in helping to disseminate good practice throughout the University. The contribution of EDU is considered elsewhere in this report (see below, paragraph 67).
37 The University's institution-wide initiatives have been managed centrally, eg the audit process which is co-ordinated by QED (see above, paragraph 29). This process has played an important role in identifying examples of good practice and disseminating them across the University. QED also co-ordinates the Student Satisfaction Survey which the University has undertaken for two years and which has identified areas for quality improvement. When areas for improvement have been identified, the University has exhibited good practice in launching initiatives to address them. An example is the Student Retention Project, an initiative designed to study and improve student retention rates. As part of this the Faculty of Engineering and Computing pioneered a number of interesting strategies, which were further developed by the Business School, for the early identification of students who may be at risk of discontinuing their studies; some of these strategies have been adopted in other parts of the University.
38 The University has a strategic Academic Development Fund which is used to fund initiatives (particularly in learning, teaching and assessment) and was specifically designed to improve the quality of provision. The Teaching Fellowship Scheme (see below, paragraph 66) also has an important quality enhancement role.
Academic standards of programmes and awards
39 Responsibility for assuring the standards of all awards ultimately rests with the University's Academic Board. The Board, and its QSC, must assure that all University awards meet its internal standards and that these standards compare with those in the wider UK higher education sector. Operational responsibility for the establishment of standards at module and programme level is devolved to the University's faculties.
Establishing standards
40 The Account indicated that standards for awards are established at programme level. The honours degree is regarded as the benchmark qualification and the University's Regulations give a brief, but clear, indication of the standard expected of this award. The University's stated objective is to ensure that standards are built in at the design, development and approval stages of all programmes. Where appropriate, University programmes are accredited by relevant professional bodies and hence are required to meet the specific standards of these bodies. External views may be included via industrial, business or professional input at the design stage. The Account indicated that all faculties had good mechanisms for liaison with employers but the audit team found that this was only formalised through liaison committees in some cases (see above, paragraph 35). The University Regulations require an external presence on all validation and review panels. The team noted some inconsistency, however, in the expression of this requirement in faculty documents describing the devolved processes; for example, one faculty document suggests external panel members will be used only if resources allow. During discussion with the deans, the team was assured that such inconsistencies were the result of poor drafting and that continued review of the process against the University regulatory framework would ensure adherence. The team also noted that review documentation for the faculty concerned suggested that, in practice, external members had been included at all recent validation and review events. As indicated earlier (see above, paragraph 30) the University will wish to review practice under the devolved structure to assure itself that any variation in practice between the faculties can be justified.
Maintaining standards
41 As part of the annual monitoring process (see above, paragraph 31), an Annual Monitoring Report is required to be completed for all programmes. These reports consider a number of aspects including standards. They detail actions to be taken and also review actions from the previous year. The audit team noted that minor changes to modules are processed slightly differently in different faculties. Minor changes can include alterations to a certain percentage of module outcomes and to the nature of assessment. The team was concerned that this could result in modules being changed gradually which, over a number of years, might have an impact on standards. The team was, however, reassured that the requirement to identify and discuss such changes as part of the annual monitoring process would prevent this from occurring.
42 The Account indicated that generic marking schemes, used across programmes, internal moderation and double-marking were used to ensure consistency and to promote a shared understanding of standards. External examiners are involved during the moderation and assessment of student work and in the decision-making process for awards. Good practice was noted in some areas where coursework specifications are sent to the external examiners for moderation prior to being distributed to students; this was not, however, University policy at the time of the audit. Given the nature of many of the University's programmes and the increasing proportion of coursework, it is suggested that the University should consider implementing this practice across all programmes.
43 The University considers that external examiners' reports provide key evidence that standards are secure. QED has sight of all the reports, major and/or urgent issues are identified and the Department provides a summary report to QSC. The audit team was told that QED, in consultation with the faculties, would determine what should be regarded as a 'major' issue. In each faculty the dean, or the chair of the faculty quality committee, reads all reports for that faculty to identify cross-faculty and recurring themes. The reports are also discussed by programme committees who consider them as part of the annual monitoring exercise; external examiner reports are attached to the annual monitoring reports and the latter are required to include comment on the action to be taken. In cases where a 'major' issue has been identified by an external examiner, the programme team is additionally required to provide the relevant dean with a response to the report; once the response is approved it is copied to QED. While the processes appeared to be robust and implemented consistently, the team noted with concern the number of reports (the majority from a single faculty) which indicated that external examiners were receiving material late, were given insufficient notice of examination board dates, and were not kept abreast of course changes. Given the important role accorded to external examiners in relation to the security of the University's academic standards, it is recommended that this should be addressed as a matter of some urgency.
44 The process for appointing external examiners is being devolved to the faculties, and the deans will have overall responsibility for such appointments from the beginning of academic year 1999-2000. It was evident to the audit team that, in the current system, external examiner nominations are considered carefully - the team saw evidence of nominations being rejected - and that the stated procedures are followed. Currently QED is responsible for issuing external examiners with a letter of contract and briefing notes detailing their roles and responsibilities. Academic departments are responsible for briefing external examiners about programme specific information. Cross-University training is planned for session 1999-2000.
Work-based and flexible learning
45 As might be expected from the University's 'Vision', much of its provision is of an applied and vocational nature. Because of this, work-based learning in various forms is common. Many vocational courses are offered in sandwich mode with students working for a full year in a relevant industrial or business position as part of their programmes of study. In the Department of Computing each student on placement is allocated both a University-based tutor (one of a small team which focuses on this activity) and a work-based mentor. Wherever possible the latter is someone with academic qualifications. Prior to the placement, each student agrees a learning contract, indicating specific outcomes, and is visited three times during the year by the University tutor. During these visits the University tutor will spend at least half an hour with the student and half an hour with the work-based mentor to assess progress. The audit team was told that there had been cases of intervention with the employer to ensure work was carried out in accordance with the learning contract and that on the rare occasion where there had been a continued lack of satisfaction an employer would be dropped from the Department's list. The team considered that the University demonstrated good practice in a number of its measures aimed at maintaining the standard of learning activity in work placements. The team noted, however, that external examiners are not afforded the opportunity to observe practice during workplace assessments. The University might consider introducing a mechanism whereby external examiners are able to monitor more directly assessment practices during student work placements.
46 A more unusual approach to work-based learning at the University, initially piloted through the Enterprise in Higher Education (EHE) Project, is the development of 'generic' work-based learning modules. These are made available to students through the Department of Continuing Professional Development. The modules are credit bearing and allow a student to agree a learning contract with transferable skills-based outcomes relating to any employment he or she may be undertaking. These modules are not prescriptive; the student initially meets with a member of staff to agree the outcomes and is assessed on a written report detailing his or her success or failure in achieving these outcomes. The audit team considered that the scheme clearly had potential value, particularly given the University's student profile and the high proportion of its students who support themselves through part-time employment. At the time of the audit the take-up of the modules was small; as it increases there will be a need to ensure that sufficient staff have the skills to agree and assess learning contracts of this kind.
47 As part of the lifelong learning element of its 'Vision', the University is proactive in seeking to offer flexible learning opportunities and the Account indicated that the University had plans to increase flexible learner registrations from around 1,800 (at the time of the audit) to around 10,000 world-wide by 2008. In order to underpin this significant development it established Napier University: Flexible (NUFlex) in September 1998. While the concept is still in its early stages, NUFlex staff appeared to the audit team to be knowledgeable, pragmatic and able to offer support in the development of distance learning materials and provision.
48 The University offers identified CATS provision and makes use of the SCOTCAT guidelines when offering credit through the Accreditation of Prior (Experiential) Learning (AP(E)L). Academic staff in the faculties, however, appeared unaware of the guidelines and it seemed to the audit team that there was little use of the SCOTCAT arrangements to recognise general credit towards awards within the University's mainstream provision. The team did note that advanced entry and module exemptions on the basis of prior learning were offered in some areas at the discretion of departments. The University's aim to increase the number of students studying on a flexible basis is likely to lead to greater numbers seeking AP(E)L. The University is, therefore, advised to consider ways of ensuring that arrangements for accrediting prior learning and experiential learning are adopted consistently across faculties and embedded at the departmental level.
Assuring standards in collaborative provision
49 The Account did not provide an analysis of the University's collaborative activity although it did list the collaborative links in place at the time of the visit (these are set out in appendix 2). The audit team noted that the University has a considerable amount of collaborative provision, both in the UK and overseas. It has initiated a number of practices to ensure that the standard of such provision equates to that offered on-campus at the University. In particular, QED retains full membership of validation and review panels for off-campus provision in contrast with the devolution of these activities to the faculties in the case of programmes to be delivered at the University. Current practice for the validation of overseas provision includes the use of a two-stage validation event. The first stage takes place in the UK, but includes the overseas partners; the second stage takes place overseas and focuses on the student experience. The University has its own guidelines for overseas provision which are being reviewed in the light of new guidelines issued by QAA and SHEFC. Common assessment criteria, examinations, and external examiners are used for provision irrespective of the mode of study or delivery to ensure comparability of standards between programmes. The team was given an example of a case in which this practice had led to the identification of a potential problem in a programme delivered overseas. The team was told that this matter had been resolved by the further moderation of a set of marks and that, because the marks had been lowered, additional support had been provided to those students affected. At the time of the audit visit, QAA was conducting an audit of the University's provision in South Africa which is the subject of a separate report.
50 As an example of the University's UK-based collaborative activity, the audit team considered the part-time, collaborative BEng programme the University has developed with Lauder and Clackmannan Colleges. In order to ensure that the student experience is equivalent and that good practice is shared, some lectures and tutorials are delivered jointly to students at the two Colleges. The same learning materials are used and students share intensive blocks of provision with students at the University's campuses, particularly the manufacturing facility at Livingston. Members of the University's academic staff have been closely involved with the development of the collaborative programme and form part of the delivery team, as an important mechanism for ensuring that the standards of the programme are equivalent irrespective of its delivery location. From its consideration of this programme and on the basis of other documentation concerning the University's collaborative activity, the team would commend the University for the steps it has taken towards ensuring the equivalence of the standard of its programmes delivered in different modes and locations.
51 The establishment of standards for in-company programmes is the responsibility of the Continuing Professional Development department but this follows the same process of validation and review as for any other University programme. The work of the department in this area includes the accreditation of professional practice and the use of work-based learning modules. The audit team learnt that the latter were initially piloted through the EHE Project.
Enhancement of standards
52 The University is undertaking a number of projects directed at enhancing the standard of its provision. A Standards Working Group was established by QSC in 1997-1998 to investigate the mechanisms by which standards are established consistently within the undergraduate programmes. The group is developing a taxonomy of standards at undergraduate level two, based on a review of the learning materials and a series of interviews and discussions with staff. The audit team noted that the Law Department was participating in the QAA trials at subject level which involved the use of the nationally-developed subject benchmark information. The Business School had also considered the Honours classifications for a sample of its programmes and compared these with other institutions using HESA data. Following work on student retention (see below, paragraph 60), a cross-University initiative was underway to develop a student diary, the aim being to ensure that students receive clear and comprehensive information about their programmes. Pilot work was also being undertaken in the Department of Psychology and Sociology to ensure that, in addition to meeting the academic standards for entry, students are prepared for the nature of the higher education learning experience.
The learning infrastructure
53 Both in the Account and in meetings it was emphasised to the audit team that the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy, 'Promoting a Learner Focus', is key to fulfilling the University's 'Vision' and achieving its educational objectives. In the view of the team this document combines a sound strategy based on robust educational ideas and principles with a translation of those ideas into a set of practical statements which teaching staff indicated that they find usable and helpful. The team noted that the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy was ambitious but concluded that good progress had been made towards implementing it and would commend the University for its development. The University recognises that the fulfilment of this strategy will in many respects be dependent on the development and implementation of a number of other strategies including, in particular, the Communications and Information Technology Strategy. This is currently in the early stages of development (see below, paragraph 56).
Library and IT resources
54 The Library has premises on, and offers a service to, all of the main campuses. It also has a presence on the web which allows students to check the availability of material and to link into electronic data sources. The multi-site nature of the University offers a number of challenges. Staff pointed out, however, that physical collections should not be regarded as static. The University has invested in an electronic system and the same system and procedures are used on each site providing access to a single database and the complete book stock. At the time of the audit, two sites remained open into the late evening and at weekends in anticipation of increased student demand during the pre-examination period. The audit team was told that the University was seeking to extend this practice to further sites, particularly those convenient to students seeking weekend use. In relation to students' perceptions of availability, those met by the team who were studying at a distance commented that they were able to order books quite easily by telephone. Although the team was told that, at the time of the audit, libraries remained open until 2100 on Mondays to Thursdays with some weekend availability, a number of local, part-time students expressed concern that access was not easy outside their normal working hours. Each campus has a user forum which provides students with an opportunity to comment on the service, although the team noted that student attendance at these is patchy. As additional means of obtaining user feedback, suggestion books are available and user surveys are carried out. Subject librarians are closely involved with the relevant academic departments and have responsibility for information resource budgets for their areas; these budgets include the allowance for all types of information resource, not solely books. Subject librarians are also involved in programme development groups and in the validation process.
55 The University has a Computing Services Unit separate from its Library, although both the Librarian and the Head of Computing Services report to the Assistant Principal/Head of Learning Resources. The Computing Services Unit supports educational and administrative computing throughout the University and manages an extensive data communications network that currently provides approximately 3,000 connections throughout the 15 campuses. The Unit has been proactive in establishing IT solutions for administrative and service matters, and in promoting the extension of the use of IT as a source of information through its IT Development Group. Student access to PCs is currently restricted in that approximately 70 per cent of non-specialist workstations are situated in departmental or faculty laboratories. There are plans, however, to aggregate non-specialist facilities in 'computer barns' making extended student access to PCs easier to resource. At the time of the audit visit, most centrally-managed suites were open until 2130 on weekdays and between 1000 and 1600 at weekends. One facility, situated within the campus library at the Craiglockhart site, is open 24 hours a day. The audit team noted the intention of the University to extend this service to more of its sites in the future.
56 Students met by the audit team expressed a concern that the email service lacked reliability. Staff informed the team that, although the current system had served the University well, it has now been outgrown and there are plans to replace it in the near future. The University plans to increase significantly the numbers of its students studying on a flexible learning basis (see above, paragraph 47). This and the wider implementation of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy will bring about an increasing reliance on electronic communication both among and between staff and students. Given these factors, the University is advised to ensure that the development and implementation of its Communications and Information Technology Strategy remain in step with the developments in teaching and learning.
Student support and guidance
57 The Account indicated that student support and guidance were provided by a range of sources, including: academic staff in students' own departments; the Student Support Service; Napier Students' Association support team; and educational and welfare advisers. There is no formal University personal tutor system but, under the devolved structure, the faculties and departments offer support in different ways. The audit team noted an example of good practice resulting from the Student Retention Project (see below, paragraph 60) whereby the use of a diagnostic test to identify students at risk of failure was piloted in session 1998-99 for students in the faculties of Arts and Social Science, Engineering and Computing, the Business School, and Science. Students identified in this manner are then offered appropriate support. The team was also told that the University offers academic staff opportunities to develop their student counselling skills.
58 The multi-site nature of the University presents particular challenges to the provision of student support, but the audit team was informed that welfare services were publicised on all sites and an approach of 'distance counselling' using email, self-help materials and video links was being trialled. It was made clear to the team that the University regards initial induction as critical in order to ensure all students are made aware of the range of support available and how to access it. As a reflection of this, induction programmes are repeated, on different days, on the different campuses. The team noted the close links maintained between the University and the Students' Association with respect to student support. Students' Association representatives commented very favourably to the team on the extent to which senior University staff were approachable and made themselves available to students.
59 The audit team learnt that all first year, full-time students at Napier are required to complete the 'Toolkit' module which introduces and reinforces a number of key learning skills. Some of the University's programmes include 'Toolkit' as a specific, stand-alone module, in others it is embedded within relevant subjects. Support in the form of a logbook and written materials, which the team considered to be of high quality, is available to all students.
60 The Account indicated that, as an element of the University's work on student retention, the Academic Board and the Corporate Management Team have now begun discussion on the introduction of a general student attendance policy. The audit team noted that student attendance records are used in a number of parts of the University as a means of identifying and supporting students at particular risk. This was one result of the Student Retention Project, a University-funded research project which was initially launched in 1995 to investigate retention issues associated with first year undergraduate students and to develop practical proposals for improving progression rates. The Project identified a number of measures relating to student success, such as the number of hours per week students spend on University work and those spent on paid, non-University work. As a further mechanism for identifying students at risk, data relating to student progression are monitored at each of University, faculty and programme levels. The Project also introduced a number of student support mechanisms such as: the booklet What am I doing here anyway? which answers some of the most common questions asked by first year students; a student diary/guide which addresses themes such as time management skills; and a student-led 'meet and greet' and information scheme for new entrants.
Support for research students
61 Arrangements for monitoring the progress of research students have already been outlined (see above, paragraph 33). The audit team learnt that there is no formal requirement at present for faculties or departments to provide training in research methods. The team also learnt that, while research students and postdoctoral researchers may be used to support teaching provision, for example as laboratory demonstrators, they are not offered any formal preparation for this role. The University is advised to ensure that appropriate arrangements are in place for training new researchers in research methods and for properly equipping them for any teaching role they may be invited to undertake.
Staff appointment and development
62 The Account stated that 'the staff of the University are its most valuable resource'. The Account also indicated that the University is committed to seeking recognition under the Investors in People (IiP) programme by the end of 2000. The audit team was told that this was not simply to achieve the 'kitemark', but because the process leading to IiP recognition would bring all staff into the development process. A steering group with cross-University representation has been established to co-ordinate the IiP bid.
63 The University has an Equal Opportunities Committee which was established in 1998 as a committee of the University Court. The work of the Committee has led to the production of a revised appointments policy which will be supplemented by guidance notes and training sessions on aspects of recruitment, in particular those which impact on the University's Equal Opportunities Policy. The Account indicated that, by September 1999, it will be compulsory for all staff who sit on recruitment panels to undergo recruitment interview training. Staff the audit team met indicated an awareness of the policy and that, where appropriate, they had either completed the training programme or were about to take part in it.
64 The University's staff induction arrangements were set out in the Account; the University runs a two-tier induction programme for all full-time staff and for part-time staff at the head of department's discretion. These arrangements were confirmed to the audit team by staff. A group of recently appointed staff indicated that they had also received some preparation for their teaching roles. This is in contrast with the position of postgraduate and postdoctoral researchers who may be involved in the teaching process without any preparation (see above, paragraph 61). The new staff who met with the team were aware of the University's Postgraduate Certificate in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education and some indicated that they were registered for this programme. There was no formal system of mentoring in place for new staff although individuals indicated that they had received, and valued, assistance from within departments and course teams. Some staff indicated that they had experienced peer review of their activities but this was not a formalised process. The University, therefore, may wish to consider putting in place more formal processes for staff mentoring and for disseminating good practice through a process of peer review.
65 A Staff Development and Career Review (SDCR) Scheme, applicable to all staff, has been in place for some time but, as the Account acknowledged 'the SDCR has had limited success to date'. The Scheme has recently been reviewed and revised from a two-yearly to an annual event. The University is also committed to ensuring that both reviewers and reviewees undergo staff development with the aim of enabling them to make the most of the process. In discussion with the audit team, staff confirmed this development, indeed most had undergone the appropriate training, and reviews were taking place at the time of the audit visit. The process was described as helpful and positive by all staff who met with the team. The University is commended for carrying out the detailed evaluation of the original Scheme when it became clear that the original arrangements were not meeting the University's needs. In the view of the team, on the basis of the documentation supplied and its discussions with staff, the revised Scheme would appear to have the potential to assist effectively the fulfilment of the University's 'Vision'.
66 The University introduced a Teaching Fellowship Scheme in 1997-98, the purpose of which is to promote and reward excellence in teaching. Teaching fellows are appointed for a five-year term (with the possibility of extension) on the basis of a portfolio of achievement. They are expected to adopt a developmental role in relation to teaching and learning within their own departments or faculties. At the time of the audit, 12 teaching fellows had been appointed and the audit team was told that the University has a target to appoint 50 over the next five years. The teaching fellows are involved in a range of initiatives aimed at developing and disseminating good practice, particularly in the area of skills development and increasing the opportunities and modes of independent learning. The team learnt that the Scheme was already having a visible effect, for example, a full day conference on teaching and learning was scheduled to take place shortly after the audit visit. It also appeared that a strong, cross-faculty network was developing between the teaching fellows themselves. The team commends the University for establishing the Scheme which will facilitate the development and spread of good practice.
67 Staff development for learning, teaching and assessment is focused in the University's EDU. As already indicated (see above, paragraph 64) the University has an established Postgraduate Certificate in Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. This is accredited by both SEDA and NBS. The number of staff who have completed or are currently registered for this programme is low. The Account indicated that 'it is expected that this provision will be given early accreditation by the ILT' and, if this is indeed the case, the audit team considered it was likely that this would provide an incentive for increasing numbers of staff to undertake the qualification. Staff indicated that they found EDU supportive and responsive. A number of examples were provided to the team demonstrating the extent to which the Unit actively seeks to promote good practice, such as providing a series of seminars on the use of the web for teaching and assessment, and the incorporation of work on mentoring in the Postgraduate Certificate in Learning and Teaching.
Internal and external communications
68 The Account stressed the University's commitment to 'involving all staff and students in a communication structure that works positively for all'. The scale of the University, its operations on a multi-site campus, its ambition to develop its flexible and distance learning provision, and to deliver parity of services to students across all of its provision further underscores the need for effective communications.
70 Although the audit team noted examples of the widespread discussion of key policy documents, such as the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy and the Students' Charter, the process of consultation did not appear to have been uniformly applied. For example, from the team's discussion with a number of programme teams, there appeared to be much less awareness of the, albeit recent, development of the Communications and Information Technology Strategy.
Publications
71 The University produces a range of handbooks and other published material for its staff and students. The audit team noted that the Napier University Staff Handbook (which was being revised at the time of the audit) and the Quality Assurance Handbook appeared to provide adequate sources of information. The University newsletter, Napier News, provides a vehicle for communicating policy developments internally as well as for conveying more general information. The Principal's newsletter, Footplate, offers a further means of raising internal awareness of major developments; this newsletter also has a distribution outside the University. The efficacy of these publications has very recently been market-tested within the University in a customer satisfaction survey of all departments in the Business Development Group; the results were being compiled at the time of the audit visit.
72 The content of publicity and recruitment materials is produced at a
local level and approved centrally. It was noted that although the Prospectus refers
to a student newspaper, Veritas, it appeared that the paper is not
currently being produced to schedule.
On-line communications
73 Internal on-line information is accessed through an email bulletin board rather than through an Intranet. The existing bulletin board is not easy to use and lacks accessible subject trails, and there was some evidence to suggest that the information it contained was not rapidly updated. As has been noted, students also expressed concerns to the audit team about the reliability of the email system (see above, paragraph 56). The University is aware of the deficiency of its email system and the bulletin board, and the team was informed that plans had been developed to upgrade these. The plans included the recent appointment of a Website Manager who will have a role to improve both internal and external on-line communications.
Communications with students
74 Given the multi-site nature of the University, the audit team was interested in the view students had of the University as an entity. Members of the management team with responsibility for learning resources indicated that they view students as essentially 'Napier students', yet those students with whom the team met appeared to have a strong site-based identity. The team learnt that one purpose of the University's approach to communications is to create a wider sense of University identity among the different sites. The team considered that it might be helpful for the University to test its assumptions about students' focus and sense of identity, in order best to shape its communications approach.
75 The Account highlighted that devolution of responsibility to the faculties and the 1995 review of the committee structure, when the total number of University level sub-committees was reduced, have had consequences for student representation. Faculties do not correspond to particular sites and site-user forums for learning resources no longer exist. Representatives of the Napier Students' Association, however, emphasised to the audit team that their views on the committee system had been canvassed and taken carefully into account by the University. They also stressed that the Association has frequent and regular access to the Head of Learning Resources and that they are able to discuss matters readily with members of CMT (see above, paragraph 58). The team learnt that the course representative system, which was developed jointly by the University and the Students' Association, is regarded as an increasingly important means of communication by staff and students. There appeared to the team to be effective student representation at appropriate levels, although student opinion on learning resources is not canvassed on a site basis. Given the importance of site identification to the students met by the team, it might be helpful for the University to consider ways of focusing its 'client care' strategies on a site basis as well as on a university-wide basis.
76 The University undertook a Student Satisfaction Survey in 1997-98 and the results of a further one, carried out in 1998-99, were being analysed at the time of the audit. The results of the first survey were disseminated widely to staff and students in a communications exercise undertaken jointly by the University and the Students' Association. A particularly strong concern expressed in the 1997-98 Survey related to the quality of feedback provided to students on their assessed work and the timescales for receiving such feedback. The audit team learnt that the identification of this concern led to widespread discussion resulting in clear proposals for action; for example, there is now a University rule whereby student work must be returned within three weeks. Another student concern identified through the 1997-98 Survey related to the profile of the Careers Service. Although the team was informed of steps that were being taken to enhance the profile of the Careers Service, it was less clear whether the concerns expressed about student awareness of the Service and the advice provided had been addressed in a systematic way.
77 In addition to the University-wide Student Satisfaction Survey, the audit team found that there is a sound scheme for collecting student feedback through end of module questionnaires which is routinely used, although many staff supplement this with other strategies such as group discussion. Student feedback is scrutinised and checked for follow-up action as part of the annual module and programme reviews. Feedback to students is also well developed, with good practice in the use of pro forma apparent in several departments.
78 The University has consulted widely as part of the process of revising its Student Charter, including seeking the views of the general student body in addition to those of the formal student representatives. The Charter has been developed as a key means for defining the relationship between the University and its students as both clients and learners. The audit team was told that the Charter is designed to apply to all students, both within the immediate University community and those enrolled on its franchised and flexible learning programmes. It was clear to the team that the strategy behind the Charter had been carefully considered. The Charter itself impressed the team as a wide-ranging and well specified document which provides benchmarks for the full range of services and the student teaching and learning experience.
79 The complaints and academic appeals procedures for students are set out in the student handbooks issued for degree programmes. Students are introduced to these procedures through the initial induction programme (see above, paragraph 58). The Students' Association Educational Adviser, who is a permanent employee of the Students' Association, provides support for students wishing to use the University complaints and appeals procedures. The audit team was informed that resolution of non-academic complaints and grievances as close to their source as possible is encouraged.
80 The sample of student handbooks provided to the audit team appeared generally to be of reasonable quality. The team did note, however, that the handbooks varied in the extent of the information provided with some being comprehensive and a small number being rather limited in the range of topics covered. Furthermore, the detail of information about University services varied, for example, the standard entry on the Careers Service was very brief and did not appear to encourage students in the early years of study to make use of the Service. Given the importance of providing information (especially to students from non-traditional routes of entry) the University is advised to ensure that the information contained in the handbooks is consistent.
Conclusions
81 Napier University has confronted a range of strategic changes since 1992 when it acquired university status. Its student numbers have grown considerably since that time. It has acquired new sites and integrated the Lothian College of Health Studies and the Scottish Borders College of Nursing. It has re-organised its academic departments and re-structured its faculties, devolving considerable powers to these faculties. The University has recognised the challenges which these developments pose both to its institutional identity and to the maintenance and enhancement of academic standards.
82 The University has developed a strong and pervasive 'Vision' for the future which indicates that it will be: 'a world class modern university'; 'focused on students and helping them to realise their full potential'; and 'the life-long learning university in south east Scotland'. This broad 'Vision' has been translated into a number of more specific strategies which are appropriate to the overall aim of creating a distinctive institutional identity, although it is not clearly articulated how they will ensure that the University achieves its vision of becoming a world-class modern university. The Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy, in particular, is central to the fulfilment of the 'Vision' and was developed through extensive internal debate and consultation. The result of this is a high level of awareness and a strong sense of ownership of the Strategy among staff at all levels. Senior staff recognise the delivery of the University's 'Vision' will require a very substantial development of existing communication and information technology resources, as well as a continuing shift in the institutional culture to a powerful customer focus. The University's ability to fulfil its 'Vision' will depend upon a major investment in its teaching and learning infrastructure and on an increasing commitment to change by all members of staff.
83 Related to its 'Vision' the University has plans to increase significantly the number of students studying on a flexible basis from under 2,000 at the current time to around 10,000 by 2008. The University has a track record of implementing arrangements to promote flexible learning opportunities, such as the accreditation of prior learning and the development of work-based learning modules. Examples of good and innovative practice can readily be identified and the University has launched the Napier University: Flexible venture to support the development of distance learning materials and flexible provision. However, if the University is to increase the number of its flexible registrations to the level currently planned, it requires to be aware of the significant challenges this will pose both in relation to the significant investment in the learning infrastructure referred to above, and in the area of staff development. As a key element in this, the University will wish to focus on the dissemination of existing good practice to ensure that adequate numbers of staff have the appropriate skills to support this style of provision.
84 The policy of devolving authority from the centre to the faculties is in line with the University's stated principle that the ownership and responsibility for core tasks should be as close to the point of delivery as possible. Benefits of the policy have been identified as a higher level of participation in quality assurance processes by staff. The University has established a regulatory framework within which each faculty is encouraged to develop its own strategies for quality assurance and enhancement. The University has in place a set of arrangements aimed at monitoring and assuring the quality of provision which, while comprehensive, can tend to be applied mechanistically. An exception is the internal audit process carried out under the auspices of the central QSC. The Committee can initiate specific ad hoc audits of academic or service activities across the University. This process is rigorous and has played an important role in disseminating good practice. QSC also retains a monitoring role aimed at ensuring the faculties discharge their duties properly. Despite this a number of inconsistencies in practice can still be identified between the faculties that do not relate to differences in academic focus alone; the most significant of these being differences in the management of the external examiner process and the arrangements for monitoring the progress of research students.
85 As part of its work towards developing a customer focus, the University has revised its Student Charter. This involved a wide consultation process during which the views of the general student population, as well as those of the Students' Association, were invited. The resulting Charter is broad-ranging but also includes performance indicators for a range of services relating to the student experience. For the past two years the University has carried out a Student Satisfaction Survey, the results of which are widely disseminated and points identified can be addressed. A key element in the University's student focus is the availability of members of CMT to the Students' Association representatives.
86 Given the University's 'Vision' and the vocational nature of much of its provision it is perhaps surprising that greater attention is not given to the University's links with the professions and industry. A number of the University's programmes have professional body accreditation and most departments have some links with relevant industry. In many cases, however, these links are operated on an informal basis and the University does not have a mechanism for knowing whether the most appropriate arrangements for industrial liaison are being employed.
87 The University has processes in place to identify information relating to the quality of provision and the standards of its awards. Some work is needed to ensure that these processes are implemented in a consistent manner and adhered to across all of the faculties within the devolved structure. Work will also be required to ensure that the development of staff and the learning infrastructure of the University are adequate to support the ambitious University 'Vision' and its related strategies. CMT is committed to fulfilling the 'Vision' and has made significant efforts to secure the participation of all staff in its development. Given this there can be reasonable confidence that the appropriate arrangements will be put in place to ensure that the standards of the University's awards can continue to be secured in the future.
Points for commendation
88 The audit team would wish to commend the University for a number of good practices, in particular:
i the consultative manner in which it has developed its Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy (paragraphs 18 and 53);
ii the self-reflective approach of the Corporate Management Team and its efforts to engender a University-wide commitment to its 'Vision' (paragraph 19);
iii the extent and rigour of the internal auditing process (paragraph 29);
iv the steps taken towards ensuring the equivalence of the standards of its programmes delivered in different modes and locations (paragraph 50);
v its review of the Staff Development and Career Review Scheme to ensure that the revised Scheme will assist the implementation of the University 'Vision' (paragraph 65);
vi the role of the Teaching Fellowship Scheme and the EDU in facilitating the development and dissemination of good practice (paragraphs 66 and 67); and
vii the wide-ranging and detailed nature of the revised Student Charter in specifying the University's relationship with its students (paragraph 77).
Points for further consideration
89 As it continues to develop its systems and arrangements for assuring the quality of its educational provision and the academic standards of its awards, the University may wish to consider the advisability of:
i ensuring that robust procedures are in place across the University to provide all the information necessary to external examiners in order to allow them to discharge their duties (paragraphs 30 and 43);
ii reviewing practice under the devolved structure to ensure that good practice can be shared between faculties and that differences in practice can be justified (paragraph 30);
iii ensuring that an adequate process for monitoring the progress of research students is in place across all faculties and, related to this, reviewing the Research Students' Handbook (paragraph 33);
iv reviewing the links between departments and industrial and professional communities to ensure that the most appropriate liaison structures are employed (paragraph 35);
v ensuring the spread of good practice on assessment moderation, including that relating to work-based placements (paragraphs 42 and 45);
vi ensuring that, as the take-up of work-based learning modules increases, sufficient numbers of staff have the skills to oversee and assess the required learning contracts (paragraph 46);
vii ensuring the consistent application of arrangements for the accreditation of prior learning and prior experiential learning across faculties and within departments (paragraph 48);
viii ensuring that communications and information technology resources are developed to an extent appropriate in order to support the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy (paragraph 56);
ix providing appropriate research methods training for research students and supporting these students and postdoctoral researchers in any teaching roles they may be invited to undertake (paragraph 61); and
x providing for more consistency in the set of information contained within the student handbooks produced by departments (paragraph 79).
90 The University may also wish to consider the desirability of:
i reviewing its quality assurance and enhancement procedures to avoid duplication and potential overload (paragraph 32); and
ii introducing a staff mentor system and peer review process across the University as a means of supporting staff and sharing good practice (paragraph 64).
Appendix 1
Napier University - facts and figures 1999
1 Key statistics
In 1998-99 the University had about 10,400 FTE students (8,850 undergraduate and 1,550 postgraduate), about 580 FTE academic staff and about 750 FTE support staff.
2 University students by faculty (head count)
| Faculty of Arts & Social Science | Napier Business School | Faculty of Engineering & Computing | Faculty of Health Studies | Faculty of Science | Continuing Professional Development | University Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full-time students | |||||||
| Undergraduate | 1,727 | 2,059 | 1,837 | 1,243 | 776 | 275 | 7,917 |
| Postgraduate | 71 | 161 | 544 | 0 | 88 | 2 | 866 |
| Sub-total | 1,798 | 2,220 | 2,381 | 1,243 | 864 | 277 | 8,783 |
| Part-time students | |||||||
| Undergraduate | 41 | 262 | 266 | 930 | 79 | 278 | 1,856 |
| Postgraduate | 152 | 825 | 264 | 21 | 76 | 60 | 1,398 |
| Sub-total | 193 | 1,087 | 530 | 951 | 155 | 338 | 3,254 |
| Total | 1,991 | 3,307 | 2,911 | 2,194 | 1,019 | 615 | 12,037 |
3 University staff (FTEs) at July 1999
| Teaching and research | 515 |
| Research only | 66 |
| Total academic | 581 |
| Academic related | 211 |
| Clerical, secretarial and related | 288 |
| Technical and related | 153 |
| Ancillary and others | 103 |
| Total | 755 |
4 Income and expenditure
| Income | £000's |
|---|---|
| SHEFC grants | 29,785 |
| Academic fees | 10,381 |
| Research grant and contracts | 2,899 |
| Other operating income | 16,409 |
| Endowment/donation income | 430 |
| Total | 59,904 |
| Expenditure | £000's |
|---|---|
| Academic departments | 28,366 |
| Academic services | 6,590 |
| Central administration | 7,312 |
| Property | 4,458 |
| Research grants and contracts | 3,226 |
| Residences and refectories | 3,700 |
| Consultancy | 2,677 |
| Other | 2,024 |
| Total | 58,353 |
Student characteristics 1998-99
5 Students by age, gender and mode of study (head count)
| Male | <17/17 | 18-20 | 21-24 | 25-29 | 30+ | Not known | Total male |
| Full-time students | |||||||
| Undergraduate | 249 | 1,805 | 1,177 | 350 | 281 | 8 | 3,870 |
| Postgraduate research | 0 | 0 | 19 | 29 | 13 | 0 | 61 |
| Postgraduate taught | 0 | 6 | 205 | 151 | 128 | 3 | 493 |
| Sub-total | 249 | 1,811 | 1,401 | 530 | 422 | 11 | 4,424 |
| Part-time students | |||||||
| Undergraduate | 6 | 69 | 186 | 251 | 361 | 2 | 875 |
| Postgraduate research | 0 | 0 | 2 | 8 | 23 | 0 | 33 |
| Postgraduate taught | 0 | 0 | 31 | 119 | 339 | 2 | 491 |
| Sub-total | 6 | 69 | 219 | 378 | 723 | 4 | 1,399 |
| Total male | 255 | 1,880 | 1,620 | 908 | 1,145 | 15 | 5,823 |
| Female | <17/17 | 18-20 | 21-24 | 25-29 | 30+ | Not known | Total female |
| Full-time students | |||||||
| Undergraduates | 250 | 1,873 | 1,039 | 383 | 492 | 9 | 4,046 |
| Postgraduate research | 0 | 0 | 14 | 13 | 18 | 0 | 45 |
| Postgraduate taught | 0 | 5 | 139 | 97 | 61 | 0 | 302 |
| Sub-total | 250 | 1,878 | 1,192 | 493 | 571 | 9 | 4,393 |
| Part-time students | |||||||
| Undergraduate | 3 | 53 | 239 | 354 | 803 | 7 | 1,459 |
| Postgraduate research | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 12 |
| Postgraduate taught | 0 | 0 | 35 | 96 | 211 | 2 | 344 |
| Sub-total | 3 | 53 | 274 | 453 | 1,023 | 9 | 1,815 |
| Total female | 253 | 1,931 | 1,466 | 946 | 1,594 | 18 | 6,208 |
| Total overall | 508 | 3,811 | 3,086 | 1,854 | 2,739 | 33 | 12,031 |
6 Students by domicile (head count)
| UK | EU | O/S | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full-time students | ||||
| Undergraduate | 7,150 | 565 | 201 | 7,916 |
| Postgraduate research | 83 | 4 | 19 | 106 |
| Postgraduate taught | 654 | 104 | 37 | 795 |
| Sub-total | 7,887 | 673 | 257 | 8,817 |
| Part-time students | ||||
| Undergraduate | 2,248 | 30 | 56 | 2,334 |
| Postgraduate research | 40 | 4 | 1 | 45 |
| Postgraduate taught | 772 | 15 | 48 | 835 |
| Sub-total | 3,060 | 49 | 105 | 3,214 |
| Total | 10,947 | 722 | 362 | 12,031 |
7 University awards (head count)
| PGR | PGT | PGCE PGT | Other degree | First | HND | Other UG | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full-time | 12 | 122 | 0 | 194 | 1,164 | 344 | 98 | 1,934 |
| Part-time | 5 | 99 | 0 | 112 | 267 | 21 | 55 | 559 |
| Total | 17 | 221 | 0 | 306 | 1,431 | 365 | 153 | 2,493 |
Appendix 2
The University's collaborative programmes as at December 1999
Awards offered overseas
1 Faculty of Arts & Social Science
2 BA (Hons) Economics with Management Studies (Flexible Learning) (Mauritius)
3 BA (Hons)/BA Financial Services (Flexible Learning) (Mauritius)
4 Cert HE Librarianship & Information Science (Flexible Learning) (Belize)
Napier University Business School
1 BA (Hons) Accounting (Hong Kong) (PT)
2 Diploma in Management Studies (Distance Learning) (Mauritius)
3 MBA (Distance Learning) (Mauritius)
4 Diploma in Management Studies (Distance Learning) (South Africa)
5 Certificate in Management (Distance Learning) (South Africa)
6 MBA (Flexible Learning) (China)
Faculty of Science
University of Hong Kong
a BSc (Hons) Life Sciences (Applied Medical Sciences) (PT)
b BSc Life Sciences (Applied Medical Sciences) (PT)
c MSc/Pg Diploma/Advanced Diploma in Biomedical Sciences (PT)
UK based collaborative awards
Faculty of Arts & Social Science
b MSc Local Economic Development (PT) (Collaborative - consortium based)
Napier University Business School
1 MBA (Open Learning) (Consortium based)
2 MSc Corporate Leadership (Flexible Learning) (Euroventures)
Faculty of Engineering & Computing
1 HNC Mechatronics (Euroventures) (PT)
2 BEng Electronics Manufacture (Lauder/Clackmannan FE Colleges) (PT)
Associate College Scottish Churches Open College
1 a Diploma of Higher Education Studies for the Church in the Community (normally FT)
b BA Studies for the Church in the Community (FT and mixed mode)
2 Advanced Diploma in Counselling (PT)
3 Certificate of Higher Education Church Studies (PT)
4 Certificate of Higher Education Working with People in the Community (PT)
Awards offered through continuing professional development
1 Dip HE Nursing with Cancer and Palliative Care; BSc Nursing with Palliative Care; BSc Nursing with Cancer Care (all PT) (Marie Curie)
Top
QAA updates
QAAtweets
QAAtube