Introduction
A team of auditors from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (the Agency) visited the University of Surrey, Roehampton (Roehampton) from 1 to 5 December 2003 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 the awards that Roehampton offers.
To arrive at its conclusions the audit team spoke to members of staff throughout Roehampton, to current students, and read a wide range of documents relating to the way Roehampton 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 academic 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 and effective 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 Roehampton is that:
- broad confidence can be placed in the soundness of Roehampton's current and likely future management of the quality of its academic programmes and the academic standards of its awards.
Features of good practice
The audit team identified the following areas of good practice:
- the variety of mechanisms used to hear the student voice, and the responsive way in which Roehampton has used these to enhance the student experience;
- the approach of the Roehampton Educational Development (RED) Centre in providing support to staff and academic teams;
- the accessibility of academic staff to students and the positive ways in which they respond to student needs;
- the comprehensive support for, and monitoring of, research degrees students;
- the academic and personal support services provided to students by the RED Centre.
Recommendations for action
The audit team recommends that Roehampton should consider further action in a number of areas to ensure that the academic quality and standards of the awards it offers are maintained. The team advises Roehampton to:
- review the appropriateness of the current programme approval procedures for a change in mode of delivery to distance learning;
- take steps to ensure that its assessment procedures in respect of the internal scrutiny of examination papers are always observed and that there is always prior external scrutiny of examination papers leading to an award;
- ensure that there is always external representation on Awards Boards and to revisit the role of the external observer;
- ensure that the procedures set out in the Handbook for the approval of off-site delivery are always observed;
- ensure that adequate consideration is given to the scrutiny of collaborative partners and sites where University programmes are taught;
- ensure that the Collaborative Provision Policy Group receives programme annual reviews as stated in its terms of reference, in order to satisfy itself about the maintenance of quality and standards in all collaborative provision.
It would be desirable for Roehampton to consider:
- maintaining the independence of University Approval Panels by clarifying the role of the Quality and Standards Advisers from the nominating School;
- continuing the development of mechanisms for University-level oversight of comparative progression, retention and attainment statistics across the institution;
- ensuring the systematic and active involvement of employers across the institution;
- ensuring that all postgraduate students teaching on University programmes are appropriately prepared for this role.
Business Studies (BA/BSc Business Studies and MSc/Postgraduate Diploma in Voluntary Action Management); Drama (BA/BSc Drama, Theatre and Performance Studies); Education (BA/BSc Early Childhood Studies and the Professional Development Programme)
The audit team looked in detail at academic provision in the areas above, to find out how well Roehampton's systems and procedures were working at that level. Roehampton provided the team with documents, including student work and, here too, the team spoke to staff and students. As well as its findings supporting the overall confidence statement given above, the team was able to state that the standard of student achievement in these areas of provision was appropriate to the titles of the relevant awards and their place in The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (FHEQ) and that the quality of learning opportunities available was, in each case, suitable.
National reference points
To provide further evidence to support its findings the audit team also investigated the use made by Roehampton of the academic infrastructure which the Agency has developed on behalf of the whole of UK higher education. The academic infrastructure is a set of nationally agreed reference points that help to define both good practice and academic standards. The findings of the audit suggest that Roehampton has responded appropriately to the FHEQ, subject benchmark statements, programme specifications and the Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education, published by the Agency.
From 2004, the Agency's audit teams will comment on the reliability of the information about academic quality and standards that institutions will be required to publish in a standard format. At the time of the audit, Roehampton was moving in an appropriate and timely manner to fulfil its responsibilities in this matter, and the information that it was publishing about the quality of its programmes and the standards of its awards was reliable.
ISBN 1 84482 048 3
>> Main report
>> Findings
Top
QAA updates
QAAtweets
QAAtube