1 / 10

One observation/generalisation!

Student membership of Audit and Review Teams Derfel Owen Development Officer (Students & Enhancement). One observation/generalisation!. Student Engagement is not the same as involvement! A recent experience of a faculty rep from the University of example. QUALT. QUACK. ENOHE.

maris-holden
Download Presentation

One observation/generalisation!

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Student membership of Audit and Review TeamsDerfel OwenDevelopment Officer (Students & Enhancement)

  2. One observation/generalisation! • Student Engagement is not the same as involvement! A recent experience of a faculty rep from the University of example QUALT QUACK ENOHE Think about how you empower students to engage! C-PRAT Consultative group for the strategic development, assurance, enhancement, progression and research of pedagogical practice in an undergraduate context FALT

  3. Student Auditors • Started in 2007 • Hugely controversial and a great deal of opposition • Main concerns from HEIs • Lack of professionalism • Time Poor • Lack of interest • Reporting? • Confidentiality • Baggage • There is nothing they can add to the process

  4. Who could we look to for evidence • QAA Scotland • HEI internal processes • GMC • Europe • Trial (6 observers)

  5. What did we learn? • Lack of professionalism “They won’t turn up!”, “They won’t read their papers”, “They won’t show respect for the process” • Not the experience of HEIs or QAA Scotland • Opposite was proved during the trial (the digest)

  6. What did we learn? • Time Poor Students are willing to give up the time if their HEI is understanding and if it worth their while: - appropriate recompense - full training and support - able to learn and pass on their experiences • Lack of interest GMC recruitement, applications to be observers

  7. What did we learn? • Reporting “Students won’t get their reports in on time”, “Students aren’t capable of writing high quality reports”, “Students aren’t experienced in writing evidence based reports” • Difficult to draw on other experiences here because reviewers do not write the finished product • QAA Scotland – students do a better job! • Trial, student feedbcak was more timely and concise!

  8. What did we learn? • Baggage “students will not leave their own prejudices to one side!”, “Students cannot give an unbiased opinion” • Is this any different with academics? • Careful recruitment and training is the key

  9. What did we learn? • There is nothing they can add to the process • Speak the same language as other students • Trial observations revealed a gap in knowledge on the part of experienced auditors • Currency • Sense of legitimacy - “if there is a student on the other side of the table I feel like I have been listened to”

  10. Pros and cons Pros • Currency • Boosts the focus on student experience • Improves the profile of audit • Legitimacy • Improves communication • Improve sharing of practice? • Challenges • Continuity • Cost • Ongoing support • Diversity

More Related