>> Main report
>> Findings
ISBN 1 84482 259 1
University of Sunderland
Institutional Audit
November 2004
RG 123 05/05
Summary
Web site for University of Sunderland
Contents
Introduction
A team of auditors from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) visited the University of Sunderland (the University) from 29 November to 3 December 2004 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 offered by the University.
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 academic award (for example, a degree). It should be at a similar level across the United Kingdom (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 University'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 as being good practice:
- use of school conferences to address specific themes, develop a broader understanding of issues, and as a mechanism for exchange of feedback and dissemination of good practice
- use of Teaching and Learning Fellowships that are focused on particular institutional priorities and targets, for example, retention and for building community links. They are used effectively in the development of 'reach out' activity as well as internal academic matters and are well integrated into the institution
- maintenance and enhancement of learning support resources as a key priority and the provision of high-quality technician support
- range and quality of support for students with special needs (physical or educational challenges) linked to the University's strategic view of diversity.
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. The team advises that:
- the Academic Board ensures greater clarity in the articulation and operation of its policy, making explicit the minimum requirements for adherence across the University as a whole. In addition, that Academic Board ensures that there is central oversight and assurance in the operation of its Assessment Boards
- in the context of the University's key strategic initiatives, the University refines its definitions of quality assurance and quality enhancement and establishes more clearly its interpretation of the relationship between them. In doing so, the University is advised to secure an approach to improvement that is more systematic, timely and strategically driven
- the Academic Board introduces measures to secure a greater degree of critical analysis throughout its annual monitoring process, and more consistency in the annual monitoring reports from schools. This would increase the University's capacity for synthesis of key matters and thereby ensure that annual monitoring makes a more effective contribution to strategic decision-making and institution-wide implementation
- the recommendation made by the previous audit team's report of 2001 for more explicit institutional consideration of professional, statutory and regulatory body accreditation reports and the introduction of a standard procedure for responding to these is fully addressed to capture intelligence and good practice
- as identified by the 2001 audit team, the University ensures that the development and implementation of improved mechanisms for the collection, analysis and use of student feedback is addressed as a matter of priority
- the University prioritises the enhancement of management information and data analysis, builds staff capacity and maximises the benefits of systems to address the acknowledged problems with the quality of statistical data
- the University secures, and assures, an equivalence of student experience for students registered on the Joint Honours Scheme.
The audit team also recommends that the University should consider the desirability of:
- keeping under review personal support for students to ensure that the variety of personal tutoring arrangements continue to reflect their particular identified needs.
Outcomes of discipline audit trails
BA English; BA English Language and Literature; BA English and Drama; BA English and Film; English in the Joint Honours programme; English Language/Linguistics in the Joint Honours programme; MA English; MA English: Postmodernity and Contemporary Literature; MA English: Restoration to Romanticism; MA World Literatures; MSc Computer Based Information Systems; MSc Electronic Commerce Applications; MSc Commercial Applications; MSc Information Technology Management; MSc Intelligent Systems; MSc Internet Engineering; MSc Multimedia Systems; MSc Network Systems; MSc Software Engineering; MPharm; PgC/PgD/MSc Clinical Pharmacy; Postgraduate Diploma Pharmaceutical Sciences; MSc Medicines Management; Practice Certificate Supplementary Prescribing (Pharmacists); BSc (Hons) Psychology; Psychology in the Joint Honours programme (including specialised major in Psychological Studies); Graduate Diploma in Psychology; MSc Applied Psychological Research.
The standard of student achievement in the programmes is appropriate to the titles of the awards and their location within The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (FHEQ), published by QAA. The quality of learning opportunities available to students is suitable for a programme of study leading to the award titles.
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 that 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 the University 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 QAA.
From 2004, the published information set will include the recommended summaries of external examiners' reports and of feedback from current students for each programme. The University is working towards meeting this expectation. The group established to steer the University's response to these requirements had reported and responsibility for implementation of plans is delegated to the Quality Support Office.
Top