A melting pot of ideas, insights and innovations heats up at QAA Connect

A swelteringly sunny day in the beautiful and historic city of Bath offered the impressive backdrop for the year's QAA Connect – as Thursday 9 July 2026 saw our first full in-person annual conference for all QAA members since the pandemic.

Delegates came from all four nations of the UK to discuss quality matters through more than two dozen presentations, with speakers from as far afield as the University of Westminster, KCL, LSE, the Open University, Buckinghamshire New University, University Academy 92, Manchester Metropolitan University and the University of Leeds.

Hosted at the University of Bath's Claverton Down site, the event was opened by QAA Chief Executive Professor Karl Leydecker and Bath Vice-Chancellor Professor Phil Taylor.

Professor Taylor stressed that it was "brilliant" to see such a wide range of delegates from across the country, from academic and professional services roles, and from higher and tertiary education.

He said that such events highlight "the diversity of our sector" – featuring contributions from "so many different institutions with different missions and different provision, but common challenges".

He noted that this is an "incredibly challenging" time as our sector faces financial, technological, regulatory and policy pressures alongside "changing expectations from students, employers and society" and as we work to "thrive not just survive".

Professor Leydecker added that as we face these challenges, "the totality of QAA members is greater than the sum of its parts" and that "we achieve the most when we come together".

Karl went on to introduce our keynote speaker James Dunphy, Chief Executive of the Committee of University Chairs.

Emphasising that "quality matters", James underlined how "vital" the role of quality professionals is – and recalled spending his own 21^st birthday on a QAA panel.

He said that he had continued through his career to work in higher education because he was constantly inspired by "the ambition across the [HE] workforce to deliver great things for our students and our staff".

"One of the great things about working in higher education is sharing that ambition... and that energy we have for brilliant education," he said.

He noted that we must be clear about the value of higher education, and that the importance of the sector's work is why it draws so much attention from policymakers.

"Politicians want to understand how we are managing the challenges... putting the student interest front and centre... and enhancing provision," he said.

One of the key themes of the conference focused on how institutions are enhancing their provision through processes of curriculum review.

Gianina Harvey-Brewin, Dean of Continuing Education at the University of Roehampton, presented a packed session on 'Curriculum Redesign for Flexible Pathways: What We're Learning in Practice'.

"Curriculum redesign is rarely just about the curriculum," she said. She observed that it is also driven by strategies for lifelong learning and widening participation, by key success metrics and by "employers who increasingly want provision to be responsive, flexible and aligned with workforce pressures".

She noted that when we come to redesign curricula we may initially think about the "visible curriculum" in terms of modules, assessments, programme structures and teaching methods – but that we also need to redevelop provision in relation to such points as belonging, induction, timetabling, student communications, student systems, staffing, governance and quality assurance.

She stressed that the moment we start designing flexible pathways we are also redesigning broader structures and processes: "Curriculum redesign quickly becomes an institutional design challenge."

This was a point iterated in the following session, which saw Professor Beverley Hawkins, Dean for Taught Students at the University of Exeter, and HE consultant Professor Jess Power continue the topic of curriculum transformation as they previewed the initial findings from the seven participating institutions in an ongoing QAA-funded Collaborative Enhancement Project, due to be published this autumn.

Curriculum reform is not just a matter of redesign, they said, but is about institutional transformation under pressure, in response to issues around sustainability, student experience, employability and graduate outcomes, and flexibility and interdisciplinarity.  They observed that curriculum reform has been a common response to such issues, but that what is different about the current moment in UK higher education is the scale at which institutions are now looking at such processes of change.

Their research highlighted the importance of communication and continuity, early-stage consultation, meaningful student partnership, understanding that different stakeholders require different approaches, tailored communication styles, and recognising that this should be a holistic process of culture change.

Professor Power said that it's about "taking people on a journey – taking people with you" and that "it's key to listen and learn and build that evidence base right from the start".

Meanwhile, Professor Marion Harney, Associate Dean (Education) in the Faculty of Engineering & Design at the University of Bath, also talked about how to make large-scale change last – and also stressed that the secret is that "it's about people".

She emphasised that "to ensure students get the best possible education we can't stand still" and therefore argued that curriculum redesign should be seen as "a strategic investment in our future" – built around a holistic and strategic approach and underpinning the development of a culture of continuous improvement.

"Transformation is just the beginning. Sustaining excellence is the long-term goal," she said.

Our early afternoon plenary session saw Dr Kate Wicklow, Policy Director at Guild HE, in conversation with Josh Fleming, Director of Strategy & Delivery Organisation at the Office for Students, and Richard Maconachie, Director of Institutional Performance at the Scottish Funding Council, discussing the current priorities and emerging challenges affecting the higher education sector.

Not to be outdone by the eminent quality assurance pedigree of the morning's keynote speaker, Kate started by pointing out that she'd spent her own 30^th birthday week on QAA duties – before going on to quiz Josh and Richard as to the regulatory arrangements for higher education in their respective nations.

Josh explained that in England, in order to access public funding pots, providers are expected to register with the Office for Students and to follow the rules and conditions required for that registration.

He noted that, in parallel to those conditions of registration, the Teaching Excellence Framework "is intended to incentivise everyone to get better and better and better" – and said that the Office for Students in now working to integrate those two aspects of regulation: to use the TEF as an initial assessment mechanism and to use breaches of minimum requirements to prompt any necessary interventions.

Richard emphasised that the SFC is "not a market regulator" but is a funding body responsible for ensuring the assurance of the quality of provision across Scotland's integrated tertiary system, with a longstanding commitment to enhancement through a partnership approach, and with student engagement as a core aspect of that approach.

Discussing the sector's financial crisis and the increasing risks of market exit, Richard suggested that some in the sector may not have been "reading the runes early enough" – and that, while institutions could have "seen things coming down the track", people have tended to avoid asking the most difficult questions, speaking truth to power and engaging with their funding bodies as early as they might have done.

Josh agreed that early engagement is crucial to addressing such emerging problems: "Institutions need to come to us early... You always wish you'd started a bit earlier."

The afternoon continued with QAA's own Data Analyst Dr Rebecca Robinson, Quality and Standards Specialist Ruth Burchell and Student Strategic Advisory Committee member Cinnomen McGuigan considering what we can learn from the results of this year's National Student Survey – published just the day before – and how to better promote student engagement.

Rebecca pointed out that, while the NSS is commonly commented on externally, its primary value is not to compare institutional performances but to support and inform providers' internal efforts to enhance their own provision and to learn both from the quantitative metrics and from qualitative comments about areas in which they can improve the student experience.

"It's good news. Everything's improving - which is great," she said.

She stressed however that there remain weaker areas – but that we've generally seen the biggest improvements in those weaker areas – which suggests that the sector is continuing to identify and address weaknesses flagged by the survey.

She noted nevertheless that, for example, in terms of academic support and student voice there remain significant disparities between the more positive experiences of full-time students and those of part-time and apprenticeship students.

"Externally, the survey's used as a marketing tool, and it's important in league tables and the TEF. But what's even more important is how we use it internally," she said.

Student engagement is clearly crucial to the enhancement of the student experience, and this can be significantly impacted by the costs of such engagement. This situation has been exacerbated by the cost-of-living crisis, and, as Cinnomen and Ruth explained, if students can't afford to be in the room in the first place – let alone find the time to participate in engagement and enhancement activities – then providers won't be able to hear from them or respond to the issues they might raise.

They therefore recommended that institutions consider appropriate ways to reward and professionally recognise student engagement in such activities – while bearing in mind that some students are unable to accept monetary payments without carer or disability benefits being detrimentally affected.

"We are asking too much from people who are time-poor," Cinnomen said.

The last major session of the day saw our Head of Public Affairs Helena Vine talking with QAA Scotland's Amy Eberlin, Professor Huw Morris from UCL's Institute of Education, and Annie Bell, Associate Director at Public First, to discuss the rise of a new political landscape and the implications of this for higher education.

"For voters higher education is not a priority," Annie warned. "There's almost nothing where voters would be willing to cut spending in order to increase spending in higher education."

She added that the only exception to this rule was that voters would be willing to cut spending on renewable energy.

This, she said, is why both Keir Starmer and Andy Burnham have said they believe that fewer people should be going to university... and why Reform UK want to reintroduce student number caps.

Amy reminded us that Scotland has an integrated approach to tertiary education and that in Scotland "enhancement isn't a bolt-on – it's core to what we believe in". She emphasised that the challenges currently facing Scotland's tertiary sector require the kind of long-term response which may not be supported by an environment of political uncertainty, but that the sector is actively looking to develop solutions, at the same time as increasing financial difficulties are posing real risks to the ongoing quality of provision.

Huw pointed out that the UK has the second most expensive higher education system in the OECD, and that politicians are aware of this.

"I anticipate there won't be new money," he said. "The government believes the money is better spent on very young people... There's also a very strong case for investing in NEETS... And there are massive skills shortages."

He went on to warn that student protection measures are insufficient and argued that for the most part "mergers don't work".

"And sadly the King of the North is not coming down to save the sector," Helena supposed.

Annie concluded that the sector therefore needs to engage across the political spectrum if it is to "avoid catastrophe".

"We cannot communicate our way out of this. We have to do things differently as well. And we need to communicate how we are doing things differently," she said.

The event ended with our CEO Karl in his closing remarks reflecting on the huge amount of information, innovation and insight which had been shared during the day – and how we now need to move forward with what we've learnt.

"Our hope is that the value of this conference isn't measured by today but by what happens in the coming weeks and months," he said.

He commended the communities of practice which underpin these endeavours: "You are not alone."