Foreword
1 This is a report of an academic quality audit of the University of Ulster (the University) undertaken by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). QAA is grateful to the University for the willing cooperation 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 was 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.
Method and process
3 The primary source of documentary information available to the audit team about the University's quality assurance arrangements was an Analytical Account (the Account, see below, paragraph 15), prepared for the purposes of the audit. The Account provided examples of the evidence used by the University to satisfy itself of the effectiveness of its procedures for the management of quality and standards. The University also supplied a number of supporting documents, including its Corporate Plan, student prospectuses and handbooks, and information relating to quality assurance. Other documents available to the team were the HEQC quality audit report of 1993 and reports of the teaching quality assessments (TQAs) conducted by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and subject reviews conducted by QAA. At a briefing meeting held to review this information, the team drew up a programme of meetings for the visit and a request for a small amount of additional information.
4 The audit team visited the University from 12-16 November 2001. For the duration of the visit, the University made available to the team a base room containing the documents referred to in the Account, and also provided access to its web site and internal web pages. The team held a total of 14 meetings with staff and students of the University. These meetings, together with the documentary material available to the team, provided the information, examples and evidence upon which this report is based.
5 The audit team comprised Dr R M Allen, Mrs P J Lowrie and Dr D E S Truman, auditors; and Mr K N Hodgson, audit secretary. The audit was coordinated for QAA by Ms S J Clark, Assistant Director, Institutional Review Directorate.
6 A brief guide, the University of Ulster - Facts and figures 2001-02, prepared by the University, is attached as appendix 1. A list of the University's collaborative partnerships as at December 2001 is attached as appendix 2. During discussions preceding the audit, it was agreed between QAA and the University that the University's management of its collaborative provision would not be included within the scope of this audit, but would be the subject of a separate enquiry, and a separate report, at a later date.
Background
7 The University of Ulster was established by Royal Charter in 1984 from the merger of the then New University of Ulster and the Ulster Polytechnic. The University is based on four campuses at Belfast, Coleraine, Jordanstown and Magee, with a fifth site under development at Springvale in north west Belfast. The first transbinary institution in the UK, it is now the largest university on the island of Ireland.
8 The University's vision is to be 'a model of an outstanding regional university with a national and an international reputation for quality'. Its Mission clearly identifies what the Account described as the 'primacy of high standards, concern for the individual, the rigour of the monitoring process, the relevance of the qualifications, the high degree of vocationality, and the importance of providing a high quality learning and physical environment'.
9 Since its establishment, the University has expanded its student population from 11,200 (9,300 full-time equivalent) to nearly 22,000 (17,050 fte). Of this total, 66 per cent are studying for undergraduate degrees, 12 per cent are on sub-degree programmes, and 22 per cent are postgraduates. Over 3,700 students are studying off-campus in a network of further education colleges and other institutions throughout Northern Ireland. In the University's view, one of its most significant achievements has been its role in widening access to mature students and those from socially and educationally disadvantaged backgrounds. In 2000, over 31 per cent of all entrants were aged 26 and over, and more than one quarter of full-time students were aged 21 or over. Overall, 37 per cent of entrants came from the manual social classes.
Academic and management structures
10 Since the previous audit in 1992, the University's structure has undergone a number of revisions. Reviews in 1995 and 1998 led to the reorganisation of the academic staff into six faculties, subdivided into 20 schools. Since the mid-1990s each faculty has also had a research graduate school, managed by a head of school. The appointment of a new Vice-Chancellor in 1999 prompted a further reassessment of both the academic and management structures. As a result, the University commenced upon what the Account described as 'a two-year modernisation programme'. It decided that six reformulated faculties would best enable it to meet its plans and strategic priorities, but increased the number of schools to 27 as part of a drive to establish more academically coherent subject groupings. The new structure was implemented in August 2001.
11 The changes to the academic structure were preceded, in October 2000, by revisions to senior management portfolios and, during 2000-01, by a wide-ranging review of procedures. The main resulting change was the division of the Academic Affairs portfolio into two distinct areas - Teaching and Learning, and Quality Assurance and Enhancement - each led by a Pro-Vice-Chancellor. The division was replicated in a new committee structure. The University now has five pro-vice-chancellors, some of whom also act as campus-based provosts. These changes in the senior management portfolios have been complemented by revisions to administrative support arrangements: the roles of Academic Registrar and Director of Student Affairs have been subsumed into pro-vice-chancellor portfolios; Teaching and Learning is supported by, inter alia, the Academic Office and the Academic Registry; and Quality Assurance and Enhancement is supported by a Quality Enhancement Division (QED) and a Quality Management and Audit Unit (QMAU). The principal managerial committees are the Planning Committee, on which all senior managers sit, and its subcommittee, the Strategic Planning Working Group.
12 At the time of the 1992 audit, the University had just introduced a modular structure for all full-time undergraduate programmes (termed 'courses' by the University and within this report) and had moved to a semester-based system of course delivery. A year later, part-time and postgraduate taught provision was modularised and the University developed a credit framework to which all award-bearing courses conform. Modularisation is now being developed further in relation to undergraduate honours degree provision, initially at the Magee campus, with a view to providing a greater range of subject combinations.
The 1992 audit and the University's response
13 In December 1992, the University participated in an audit conducted by HEQC. The subsequent report, published in August 1993, commended a number of the elements of its quality assurance structure including course approval; course committees; annual monitoring and review; the management of postgraduate research students; its commitment to the development of teaching; and staff development. There were a range of matters recommended to the University for further consideration and, more broadly, a general theme running through the report that there was a gap between the arrangements devised by management and their patchy, sometimes inadequate, implementation at local level.
14 The University provided the current audit team with summaries of how it had responded to the report: examples of specific actions included several steps to improve internal communications; the application of best practice across the full range of sandwich placements; and more attention given to the induction of new staff. It was evident that the years since 1993 had also seen a number of structural changes and the introduction of new procedures designed to improve the assurance and enhancement of quality. These included the establishment of an Educational Development Unit; the introduction of an annual Student Questionnaire and a Graduate Survey; a review of the external examiner system; and the introduction of a student complaints system. In 1998 the Seven Year Review Committee, an independent review body acting under the terms of the University's Charter, reported that the University's response to the 1992 audit was 'careful and thorough and that the attention given to better communications has paid off in developing a strong sense of identity and in improving quality control and assurance'. While the evidence available to the team suggested that the University's response to the report had been comprehensive, the radical 'modernisation' programme commenced in 1999 meant, inevitably, that the team focused primarily on activities over the last two years, rather than testing the effectiveness of the accretional changes of the previous six years.
The Analytical Account
15 The Account, which had evidently been developed after wide consultation and consideration by senior committees, was a thorough and well-produced document with extensive supplementary annexes. It sought to provide the background to, and context for, the significant and continuing changes that had occurred in the two years prior to the audit visit. It presented in considerable detail and with some sophistication the principles underpinning the changes and, in sections on 'Assuring Standards' and 'Managing and Enhancing Quality', it sought to demonstrate the establishment and operationalisation of the new principles. In showing how and why changes had come about, the Account demonstrated some critical reflection on areas where it was considered that previous procedures had been ineffective. Perhaps because of its emphasis on strategy and principles, together with its extensive detail on both old and new processes and procedures, the Account generally underplayed the role of faculty and school level management in the University's approach to quality and standards. This inadvertently created within the Account a view of the new structure that was apparently highly centralist, and which failed to capture effectively the emerging relationship between the institutional and faculty needs, and the attempts to create an effective balance. This matter aside, the Account was an exemplary document which, together with the well-organised base room of evidence, was a valuable and effective tool for the audit.
The strategic approach to quality management
Principles for standards assurance and quality management
16 The Account noted that the emphasis within the Mission on quality and standards 'requires a commitment to quality which permeates all aspects of the University's structures'. As a result, the University 'aims to operate an integrated system of standards assurance and quality management and enhancement which makes an effective contribution to the achievement of the...Mission and which underpins the academic planning process'. It must be 'sufficiently robust to maintain the defined standards of the University's awards, to satisfy internal quality management and enhancement objectives, and to comply with the published sections of QAA's Code of practice (on the assurance of academic standards and quality in higher education)' (QAA's Code).
17 The Account reported that the decision to separate the pro-vice-chancellor portfolios for Teaching and Learning, and Quality Assurance and Enhancement was based on the desire to create greater integrity in standards and quality management and assurance by divorcing responsibility for standards definition, approval and review from quality assurance. In pursuit of this strategic and operational distinction, the University has also sought to 'revise its quality assurance and audit processes so that they are conducted by persons other than those responsible for the management and delivery of programmes'. The full implications of implementing the distinction are now crystallised in a set of Principles for Standards Assurance and Quality Management. The Account commented that, though 'originally conceived as an undifferentiated set of quality guidelines', the principles had been revised to reflect better the remits of the two main Senate committees responsible for standards and quality respectively, the Teaching and Learning Committee (TLC) and the Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee (QAEC). These divisions of responsibility have enabled the University to establish a clear distinction between standards and quality in relation to taught courses.
18 The clearly articulated and widely disseminated principles require, for the assurance of standards, that there is evidence of the establishment of course standards appropriate to awards; accordance with the national framework for higher education qualifications; continuing review of the validity of awards; student performance commensurate with externally benchmarked standards; and sufficient learning resources. The framework for the management of quality is required to provide procedures for the approval, monitoring and review of processes to ensure their efficacy; the incorporation of stakeholder views into course development; the quality management arrangements for learning resources; the evidence of timely and appropriate action to deal with identified concerns; and the promotion of, and reward for, excellence and innovation in teaching and research. The audit team was informed that an important consequence of these arrangements was that faculties had virtually no autonomy in respect of standards but considerable discretion in areas of quality such as annual monitoring; the University saw the distinction between the management of standards, which required strong central control, and of quality, which allowed for some diversity, as enabling the establishment of a balance between the corporate need for consistency and the faculties' need for flexibility. The team considered that, in establishing these formal principles, the University had provided the opportunity to determine and implement appropriate structures and procedures that would permit what the Account described as 'a devolved and distributed approach to quality management, supported by appropriate reporting and monitoring arrangements'. Aspects of this approach are considered in more detail in the paragraphs that follow.
The faculty framework
19 The audit team learnt that, alongside the recent realignment of senior roles, deans, who were previously considered distinct from senior officers, had become fully part of the Senior Management Team with a greater emphasis placed on their corporate managerial role and a clearer brief to lead their faculties. This change supported the University's claim to the team that faculties were the academic drivers of the institution. Heads of school are responsible through the deans for the resourcing of courses and, through course directors, for their management. The team heard that the University saw both heads of schools and deans as central to academic and resource planning and quality.
20 Within faculties, coordinators for teaching and learning are responsible for leading the development and implementation of University policy and faculty practice. They provide a focal and contact point in the faculty, chair the Faculty Teaching and Learning Committee, and coordinate faculty responses to consultations. They are in close liaison with school coordinators for teaching and learning who liaise, in turn, with course directors. Course directors, working with a course committee, are responsible for the effective day-to-day management of courses. The Account stated that the University placed great emphasis on this level of academic management as 'a central element in an effective quality management structure' and aimed to ensure that 'the processes which it puts in place encourage, stimulate and support active Course Committees'.
The committee structure
21 The University's Council is responsible for the oversight of finances and resource-related matters, while Senate is responsible for the ordering of academic affairs. As a result of the report of the Seven Year Review Committee, the constitution and role of Council, Senate and their committees was reviewed in 1999 and a revised structure was introduced in October 2000. The Account stated that the 'membership and structure of committees is designed to facilitate an integrated approach to the achievement of the University's strategic objectives': there is, for example, substantial common membership of Senate committees to ensure 'consistency of approach and inter-committee communication'. In addition, formal communication channels and linked membership exist between University committees, and between University committees and their faculty equivalents. In relation to quality and standards, this approach is exemplified in the operation of TLC and QAEC, where cross-referral of items of business takes place when appropriate.
22 While TLC is responsible to Senate for the definition, maintenance and review of the standards of taught courses, QAEC has responsibility for audit, assessing the effectiveness of quality assurance processes, proposing enhancements and identifying and disseminating best practice. It is required to keep under review, advise and make recommendations to Senate on 'all matters relating to the quality assurance and enhancement of teaching and learning, including learning support services'. The Research Degrees Committee (RDC), a subcommittee of the Research Policy and Practice Committee, 'exercises its delegated authority from the Senate' for the admission of research students, the oversight of their supervision and training, the monitoring of progress, and the regulation of examination conduct. It is also responsible for monitoring and reporting on the standards of research degrees.
23 At faculty level, the audit team was informed that the Faculty Board was the 'faculty in corporate mode', with the Faculty Executive the equivalent of the central Planning Committee. Faculty Board terms of reference include advising and reporting to Senate 'on all matters relating to the organisation of education, teaching and research, including curriculum and examinations'. The team heard that it was intended that faculty committees would mirror the central committee structure, though with scope for 'cultural adjustments': faculties might seek approval, for example, not to have both a faculty TLC and a QAEC. The University advised the team that it would be amenable to such requests for a merging of functions at a faculty level provided that a common framework, and adherence to the principles, was maintained. This was on the basis that the nearer to the point of delivery, the more intertwined the strands of Teaching and Learning and Quality Assurance and Enhancement became.
24 It was evident to the audit team that the University had, in the establishment of strong principles, in the direct linking of committees from faculty to University level, and in the incorporation of the dean into the senior management structure, put in place a clear structure for quality and standards management. Staff informed the team that the structure placed responsibility for quality close to those who delivered the various academic and support services: the emphasis was on self-evaluation and continuous improvement, in which the overarching principles and frameworks must be observed, but where insistence on uniformity was seen to stifle desirable diversity. The University emphasised, however, that devolution of responsibilities to faculties did not mean that the centre was not strongly involved in quality management: each faculty was required to justify the detail of its approach, with the central committees checking that it was within the bounds of acceptable diversity, and faculty procedures were subject to routine audit through, for example, the annual monitoring process (see below, paragraph 25). These arrangements were underpinned by the work of QMAU, which managed annual monitoring and provided supporting statistics. Staff viewed the arrangements as a continuing dialogue between faculty and centre, based on levels of permissiveness enabled by clear central directives. In the view of the team, the structure provided the potential for faculties to adhere to and engage with the policies, procedures and regulatory frameworks of the institution, while retaining sufficient flexibility for their schools and constituent courses to operate and develop in an appropriate manner.
Monitoring and audit
25 The Account acknowledged that the University had introduced new procedures for annual subject monitoring in 2001-02 because previous arrangements 'were not working to best effect'. A 'reliance on substantial but routine form filling and a failure to encourage the direct engagement of the staff responsible' meant that the system had not, in the University's view, resulted in benefits commensurate with staff time and effort. At the time of the audit visit, a new subject-led annual monitoring process had been developed, assisted by the realignment of subjects within faculties to produce more academically coherent subject groupings (see above, paragraph 10). The process gives faculties freedom to organise annual monitoring in the form that they find most appropriate, and there is no formal University-led stage to the procedure. There is, however, a requirement for a report for each subject to be submitted to a subgroup of QAEC. In determining the effectiveness of these subject reports, the emphasis will be on 'evidence of critical self-reflection, on the approach taken to identifying and resolving problems, and on the extent to which individual courses and subjects are developing a quality culture' and are in line with statistical profiles and performance indicators provided by the University.
26 The Account reported that a new development for the University was the introduction of themed audits, with a full programme of such audits scheduled for 2002-03. Their purpose will be to 'review how effective existing procedures are in achieving their aims in relation to quality management and assurance' and to 'ensure reflection on priority areas for development' as defined in the Corporate Plan. The focus of the first two audits, planned for 2001-02, will be on aspects of the University's collaborative provision, partly as a result of specific concerns identified during annual monitoring in 2000, and in part as preparation for a future QAA collaborative audit. From its discussions with senior staff, it was evident to the audit team that, despite the ambitious declared aims of themed audits, the methodology would be employed, initially at least, on a modest scale. It did not currently represent a primary tool by which the University sought to ensure effectiveness, but provided a further element within the repertoire of quality management tools under development.
Approval and review
27 The University's procedures for course approval and review are detailed in an exemplary Course Approval, Management and Review Handbook. During the systematic review of procedures in 2000-01, the University identified some areas of potential weaknesses in relation to its course approval process and made a number of revisions. Of these, the establishment of a Course Approval Sub-Committee (CASC) of TLC, which looks in detail at new course proposals, was designed in particular to address the identified need to make explicit the relationship between course planning and resourcing and to ensure closer University-level scrutiny than had previously occurred. QAEC audits the rigour of the process, which is relatively elongated and normally completed in nine months to two years. The audit team noted that CASC had already reviewed faculty arrangements for approving revisions to existing programmes and had specified the types of changes requiring central approval. In so doing, it had restricted the extent of authority delegated to faculties and ensured that major changes were only approved where consistent with the University's planning objectives; responsibility for minor changes remains devolved, but still within strict guidelines. The team's comments on the approval process in relation to standards matters are provided below (see below, paragraphs 36-38).
28 The audit team was informed that the University was in the process of determining what form of course revalidation to introduce to meet the changing needs of the new quality framework. The intention is that the new arrangements will be subject-based and University-led, with all courses reviewed at least every five years, but that the process will be 'sufficiently flexible to allow for more urgent or frequent reviews...where significant problems are identified'. The reviews will consider groups of courses by level within subjects, with the aim of retaining the advantage of scrutiny at course level, while permitting broader review at subject level.
The role of students in quality management
29 The Account claimed that students 'have an important role to play in the governance of the University'. It outlined the means by which student views were obtained, and the effectiveness of student support determined, as part of the management of quality. There is, for example, student representation on the Court, Council, Senate, faculty boards, and a wide range of subordinate committees. Additionally, a Students' Union (SU) Liaison Group acts as a useful forum for discussions between the SU and senior management. Student feedback is gathered formally through staff/student consultative committees and through module evaluation, with the results considered as part of the annual and periodic review processes.
30 The University's techniques for identifying student perceptions of their experience include the Student Questionnaire and the Graduate Survey, both well-established, and standardised institution-wide procedures. The Questionnaire aims to evaluate the quality of individual teaching that students receive, with analysis provided by QED. A report is provided for the member of staff concerned and their head of school, and both school and faculty submit to QAEC an annual report on the general outcomes. The purpose of the Survey has been to ascertain final year students' perceptions of, and attitudes towards, their overall experience at the University. A general annual report, with faculty-specific reports and dedicated reports for service providers, 'is used to inform the institution's quality assurance procedures' and to contribute to planning and policy decisions. The collection of longitudinal data has also provided an opportunity to analyse changing perceptions of the University.
31 The Account noted that, in relation to students, 'the widespread introduction over the years of appraisal and evaluation questionnaires has contributed to "questionnaire fatigue"'. Consequently, while the University believes the Graduate Survey to be unique in its emphasis on the enhancement of the total student experience, it is 'timely to review the effectiveness of this broad instrument in achieving continuous quality improvement'. From 2001 the Survey will be replaced by 'a variety of instruments', to be trialled with students prior to University-wide application: mechanisms under consideration include a first-year student experience survey and course experience questionnaires. The audit noted that surveys across specific aspects of service provision were also under active development.
32 It was clear to the audit team that the University had put considerable effort into eliciting the views of students and, in the form of the Student Questionnaire, had developed what seemed to the team to be a particularly effective enhancement tool. The team also concurred with the University's view that the recent review of processes, aimed at maximising the utility of the information collected while avoiding 'questionnaire fatigue', was timely. As it proceeds with this work, however, the University will need to take care that, in replacing the Graduate Survey with a range of other tools, it does not lose sight either of the quality of the total student experience, or present such a complex range of tools that it cannot capture the important lessons to be learnt, and identify the necessary actions. The University now has a significant opportunity to develop, as with its other quality assurance mechanisms, an institutional approach to determining what information is required and how it might best be used in a way that is transparent to, and effective for, all members of the institution. It may wish, therefore, to consider the advisability of seeking to achieve a more coherent and strategic approach to developing the repertoire of mechanisms for collecting and utilising student feedback.
Quality management: conclusion
33 The University has sought in the recent past to redesign radically its structures for the management of quality and standards. The Account demonstrated the careful thought and preparation that had gone into the construction of the new system and the principles on which it was founded. In discussions with staff at all levels, it was clear that the University had taken care to ensure the effective implementation of the system, providing opportunities for consultation and testing and, where necessary, an iteration and development of the new procedures. Less clear from the Account was the importance of the means by which the University had provided opportunities for staff within faculties to engage more actively with the quality systems. In particular, the structural operationalisation of the distinction between central control of standards and the devolution of some responsibilities for quality management had, by permitting flexibility and diversity, created the potential for an effective balance between institutional and faculty needs. While it is too early for the University to judge the effectiveness of these wide-ranging changes, the University is to be commended on the careful determination and implementation of structures at all levels for the management of quality and standards.
34 It was also clear to the audit team that the changes made or envisaged were very ambitious in terms of both scope and pace, and were not restricted to matters relating to quality and standards (see below, paragraphs 52-53, 62 and 64). While there was evidence that the senior management had so far been effective in ensuring the implementation of its aims, it was also evident that there was a potential to undermine the successes to date if some reduction in the scope and pace of change did not take place. The University may wish, therefore, to consider the advisability of seeking to consolidate the new structures and procedures, in order to continue to secure the evident support and commitment of its staff.
The academic standards of awards
Approach
35 The principles underpinning the University's approach to assuring academic standards are detailed above (see above, paragraph 18). TLC and RDC keep under review and report to Senate on the standards of awards of taught courses and research degrees respectively. The Account set out the processes through which standards matters were addressed, and provided clear descriptions of the mechanisms used by the University to satisfy itself of the appropriateness of both undergraduate and postgraduate awards. It also emphasised the University's aim 'to ensure that its guidelines and procedures have appropriate internal and external requirements to satisfy the expectations of both internal consistency and national standards'. The various elements of the University's approach to standards are discussed in the paragraphs that follow.
The definition of standards
36 The Course Approval, Management and Review Handbook sets out for staff the principles of standards assurance. In terms of course approval, the Handbook for Members of University Evaluation Panels requires that 'the academic standards of courses are appropriate to their related awards; course structures accord with the National Qualifications Framework;...standards are externally benchmarked and validated through inter alia, the input of external examiners and statutory and professional bodies and by reference to relevant subject benchmarks'. The audit team noted that the expectation that course planners should take account of the national subject benchmarks now available at undergraduate level was explicit in the criteria for new course approval. The standards of taught postgraduate courses are defined in substantially the same way as undergraduate courses; the outcomes of the work of research postgraduates are, inevitably and in accordance with practice at other UK institutions, less closely defined, depending largely on the role of the external examiner (see below, paragraph 44).
37 The Account was clear that the University expected 'course and module descriptions to provide information on intended learning outcomes, assessment strategies and performance criteria'. To this end, it now requires that 'course specifications' (modelled on QAA's programme specifications) are made available to students, staff and external examiners. Since October 2001, staff preparing course specifications have also been required to take into consideration the generic level descriptors of the Northern Ireland Credit Accumulation and Transfer System (NICATS). Staff who met the audit team had found the mapping of assessment procedures against course outcomes to be a valuable process, aided by the availability of an Assessment Handbook (see below, paragraph 42).
38 Staff who met the audit team knew and understood the procedures set out in the Account and relevant handbooks; the associated documentation scrutinised by the team was also consistent with the claims in the Account. The team concluded that the University had been successful in ensuring that staff were acquainted with the principles and practical requirements of defining standards and that the University's investment in staff development programmes and in securing effective communications (see below, paragraphs 63, 65 and 70) had played an important part in ensuring staff commitment to the procedures. It was also evident that the University had made good progress in introducing course specifications and, in so doing, had ensured that standards were specified to a degree that made clear to students, staff and external examiners the expectations associated with its modules and courses. The team was satisfied that the University's procedures for defining standards gave due regard to national benchmark standards and met its stated intention of addressing the requirements of external and internal consistency.
Admissions
39 The University's entry requirements for taught courses are set out in its award regulations, and are expressed in terms of GCE A level and GCSE grades, or equivalent standards in other awards. The requirements are also described in the relevant prospectuses. The Account reported that adjustments to the entrance requirements established at course approval required authorisation by TLC, while adjustments in the light of applicants' examination results in August needed the approval of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning).
40 The Account provided a clear description of the processes for student admission. Selection is the responsibility of the faculties, acting in accordance with the University's Admissions Policy and Student Recruitment Strategy, with academic staff in schools providing advice when queries arise. Applications from overseas students are considered in a similar way, with the International Office advising on the acceptability of overseas qualifications and managing the processing of offers. In addition to the general standard of academic qualification, consideration is given to the applicant's command of the English language, using recognised tests. Postgraduate research student admissions are overseen by RDC and from October 2001, all shortlisted applicants for research degrees must be interviewed before receiving an offer.
41 The Account outlined the ways in which the University gave effect to its policies of widening participation and encouraging mature applicants, including its recent decision to allow students to claim exemption from modules on the basis of the accreditation of prior experiential learning (APEL). The audit team noted that, as a result of the commitment to increasing access, the University's policies on the maintenance of standards were more concerned to ensure the specification of outputs than with dependence on the regulation of intake standards - part of its rationale for permitting different entry requirements for different campuses (see below, paragraph 47). This position notwithstanding, it was evident to the team that the admissions procedures, managed at faculty level but within a clear central policy framework, enabled the University to satisfy itself that the intake standards of its students remained appropriate.
Assessment and external examiners
42 The Account acknowledged that before 2001 the University 'had not published comprehensive guidance on assessment policy and practice'. It indicated that adverse comments in some QAA subject review reports, coupled with the publication of the section of QAA's Code relating to assessment, had given 'renewed impetus' to the consideration of assessment matters at central level. In 2000 TLC established a working group to draw up University-wide guidelines: the result was the publication, in 2001, of an Assessment Handbook, intended to complement existing subject and faculty statements of assessment strategy. The Handbook gives a general background to the theory and practice of assessment, and practical advice on devising assessment procedures, as well as containing the University's formal regulations and examination procedures. It also provides examples of good practice developed in particular schools and courses. The Account indicated that in 2001-02 the University was seeking to build upon this progress by considering the introduction of 'broad criteria relating to classification and mark bands'.
43 The University's assessment procedures include a range of mechanisms designed to ensure that standards are judged appropriately. Course specifications are intended to provide statements against which student performance can be assessed. The marking of student assignments includes double marking, with systems of moderation to deal with any differences between markers. Double marking also plays an important role, together with marking schedules, the guidance of mentors and the institution-wide induction programme (see below, paragraph 63), in ensuring that staff new to the University become familiar with the appropriate standards in assessment.
44 The duties of external examiners and the procedures for their nomination and appointment are detailed in an External Examiner's Handbook. External examiners are appointed for all courses, with remits for specified modules, and also for the examination of research students. Their 'chief responsibilities', according to the Account, are 'to ensure that academic standards are maintained and that individual students are treated fairly'. They also play a crucial role in the overall assessment process, including general consultation on assessment, scrutiny of questions, and monitoring of marking standards, using a sampling method when the number of candidates makes this necessary. The work of boards of examiners cannot be finalised until the appropriate document has been signed by the relevant external examiner(s).
45 After completion of the examination process, external examiners are required to report to the University. The report, made on a structured form but with the opportunity of writing freely beyond its confines, must be submitted within one month of the relevant meeting of the board of examiners. In the first instance, reports are considered by the appropriate course committee, which is responsible for responding to any substantive matters raised, in collaboration with the teaching staff concerned. The report and response then feed into the annual monitoring process (see above, paragraph 25). The Account signalled the University's recognition that this approach had not always proved effective in ensuring that matters of more general faculty or institutional relevance were addressed, and reported that the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning) would be responsible from 2001-02 for providing TLC and QAEC with 'appropriate reports on University-wide issues'.
46 The Account described external examiners' reports as 'a key component in the University's quality assurance procedures'. The audit team had access to a significant proportion of recent reports submitted by external examiners drawn from a wide spectrum of UK universities. It was clear that most had taken the opportunity to comment on their experience in both general and detailed terms and were satisfied that academic standards were appropriate; some commented that student performance exceeded that at many other institutions. The team noted that, where an external examiner for a postgraduate programme had expressed concern over standards, the University had acted promptly in response and made a commitment to remedial action. On the basis of the evidence available to it, the team was satisfied that the University was making effective use of the external examiner system as a means of assuring standards.
Internal and external comparability of standards
47 The University has a range of mechanisms to enable it to make internal comparisons of standards. Its use of the NICATS generic level descriptors in course approval is intended to assist in the maintenance of comparability across disciplines, while the centralised collection and provision of student performance data enables course teams, faculties and the central committees to make judgements about internal comparability. The audit team noted in particular that the revised arrangements for annual monitoring would include scrutiny, by the subgroup of QAEC, of statements of performance indicators, and that consideration was being given to the establishment of faculty-based archives as a source of reference for information about student performance. In addition, the team was satisfied that, while in some cases the University operated different entry requirements for the same course at different campuses, its procedures for defining standards and analysing student performance provided it with the means for assuring cross-campus comparability.
48 In terms of assurances of external comparability, the University draws upon both the work of its external examiners and its own efforts to incorporate subject benchmarks into course specifications. The audit team noted that a significant proportion of the University's courses were subject to accreditation by professional and statutory bodies, providing a further, independent means of assurance that the quality and standards of its provision were in accordance with national norms. The team also noted that the University had participated in a large number of TQAs and QAA subject reviews - 33 at the time of compiling the Account - and had given close scrutiny, at both central and faculty level, to their findings and to the University's performance relative to other institutions. In total, the team was satisfied that the University had established, and was using, a range of appropriate mechanisms for making judgements about the internal and external comparability of standards.
Evaluation and improvement of procedures
49 The Account outlined the ways in which the University evaluated, and was seeking to enhance, its procedures for managing standards. It cited examples of changes made as a result of both major institutional reviews and the outcomes of routine monitoring. It also claimed that 'significant improvements' had been achieved, principally through 'the enhancement of information provision', such as the introduction of the Assessment Handbook and internal codes of practice that took account of QAA's Code and were designed 'to support consistent practice'. Of these, the audit team noted in particular the document Best Practice in Procedures and Documentation for Research Graduate Schools that responded to the expectations of QAA's Code relating to postgraduate research programmes. It also noted that a protocol in respect of the 'year abroad' was in preparation.
Standards assurance: conclusions
50 The totality of the evidence indicated to the audit team that the University had established clear and effective procedures and structures for defining, monitoring and maintaining the standards of its awards. It was also evident that care was being taken to disseminate information about standards assurance throughout the institution, to draw upon the external reference points provided by subject benchmarks and nationally-recognised frameworks, and to further develop and refine procedures where appropriate. The University is to be commended for the establishment of a coherent system of principles and practices which incorporates QAA's Code, the qualifications framework, subject benchmarks and the outcomes of subject review to assure academic standards.
Context
51 In a June 2000 update to its Corporate Plan, the University states that the implementation of its strategies for teaching and learning, research and knowledge transfer and regional development will be 'underpinned by effective and integrated strategies and operational plans for information/information technology, estate, external relations, student affairs, human resources and finance'. The Account reported that this 'integrated approach' to the learning environment was underpinned by the recent changes in the senior administrative structure and the realignment of committees, which had been designed to achieve more systematic planning and greater integration of the departments that supported faculties in implementing their learning and teaching strategies. Aspects of the University's approach to maintaining the learning infrastructure are discussed in more detail in the paragraphs that follow.
Information Services and information strategies
52 Since 1992 the University's library, computing and media services have operated as a single department, Educational Services. In 1999 a major internal review resulted in a restructuring of the department and in 2000, it merged with Management Information Services (MIS) to create a central Department of Information Services, with four divisions covering Library Services, IT User Services, IT Infrastructure and MIS. There have also been major developments in the physical provision of information services in the period since the last audit, with the building of new Learning Resource Centres at Jordanstown and Magee, and a continuing programme of upgrading and refurbishment of computing facilities at all campuses.
53 These structural changes have been accompanied by the development of strategic plans relating to both information systems and information provision. Following considerable work by a Task Force, a Strategy for Ulster's Communication and Control of Information and Necessary Computing Technology (SUCCINCT) was adopted in May 2001. The SUCCINCT initiative was in part a response to the report of the Seven Year Review Committee which recommended that 'the University exploit fully advanced communication technologies'. The overarching strategy recommended by the Task Force combines an information strategy, addressing the communication of information, together with an information and communications technology (ICT) strategy which addresses the articulation of strategic plans for the development of networking services and the provision of information systems to support teaching, learning, research and administration. The Account stated that the implementation of SUCCINCT would have 'a major influence on Information Services' future development'. To take forward its recommendations, an Information and ICT Strategy Committee is to be established; at the time of the audit visit, the identification of the new committee's membership was near completion. Further comment on SUCCINCT in relation to communications is provided below (see below, paragraph 67).
54 The Account outlined the strengths and weakness of Information Services provision that had been identified in the 1999 review, and described the ways in which the findings of the review had been 'addressed energetically' by the University. At operational level, for example, perceived weaknesses in campus organisation and faculty liaison have been tackled through the designation of a Library and IT User Services manager at each campus and dedicated faculty support staff who also serve as representatives on relevant faculty committees. The audit team was informed that these measures and the recent revision to faculty structures had enabled Information Services to 're-engage' with the faculties, as evidenced by effective consultation on the SUCCINCT development. The Account also summarised the mechanisms used by the Department to monitor user satisfaction on a continuing basis: examples included user forums, meetings with SU officers, the Graduate Survey, and feedback via the web. In addition, the routine collection of statistics through quality assurance processes such as module evaluation provide opportunities to assess the effectiveness of Information Services provision.
55 Linked to its regional strategy, and as part of its commitment to providing opportunities for lifelong learning, the University has also developed an e-learning strategy. The strategy has three strands: the establishment of a suitable infrastructure; the development of a strong skills base; and the selection of courses for delivery by e-learning. The SUCCINCT initiative is intended to address the infrastructure requirements. To take forward other aspects of the strategy, an Institute for Lifelong Learning has been established, building on existing expertise within the University. The Institute's work will include facilitating the selection of courses and the production of high quality learning materials, disseminating examples of good practice, and encouraging the spread of e-learning as a mainstream activity. External funding has been secured to assist it in its work. The audit team noted that students were already receiving induction in e-learning and that each faculty had been asked to formulate an e-learning strategy to complement the University's strategy; progress was now reported as a standard item at faculty boards and faculty TLCs.
56 It was clear to the audit team that the University had invested considerable resources and effort in devising and implementing its strategies for information services and ICT, as part of its approach to developing an integrated learning environment. The University will no doubt be alert to the need for effective monitoring of the implementation of SUCCINCT to ensure that the further development of networking services and the information systems infrastructure continues to meet the needs of its Corporate Plan.
Student support
57 The Account detailed a comprehensive system of student support provided centrally and at faculty and course level. As a result of the review of senior management portfolios in 1999, a Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Student Support) was appointed, signalling the importance attached by the University of meeting the needs of a changing student population. To match the Pro-Vice-Chancellor's portfolio, a Student Support Department was created, incorporating Student Affairs (including counselling and guidance, health services, accommodation, and disability and hardship support), Catering, Sport and Recreation and the Conference Office. A Student Support Committee (SSC), reporting to Senate, keeps an overview of policies and provision. The SU also plays an active role in supporting students and maintaining appropriate channels of communication with senior officers.
58 The Account reported that, in addition to providing central support services, Student Affairs worked closely with subject teams, course directors and, principally, designated advisers of studies. The University's studies advice system, set out in an internal Code of Practice, requires course directors, working in conjunction with heads of school and faculty boards, to allocate all students to an adviser of studies. The audit team noted that faculties were permitted to adopt different approaches to the adviser system, within the parameters of the Code of Practice; the relevant committees were notified of variations, so as to provide opportunity for shared experience between faculties and a means of identifying best practice. Advisers are responsible for notifying course committees and/or boards of examiners of matters relevant to their students' academic performance, and for referring students as appropriate to other support services. They and other staff are assisted in their work by a wide range of University publications, including a comprehensive video and resource pack containing material relevant to, for example, the needs of mature students, mental health matters, and hardship funds. Advisers who met the team confirmed that they were a key component in the first line provision of student support.
59 Student Affairs has also played an important role in formulating the University's response to needs arising from the growing diversity of the student population. Examples of its work include the production and promulgation of a policy on Managing Diversity and a Code of Practice for Teachers of Students with Disabilities; monitoring of both is undertaken by SSC and QAEC. The audit team noted that, by having in place established policies and procedures, the University had been able to respond positively to developments in the external environment. It had used the section of QAA's Code relating to students with disabilities to audit its own provision, making adjustments as appropriate and, through QAEC, was addressing the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act and Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
60 Specific support measures are in place for research and international students including, for the latter, an orientation programme organised by the International Office in partnership with Student Support. The Centre for English Language Teaching (CELT) offers in-sessional English courses and also specific subject oriented modules to support both undergraduate and postgraduate international students.
61 The University's arrangements for student support have received consistent praise in TQA reports and QAA subject review reports. The evidence available to the audit team suggested that the University's achievements in this area were the result of a careful strategy, designed to meet the needs of the student population and responsive to changes in the external environment. Although it was evident that the recent organisational changes had created a period of uncertainty, staff who met the team were enthusiastic about the opportunity to move forward under the new structures and determined to maintain the high quality of support provided. It was also clear that the University was aware of the particular challenges for student support posed by its multi campus nature, with demand for services varying according to campus size and composition, and would be keeping this matter under review as it developed performance indicators for Student Support.
Human resources
62 The Account detailed the University's approach to human resource management and made it clear that, because 'quality staff are central to the achievement of the University's goals', the Human Resources Department was expected to 'act as a partner to progress the teaching, research and community activities of the University'. The Department was reorganised as part of the administrative restructuring in 2000, and is responsible for a wide range of services, including recruitment and selection, employee relations, disciplinary matters, payroll, and health and safety. However, it no longer includes the staff development and equal opportunities sections; these are now within the office of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Quality Assurance and Enhancement). Its current work includes the development of implementation of new procedures for recruitment and selection, following a major review of the human resources function and significant criticism of existing procedures, from both within and outside the University. Matters to be addressed include the provision of training for members of interview panels and the need for greater clarity in stated criteria for selection.
Induction and probation
63 According to the Account, the induction of new staff 'occurs at two levels: corporate and local'. All new academic staff are required to attend a two day induction programme organised by the Staff Development Unit (SDU, part of QED), which focuses both on University policies and on matters related to learning and teaching. An equivalent event is organised on a part-time basis for part-time lecturers. Staff without experience of teaching at tertiary level are required to take the Postgraduate Certificate in University Teaching, accredited by the Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Local induction takes place at school and faculty level. All staff are allocated a mentor and heads of school are responsible for the management of probation, reporting annually to Human Resources and to an Academic and Academic-related Staff Progress Standing Committee on the progress of each probationer. The Account indicated that inconsistencies in the approach to local induction were being addressed through the provision of advice, from QED, on the minimum expected contents of local induction programmes. In spite of variations in practice, the recently-appointed staff who met the audit team were satisfied with the induction they had received.
Staff development
64 At the time of the audit visit the University's Staff Development Strategy (1997) and associated policies were under review, with the intention of having a new strategy in place by October 2002. The audit team heard that the provision of staff development was 'needs-driven', with requirements identified at corporate, faculty, school, subject and individual level. Teaching aspects of the Student Questionnaire (see above, paragraph 30) are analysed by SDU and the results provided to staff and heads of schools. An audit of staff development needs is conducted annually and informs both central and faculty plans. The Account drew attention to the strengths and weaknesses of various aspects of the University's staff development arrangements. For example, it noted that the biennial appraisal process afforded the opportunity to identify individual staff development needs, but that 'to date the uptake of appraisal has been sporadic'; as a result, QED was working on measures to secure greater involvement, and to strengthen the monitoring of the process at University level. Similarly, while the University's Strategy for Teaching and Learning requires the participation of all staff in a peer observation scheme, the confidential nature of the scheme limits the opportunities provided for the identification of development needs. Nonetheless, staff who met the audit team had found the peer observation process to be beneficial.
65 The audit team noted that while SDU had a recurrent budget, staff development funds were also distributed to faculties. This approach had, in the view of the team, resulted in an impressive range of staff development activities. It noted in particular the policy-led development activities organised and delivered by SDU in collaboration with Information Services staff, Teaching Development Advisers, and other internal and external experts. It appeared to the team that such activities had done much to embed an understanding of detailed aspects of the University's approach to quality and standards. The team also met several staff who commented on the positive outcomes of faculty and school level staff development 'away days' which had, in addition to consideration of academic matters, provided an opportunity for consultation about University policies and institutional restructuring. The University is to be commended for the development of an effective framework for the identification of corporate and individual staff development needs and on the wide range of activities that are offered in support of those needs. In the view of the team, the provision of appropriate staff development has been an important factor in enabling the University to manage significant organisational change.
Promotion and reward
66 The Account reported that, in part as a response to the recommendations of the 1993 audit report, the University had reviewed 'the way in which promotions of academic staff are processed and assessed'. As a result, 'efforts have been made to review annually and make more explicit the criteria and opportunities for academic promotion'. The Account provided examples of a range of improvements relating to promotions procedures, including a clearer emphasis on promotion on the grounds of teaching excellence and a 'broader contribution to the process of student education'; the introduction of clear guidelines on the submission of evidence in support of applications for promotion; and system of feedback to candidates designed to facilitate understanding of promotions criteria and of how decisions were made. The University has also established a range of schemes for acknowledging staff excellence, including Distinguished Teaching Fellowships, Distinguished Research Fellowships, University Business Fellowships and University Community Fellowships. The audit team heard evidence of the motivational aspects of the reward system and the staff it met were aware of the routes available for promotion. On the basis of the information available, the team was satisfied that the University had established appropriate mechanisms and procedures for promotion and reward.
Internal and external communications
67 The Account stated that, 'at a time of transformation, societal and organisational', communication was 'critical in explaining the University's objectives' and as 'the means of harnessing the allegiance of staff'. The SUCCINCT Task Force was asked, in addition to IT and information systems matters, to develop detailed recommendations in respect of the University's communications strategy and the provision of information more generally. The implementation of the recommendations is intended to solve a range of communications problems which were in the main associated with the increased use of information technology: the need for a more integrated approach to information management, particularly within the context of the business processes of the University; the need for more formal control of the production of web material; and the need to identify and make explicit a common technology base to facilitate communication, procurement and maintenance. From the Account and from its discussions with senior staff, the audit team noted the importance that the University attached to the SUCCINCT proposals. In the view of the team, its significance as a communications strategy as well as an information and information technology strategy will require careful and continuing enunciation, if the far-reaching benefits of implementation are to be realised.
External communications
68 The Account placed considerable emphasis on the strategic importance of external communications. The Department of Public Affairs manages the University's external profile and takes a leading role in promoting the institution, liaising with faculties, schools and administrative departments in respect of corporate publications, media relations and web development. The Account indicated that the University had identified its web site as 'a key aspect of its business' and had invested funds to ensure that it served as 'a suitable promotional vehicle'. It was clear to the audit team that the web was increasingly important to the University as a means of internal and external communication and there was evidence to confirm the considerable development that had taken place to make it a central resource for both external and internal users.
Internal communications: communications with staff
69 In terms of communications with staff, the Account identified a need for the University 'to improve communication between senior management and the staff they represent' and 'to develop and implement systematic communications channels among and within faculties and administrative departments'. These statements notwithstanding, the audit team's discussions with staff indicated a general perception that communications had improved. It appeared that the inclusion of deans in the Senior Management Team (see above, paragraph 19) had led already to a greater ease of communication and involvement in the decision-making process; the difference had been recognised by other members of the academic staff who met the team. It was also evident that the committee structure was taken seriously as a means of communication, consultation, discussion and dissemination: representational roles on committees and the associated provision of feedback to constituents were regarded as important responsibilities; increasingly, minutes were available on the web; and deans, heads of school and course directors acknowledged the importance of communicating 'upwards and downwards'.
70 The audit team also noted a variety of forms of written communication available, including a monthly staff newsletter and daily On-line News bulletins, both published by Public Affairs, and the developing web site, which included a dedicated area for information relating to restructuring. The team saw a wide range of documentation, both paper- and web-based, which demonstrated clearly the University's commitment to disseminating information to staff. Procedural documents such as the Course Approval, Management and Review Handbook and the Corporate Plan were widely available, as were Learning and Teaching Handbooks, produced at faculty level and tailored to meet the needs of individual faculties. The team found this documentation to be prepared to a very high standard. Overall, it was evident that the University had made a firm commitment to effective communication with its staff and, in the context of restructuring, had used the mechanisms available not only to promulgate proposals, but also to ensure that the reasoning behind them was understood.
Internal communications: communications with students
71 The Account stated the University's commitment to providing 'accurate and timely information to students at all stages of their University careers'. In terms of information for prospective students, the audit team had access to a wide range of centrally produced prospectuses, student handbooks for full-time, part-time and international students, and pre-entry information provided for schools and colleges. The accuracy of such information is controlled and monitored by Student Recruitment Services in conjunction with faculty staff. The materials seen by the team were of a very high quality.
72 Post-arrival, students are provided with faculty and school-based handbooks, many of which are available in both paper and electronic format. They also receive information about academic and other support services. The audit team noted in particular that the University Careers web site provided detailed information on careers services available across all campuses, covering matters such as employability skills, personal and career development, work experience and placement, and employment opportunities. The Library Services web site included contact details for each of the campus libraries, details of faculty and subject support, and guidance on the support available for customers, including students with disabilities and those studying part-time or at a distance. A training page included an interactive library induction guide for new students.
73 In terms of more general communications, students are represented on a wide range of central and faculty committees, with SSC and the SU Liaison Group serving as dedicated fora for consideration of University-wide student matters. The audit team was informed that more specific matters, usually concerned with teaching and learning, were aired initially at local level either by direct consultation between students and staff or through the course-based staff/student committees. The latter comprise student representatives from each year of the course, together with the relevant course directors, heads of department and other appropriate staff. Minutes are available on-line. The evidence available to the team indicated that these committees were working effectively, providing an opportunity for immediate feedback from students and action by staff. Further comment on student representation and feedback is provided above (see above, paragraphs 29-32). Overall, the team was satisfied that the University had established appropriate mechanisms for communicating with its students.
Communications with students: appeals and complaints
74 Perhaps surprisingly given its comprehensiveness, the Account provided no information about the University's procedures for student academic appeals. During its visit, the audit team learnt that the University had considered its arrangements for both complaints and appeals in the light of the relevant section of QAA's Code. It was evident that the complaints procedure was well-established, with detailed monitoring reports produced for consideration by the appropriate central committees. In terms of appeals, however, while procedures were in place, the University had very recently taken steps to ensure that the clarity of the information available was consistent with the expectations of the Code, and was in the process of completing a TLC review of the timescale for lodging an appeal. The University will no doubt wish to confirm the outcomes of the review as quickly as possible.
Conclusions
75 The University of Ulster aims to be 'a model of an outstanding regional university with a national and an international reputation for quality'. The period since its establishment as a single institution in 1984 has seen a steady expansion in student numbers and in the provision of its estate. Around 22,000 students are now studying at the University's four campuses throughout Northern Ireland, with a fifth campus due to open in the near future. The University views as one of its most significant achievements its success in widening access to mature students and those from socially and educationally disadvantaged backgrounds: in 2000, almost a third of all entrants were aged 26 and over, and 37 per cent were from the manual social classes.
76 The period since the previous audit in 1992 has seen a number of revisions to the University's management and academic structures. Most recently, the appointment of a new Vice-Chancellor in 1999 has prompted a wide-ranging reassessment of structures, management and administrative duties, and procedures. The result has been a restructuring of the six faculties, and a redefinition of the University's approach to assuring the quality of its provision and the academic standards of awards. The processes of quality audit and assurance have been separated, in management and committee terms, from those of defining and maintaining standards, but principles and frameworks relating to both have been specified centrally, with a measure of flexibility permitted at faculty level, particularly in relation to quality management. The changes have been supported by clear procedures and documentation, and by considerable efforts to ensure that staff are familiar with the principles that underpin them. The result has been the careful and commendable implementation of new structures for the management of quality and standards at all levels.
77 It is too early for the University to judge the overall effectiveness of these recent and continuing changes. In terms of quality management, key procedures relating to course approval and annual monitoring have been revised and have yet to take full effect, and planned new processes, such as thematic audit, will operate for the first time in 2001-02. However, the considerable progress made to date and the care with which the University has managed the process of change give grounds for confidence in its capacity to ensure that the new structures and procedures prove to be fit for purpose. Given the scale and pace of change, however, it will be important in the near future for the University to consolidate the new arrangements, without making further major changes, in order to continue to secure the support of its staff. It may also wish to give particular consideration to its approach to securing and utilising student feedback, where the current wealth of available mechanisms suggests the need for a more strategic approach to determining the information required and how it might best be used.
78 The University's approach to academic standards is based on a coherent centralised framework designed to meet expectations both of internal consistency and of national standards. It has well-defined and implemented procedures for specifying the qualifications required of applicants and for controlling admissions, both at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels, having cognisance of its policies for widening participation. The procedure for approving new courses includes a strong emphasis on the clear definition of intended academic outcomes through a process of course specification which takes account of national frameworks, subject benchmarks, and the generic level descriptors of NICATS. As a result, course specifications set out standards onto which student assessment is mapped. External examiners play a full role in the assessment process and there is evidence that the University responds promptly to their reports. It is also clear that the University maintains a regular review of its processes for the specification and maintenance of standards, developing procedures and disseminating good practice as appropriate.
79 Developments in the University's core processes of teaching, learning and research have been accompanied by due attention to the learning environment, and to the importance of good communications. The University has continued to ensure that it provides a high quality of student support, taking into account the requirements of its four campuses and external developments in relation to, for example, disability legislation. There is a strong and well-led mechanism for the provision of information in support of teaching and learning, with considerable resources committed to implementation, and support for the development of e-learning. The University has also embarked on a substantial programme of work to give effect to new integrated strategies for information systems, information provision and communications. While it will be important for the University to continue to enunciate the aims of those strategies and to monitor their implementation, the success with which it has carried through the recent, substantial institutional changes suggests that its commitment to effective communication is being realised.
80 The findings of this audit support general confidence in the University's capacity to discharge its responsibilities for assuring the quality of its provision and the academic standards of its awards.
Points for commendation
81 The audit team wishes, in particular, to commend the University for:
(i) the careful determination and implementation of structures at all levels for the management of quality and standards (paragraph 33 and passim);
(ii) the establishment of a coherent system of principles and practices which incorporates QAA's Code, the qualifications framework, subject benchmarks and the outcomes of subject review to assure academic standards (paragraph 50);
(iii) the development of an effective framework for the identification and prioritisation of corporate and individual staff development needs, and the wide range of activities that are offered to meet those needs (paragraph 65).
Points for further consideration
82 As it continues to develop its systems and arrangements for assuring the quality of the educational provision and the standards of its awards, the University may wish to consider the advisability of:
(i) seeking to achieve a more coherent and strategic approach to developing the range of available mechanisms for collecting and utilising student feedback (paragraphs 31-32);
(ii) given the recent pace of change, seeking to consolidate its new structures and procedures, in order to continue to secure the evident support and commitment of staff (paragraph 34).
Appendix 1*
University of Ulster - facts and figures 2001-02
*As supplied by University of Ulster
History
The University of Ulster was established by Royal Charter on 1 October 1984 from the merger of the then New University of Ulster and the Ulster Polytechnic. It has four campuses at Belfast, Coleraine, Jordanstown and Londonderry and work has commenced on a fifth campus in Belfast. The University was the first trans-binary institution in the United Kingdom and with a student population of almost 22,000 fte is the largest university on the island of Ireland.
The University places considerable emphasis on its regional role and aims to be a model of a regional university with a national and an international reputation for quality. It seeks to achieve this through its approach to its core activities - teaching and learning, research, and technology and knowledge transfer.
The University Mission is to:
- advance education through a variety of patterns, levels and modes of study and by a diversity of means by encouraging and developing teaching, learning and creativity;
- promote and enable access to and participation in higher education for the benefit of the community in Northern Ireland and elsewhere;
- preserve, advance and disseminate knowledge and culture through teaching, learning, vocational training, scholarship, research and technology transfer;
- create and sustain urban, rural, international and European Union educational and community partnerships which foster economic, social and cultural development;
- promote and incorporate within the activities of students and staff the best European and international experience and practice;
- advance understanding and social cohesion by the example and influence of corporate life and to strive for excellence in all our work.
Teaching and Research is structured around the University's six Faculties - Arts, Business and Management, Engineering and Built Environment, Informatics, Life and Health Sciences and Social Sciences.
Student numbers
Student population 2001-02 by Faculty and mode of attendance
| Faculty |
Full time
|
Part time
|
Total
|
| Arts |
2,522
|
305
|
2,827
|
| Business and Management |
2,787
|
2,235
|
5,022
|
| Engineering and Built Environment |
1,907
|
351
|
2,258
|
| Informatics |
2,036
|
387
|
2,423
|
| Life and Health Sciences |
3,326
|
1,780
|
5,106
|
| Social Sciences |
2,111
|
1,473
|
3,584
|
| Total |
14,689
|
6,531
|
21,220
|
Student characteristics
Gender analysis 2001-02
| Gender |
Full-time
|
Part-time
|
Total
|
| Male |
5,987
|
2,511
|
8,498
|
| Female |
8,702
|
4,020
|
12,722
|
| Total |
14,689
|
6,531
|
21,220
|
Mature student entrants 2001-02
Proportion of full-time undergraduate population aged 21 or over on entry - 20% Proportion of part-time undergraduate population aged 21 or over on entry - 96%
Domicile analysis 2001-02
| Domicile |
United Kingdom
|
Other European Union
|
Overseas
|
Total
|
| Undergraduate |
15,427
|
1,228
|
74
|
16,729
|
| Postgraduate (taught) |
2,985
|
588
|
223
|
3,796
|
| Postgraduate (research) |
503
|
107
|
85
|
695
|
| Total |
18,915
|
1,923
|
382
|
21,220
|
Institutional staff 2001-02
| Staff Category |
Full-time
|
Part-time
|
Total
|
| Academic |
934
|
253
|
1,187
|
| Research |
150
|
18
|
168
|
| Academic Related |
336
|
71
|
407
|
| Technical |
207
|
7
|
214
|
| Clerical |
401
|
375
|
776
|
| Computer Staff |
22
|
3
|
25
|
| Manual |
269
|
356
|
625
|
| Others |
63
|
17
|
80
|
| Total |
2,382
|
1,100
|
3,482
|
Appendix 2*
List of the University's collaborative partnerships as at December 2001
*As supplied by University of Ulster
V = validated
F = franchised
J = joint
Armagh College of Further and Higher Education
Diploma in Irish Language F
HNC Business and Finance F
Athlone Institute of Technology
Postgraduate Diploma/MSc Electronics and Software Systems J
Postgraduate Diploma/MSc Toxicology J
The Beeches Management Centre
Postgraduate Diploma in Health and Social Services Management F
Belfast Institute of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students (Science and Technology)
V
Certificate in Foundation Studies in Computing and Business V
Certificate in Foundation Studies in Computing with Multimedia V
Certificate in Information Technology Studies and Professional Development
for Women F
Certificate in Women's Studies F
Certificate/Diploma in Community Development and Education V
Certificate/Diploma in Counselling V
Certificate in Health Promotion V
Diploma in Health Promotion V
Diploma in the Humanities V
Diploma in Combined Social and Behavioural Sciences V
HND Architectural Technology (with CIS) F
HND Building Engineering (with CIS) F
HND Computing (with CIS/CAS) F
HNC Hospitality Management F
HNC/HND Retail and Customer Services Management (with CIS/CAS) F
DipHE Humanities V
DipHE Playwork V
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
Belfast Institute of Further and Higher Education
DipHE Social Work V
DipHE Supported Learning V
FdSc Multimedia V
BA (Hons) Business Studies (Level C) F
BSc (Hons) Business Finance and Investment (Level C) F
BA Hons International Business Studies (Level C) F
BA Hons Retail Management (Level C) F
Postgraduate Certificate in Educational Technology F
Castlereagh College of Further and Higher Education
HNC Computing F
HNC Computing (Software Engineering) F
Causeway Institute of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Certificate in Information Technology Studies and Professional Development
for Women F
HNC/HND Building and Estate Management V
HNC/HND Caring Services (Social Care) V
HNC/HND Communication and Presentation (Radio, TV and Multimedia) V
HNC/HND Engineering Design and Manufacture (Electronic Engineering) F
HNC/HND Engineering Design and Manufacture (Mechanical Engineering) F
HNC/HND Retail Management F
HNC/HND Science (Environmental Studies) F
HNC/HND Science (Sports Studies) V
East Antrim Institute of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Diploma in the Humanities V
HNC Business and Finance F
HNC/HND Business and Marketing F
HND Engineering (Electrical/Electronics) F
HND Engineering (Mechanical, Manufacturing and Design) F
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
FdEng Telecommunications V
East Down Institute of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students
V
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature
Students (Science and Technology)
V
Diploma in European Studies V
HND Building Engineering with CIS F
HNC/HND Business and Finance F
HNC/HND Business and Marketing F
HNC/HND Computing
(Business Information Technology) - F
HND (pt) Computing (Business Information Technology and Software Engineering)
F
HNC/HND Computing (Software Engineering) (with CIS) F
HNC Hospitality and Tourism V
HNC Mathematical Studies (Mathematics, Statistics and Computing) F
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
East Tyrone Institute of Further and Higher Education
HNC Care Practice V
HNC Computing F
HNC Computing (Business Information Technology) F
HNC Sports and Leisure Management V
DipHE Social Work V
BSc Hons Health Sciences (Levels B and C) F
BSc Hons Health Studies (Levels B and C) F
BSc Hons Nursing Sciences (Levels B and C) F
Enniskillen Agricultural College
BSc Hons Equine Studies V
Fermanagh College
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Certificate/Diploma in Counselling V
Diploma in the Humanities V
HNC/HND Business and Finance with (CIS/CAS) F
HNC/HND Business and Marketing (with CIS) F
HNC/HND Public Administration (with CIS/CAS) F
HNC/HND Retail and Customer Services Management (with CIS/CAS) F
HNC Science (Environmental Studies) F
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
DipHE/BA Hons Accounting (Levels B and C) F
Greenmount College of Agriculture and Horticulture
FdSc Information Technology (Agri-Food) V
HNC/HND Rural and Countryside Management with CIS V
Homefirst Community Health & Social Services Trust
Postgraduate Diploma in Health and
Social Services Management F
Hong Kong College of Technology
BSc Hons Computing Science F
Limavady College of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Certificate/Diploma in Community Development and Leadership V
Certificate/Diploma in Local History and Cultural Traditions V
Diploma in Fine and Applied Arts V
Diploma in Traditional Crafts V
HNC Business and Finance F
HNC Business and Marketing F
HNC Counselling V
HNC Retail and Customer Services Management F
HNC Sports Studies V
DipHE Fine and Applied Arts V
DipHE Computing with eMedia V
Lisburn Institute of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Certificate in Counselling V
Diploma in Counselling V
Diploma in the Humanities V
HNC/HND Retail Management F
Loughry College
Postgraduate Diploma/MSc Food Biotechnology J
National University of Ireland, Galway Newry and Kilkeel Institute
of Further and Higher Education(Associate College)
Postgraduate Diploma/MSc Electronics and Software Systems J
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students (Science and Technology)
V
Certificate in Information Technology Studies and Professional Development
for Women F
Diploma in the Humanities F
HND Building Engineering F
HNC/HND Business and Finance (with CIS/CAS) F
HNC/HND Business and Marketing (with CIS/CAS) F
HND Computing (with CIS/CAS) (Years 1 and 2P only) F
HNC/HND Hospitality Management with CIS F
HNC/HND Retail Management F
HND Science (Environmental Studies) F
DipHE Modern Studies in the Humanities V
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
DipHE/BA Hons Accounting (Levels B & C) F
FdSc Computing and Network Systems V
Postgraduate Certificate in Educational Technology F
North Down and Ards Institute of Further and Higher Education(Associate
College)
Certificate in Information Technology
and Professional Development for Women F
Diploma in the Humanities V
Diploma in Social Sciences V
HND Business with Computing F
HND Business and Finance (with CIS/CAS) F
HNC/HND Business Studies V
HNC/HND Sports Management V
HNC/HND Tourism and Hospitality Management V
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
DipHE Social Work V
DipHE Supported Learning V
BA Hons Accounting (Levels B & C) F
North East Institute of Further and Higher Education (Associate
College)
Certificate in Foundation Studies
for Mature Students V
Certificate in Counselling V
Diploma in Combined Social and Behavioural Sciences V
Diploma in the Humanities V
HND Building Engineering (with CIS) F
HNC/HND Business and Finance F
HND Business with Computing F
HND Business with Marketing F
HND Computing (Years 1 & 2) F
HND Computing (Software Engineering) F
HND Engineering (Electrical/Electronic) F
HND Engineering (Mechanical, Manufacturing and Design) F
HNC Leisure Management V
HND Science (Applied Biology) (Year 1 only) F
HNC/HND Science (Environmental Studies) F
DipHE Electronics and Software Systems V
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
DipHE/BA Hons Accounting (Levels B & C) F
FdSc Computing (Software Development) V
North West Institute of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Addiction Studies F
Certificate in Counselling V
Certificate in Foundation Studies in Science V
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students F
Certificate in Information Technology Studies and Professional Development
for Women F
Certificate in Women's Studies F
Certificate/Diploma in Community Development and Education F
Diploma in Counselling V
DipHE Learning Disability Studies V
DipHE Professional Development in Nursing F
DipHE Social Work V
FdSc Computing (Software Development) V
Postgraduate Certificate/Diploma in Educational Technology F
Northern Ireland Hotel and Catering College (Associate College)
Certificate in Foundation Studies in Culinary Arts V
HND Food and Consumer Management V
HNC/HND International Hospitality Management V
HNC/HND Travel and Tourism Management V
BA Hons Culinary Arts with DIS (Years 1 - 3P) V
BA Hons Hotel and Tourism Management
with DIS (Years 1 - 3P)
F
BA Hons Travel and Tourism Management with DIS (Years 1 - 3P) V
BA Hons Hospitality Management with DIS (Years 1- 3P) F
Omagh College
HNC/HND Building Engineering F
HNC Business and Finance F
HNC Business and Marketing F
HNC Computing (Software Engineering) F
HNC Computing (Business Information Technology) F
HNC Hospitality Management F
Queen's University, Belfast
Postgraduate Diploma/MSc Manufacturing Technology, Design and Management J
MSc Advanced Social Work J
Police Service of Northern Ireland Training College
Certificate/Diploma in Police Studies V
Subang Jaya Medical Centre, Malaysia
DipHE Medical Laboratory Technology V
Trinity College, Dublin and University of Limerick
Postgraduate Diploma/MSc Biomedical Engineering J
University of Hong Kong
Postgraduate Diploma in Human Nutrition F
Postgraduate Diploma in Dietetics F
MSc Human Nutrition F
MSc Human Nutrition and Dietetics F
University of Ioannina and University of Patras, Greece
Postgraduate Diploma/MSc Food Biotechnology J
Upper Bann Institute of Further and Higher Education
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Diploma in Combined Social and Behavioural Sciences V
Diploma in the Humanities V
HNC Business and Finance F
HNC Business and Marketing F
HND Computing (with CIS/CAS) F
HND Building Engineering (with CIS) F
HND Civil Engineering F
HND Engineering (Electrical and Electronic) F
HNC Retail and Customer Services Management F
FdEng Knowledge Technologies V
Postgraduate Certificate in Educational Technology F
Westcare Business Services
Postgraduate Diploma in Health and Social Services Management F
Workers' Educational Association
Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students V
Top
QAA updates
QAAtweets
QAAtube