The Quality Framework for Scottish FE Colleges

1. The Quality Framework for Scottish FE Colleges Angus Allan, HMIE

2. What is of greatest importance in the learning resource centre in your college? • A • B • C • D • E

3. The review model – factors informing developments • Lifelong learning strategy • Consultation 2003 - 2004 • Strong support for the development of differentiated approach • SFEFC’s quality improvement group • Analysis of reviews from last round

4. “the time is right for a move to a quality improvement culture… based upon an all-round, learner-centred quality improvement approach. …The focus needs to move further towards measuring outcomes for learners” Life through learning. Learning through life

5. “ Quality mechanisms should: • Drive innovation in quality improvement • Include learner evaluations • Use partnership approaches and benchmarking to raise standards • Have an appropriate balance between internal and external dimensions… ” Life through learning. Learning through life

6. The review model Developments in the model include: • developments in quality framework • increased engagement with: • learners • employers and key partners • a proportionate approach • published reports • a change in post-review engagement with HMIe.

7. The review model has a primary focus on: • the learning & teaching process • learner progress and outcomes • leadership and quality management

8. The review model is intended to: • support promote and develop quality enhancement and good practice in colleges to provide the best possible experience for the learner • support college arrangements for enhancing quality by providing speedy and detailed information for college managers and staff …

9. The requirement for revision of the quality framework • The previous framework covered almost half of the period since incorporation – all colleges have changed and matured • Evolving Scottish policy and social context • Changed and increased learner population • Changing insights into learning, and approaches to learning • The underlying reason for having the framework is that evaluation is a key stage in planning for improvement; this principle also applies to the framework itself.

10. Purpose of the framework and overall structure No change in intended purpose: • use by colleges in self-evaluation as part of maintaining and enhancing provision and outcomes, and planning for improvement • use by HMIE in external evaluation and reporting No change in overall structure: • subject and cross-college elements and QIs • prompts and indicative sources of evidence • grade descriptors

11. Scale of revisions - statistics • One of 17 elements removed, with consequent adjustments to others. • Titles of four elements adjusted to convey shifts in emphasis • 12 element titles unchanged. • Net increase of one QI – conflation in A QIs and additions in B QIs • Titles of some QIs adjusted for clarity or to convey shifts in emphasis

12. Kinds of changes • Tidying-up / streamlining • Clarification • Updating • Including items previously omitted • Shift in focus or emphasis • Significant The central concern was to make only necessary or clearly desirable changes, and to maximise consistency with the previous framework.

13. A4.4 Staff development and review A8.4 On-course guidance and support A8.5 Pre-exit guidance B2.1 Leadership for access A4.4 Staff development and career review process A8.3 On-programme guidance and support A8.4 Progression guidance B2.1 Leadership for access and inclusion Changes of QI titles - examples From 2004 Until 2004

14. Specific adjustments - examples A.1 Programme design • In A1.1, the focus shifts from range of programmes to their relevance to learners’ and other needs A.4 Staffing • There is an increased focus on continuous professional development through a new separate QI A4.5 A9 Quality assurance and improvement • A9.1 Programme review and evaluation provides a wider range of prompts better reflecting areas highlighted by reviews as important

15. Streamlining - examples A2 Accommodation for teaching and learning • Two previous QIs Accommodation and facilities for teaching and learning and Facilities to support learning in the subject area amalgamated under the first title. A3 Equipment and materials • The previously separate QI on ICT has been subsumed within A3.1 Materials and equipment to support learning and teaching A8.3 Pre-programme guidance and support • Conflation of two previous QIs Pre-entry guidance and support and Induction.

16. Areas of more significant revision A5 Learning and teaching process A7 Learner progress and outcomes BI Educational leadership, direction and management and to a lesser extent: B4 Resources and services to support the learner B5 Staffing

17. A5 Learning and teaching process: basis for revision • Evolving practice across colleges • HMIE report Student Learning in Scottish Further Education colleges, drawing upon: • HMIE reviews • Learners’ views • Focus on Learning project • Wider research on learning …and setting out “recurring themes”

18. A5 Learning and teaching process: structure Until 2004 From 2004 A5.1 The context for learning A5.2 Standards set by lecturers A5.3 Planning for learning and teaching A5.4 The teaching process A5.5 The learning process A5.1 The learning process A5.2 The teaching process A5.3 Context and planning for teaching and learning

19. A5 Learning and teaching process: content References in A5.1 - A5.3 prompts include: • learner engagement • reflection on learning • independence in learning • use of resources by learners (including ICT) • focus on learners • staff-learner relationships • physical environment

20. A7 Learner progress and outcomes: basis for revision Consensus that learner outcomes should be evaluated against a balance of points including: • reference to pre-programme and current levels of skills • acquisition of skills from a diverse range • formal qualifications and awards • retention and post-course progression … and taking more account of customer views/ satisfaction against aspirations

21. BI Educational leadership, direction and management: basis for revision • Consensus that restriction of the previous scope of B1 to avoid evaluation in strategic and related areas was artificial and unhelpful in the wider consideration of learning and outcomes • Recognition that evaluations of leadership, direction and management need to draw upon their impact Still no consideration of: - Funding, broader aspects of governance, health and safety, management styles

22. BI Educational leadership, direction and management: structure/content Prompts extended to cover, for example: • clarity and comprehensiveness of aims, objectives, targets • their relationship to legislative and policy imperatives • portfolio planning • curriculum-related estate planning and development • curricular response to context and needs • progress, achievement and trends across aims, objectives and targets

23. B4 Resources and services to support the learner: summary • Some changes parallel and extend those under B1, for example strategic aspects of ICT across the curriculum • References to ICT are more prominent to reflect its continuing growth in usage and importance • References to inclusion are built up in alignment with those on access • Centrally-available learning materials and equipment still a key feature of B4

24. B5 Staff: summary • Some changes parallel and extend those under B1, for example strategic aspects of CPD • References to qualifications, skills and experience of staff are extended and spelled out more specifically • Staff development makes specific reference to new roles, and to new staff

25. B6/B7 Quality assurance and improvement • Key aspects continue to be: • Role of self-evaluation in quality improvement • Importance of feedback from users • Inclusion of all areas that impact on the learner experience • Staff commitment to improvement • Identifying and sharing good practice (external dimension?)

26. Overarching questions • In the area you work in do quality improvement processes: • drive innovation in quality improvement? • include learner evaluations? • use partnership approaches and benchmarking to raise standards? • make a difference?