Barriers to Quality/Assignment

2. Barriers to Quality/Assignment Objectives • Investigate the potential barriers to establishing and maintaining quality systems in Higher Education; • Consider the broader perspectives of cost in relation to quality; • Examine the implications for your own context at King Saud University.

3. Developing Quality Systems in Higher Education What are the barriers to quality?

4. Barriers to Quality • Systems and procedures • Culture: attitudes, values • Organisational design • Management perspectives Beckford (2002)

5. Barriers to Quality/Assignment GROUP TASK • Examine the barriers to quality using Beckford’s model and taking the given category, apply it to King Saud University systems; • Where are the barriers within the category you have been given? • How could the barriers identified be addressed/minimised?

6. Barriers Systems and Procedures • here

7. Barriers: Culture, Attitudes, Values • here

8. Barriers: Organisational Design • here

9. Barriers: Management Perspectives • here

10. Quality: the Implications What are the implications of quality deficits in Higher Education provision?

11. Quality Costs • Direct • Indirect • Staff time • Quality systems • Inspection • Correction and/or Modification • Rectification • Loss reputation

12. Barriers to Quality • Time • Hard work ‘… hard work and time are two of the most formidable blocking mechanisms to quality improvement.’ Sallis (2002, page 30)

13. Gap Model Gaps between: • ‘Customer’ expectations and the perceptions of management • Management perceptions and quality specifications • Quality specifications and delivery • Delivery and communication to customers • Perceived service and expected service Kelemen (2003)

14. Plugging the Gap • Staff development • Pro-active monitoring of: • Resourcing • Delivery • Assessment decisions • Clarity for: • Communication channels • Lines of responsibility • Maintain control of quality systems McGhee (2003)

15. Barriers to Quality ‘Managers have to be able to let their staff take decisions and be willing to see them make honest mistakes.’ Sallis (2002, page 31)

17. Total Quality Management What is Total Quality Management ?

18. Total Quality Management ‘Total Quality Management is both a philosophy and a methodology.’ Sallis (2002, page 3)

19. Principles of TQM • Agreed requirements • Requirements met first and every time • Q improvement reduce waste/total cost • Prevention rather than fire-fighting • Planned management action • Every job must add value • Involve everybody • Establish culture of continuous improvement • Emphasis on measurement • Emphasis on creativity Flood, 1993

20. Total Quality Management Four Quality Imperatives • Moral imperative • Professional imperative • Competitive imperative • Accountability imperative Sallis (2002)

21. Recap: Hierarchy of Quality Concepts Total Quality Management Continuous improvement Quality Assurance Prevention Quality Control Detection Inspection

22. Total Quality Management • Is about improving … • effectiveness • competitiveness • flexibility • Removing wasted effort • Prevention rather than detection

23. TQM Interfaces People Communication Culture Customer Processes Systems Commitment dti; from quality to excellence

24. Total Quality Management 4 Pillars of TQM • Synergistic Relationships • Continuous improvement and self evaluation • System of ongoing process • Leadership

25. Leadership • Top/senior management responsibility • Engineers of culture • Define role/purpose • Create staff development opportunities • Use research/practice-based information to form policy and practice • Design initiatives

26. Total Quality Management ‘… rejects any outcome other than excellence’ Sallis (2002, page 24)

28. The role of the external examiner • What is the role of an external examiner and what are his/her duties?

29. Regulations: The Essentials Credits, marks, attempts • “modular” scheme, based on 20- (or 30-)credit building blocks • undergraduate: 120 credits per year; 360 for BA (Hons), BSc (Hons), … • normally: level 2 contributes 30%; level 3 contributes 70% • MA, MSc: extra 60 credits in a third trimester (180 total) • module “pass mark” is 40% • undergraduate is permitted up to three attempts per module (p/g: 2) • resits are capped at 40%, unless there are mitigating circumstances • many awards have additional PSRB regulations

30. Decisions • the examining board has discretion (note 10.11 and 10.12) • pass and progress; pass and award • compensate (within a module, across the profile) • re-assessment – at next available opportunity • re-take: a module, several modules, the year • trail a module (“conditional progression” to the next level) • defer decision, followed by a chair’s action • fail: required to withdraw

31. Classification Boundaries • usual undergraduate: 70%, 60%, 50%, 40% • usual Edexcel on modules: 70% Distinction, 55% Merit, 40% Pass • taught postgraduate: • special provisions if within 1% or 2% of a boundary

32. Borderlines • if the overall average is “near“ a borderline, then further discretion is available • within 1%, the board may award the higher classification • within 2%, and if the student has 60 or more credits at level 3 in the higher classification, then that classification may be awarded • in both cases, the overall performance of the student needs to be considered • credit preponderance, performance in the final-year project or dissertation, “exit velocity”, performance in a “difficult” module, … • Academic Handbook, section 6A, section 10.2, para (iii)

33. Compensation • compensatewithin a module • overall average mark is >=40% • element failed (but has been attempted) • have the module learning outcomes been met? • are all PSRB requirements fulfilled? • compensate across the profile • up to one-third of the credits for undergraduate • up to one Masters module (20 or 30 credits) • Academic Handbook, Section 6A,paras 13.1 and 13.2 (and Section 7D para 17 for taught Masters)

34. SUMMARY : WHERE DO EXAMINERS FIT IN? 1 Rationale : Why are you here? 2 Processes for identifying and implementing actions recommended in External Examiners’ Reports

35. QAA CODE OF PRACTICE ‘External examiners are appointed by an institution, and their reports are an important component of both an institution’s internal and any external quality assurance processes. Institutions should consider carefully their requirements with regard to such reports, and advise external examiners explicitly’

36. Quality EnhancementStrategy • 2 Key aims • To provide and utilise robust information for the maintenance and improvement of standards of learning and teaching • To promote an ethos of self-evaluation and the continuous improvement of learning and teaching throughout the university

37. UWIC ACADEMIC HANDBOOK • External examiners are a key element in UWIC’s pursuance of quality enhancement and the maintenance of academic standards • They provide an objective view of the operation of the programmes they are associated with, and they enable comparisons with the standards offered in other institutions of which they have knowledge

38. ‘External Examiners shall prepare their reports on courses for which they are responsible on at least an annual basis. Such reports are not normally subject to confidentiality, and should not therefore refer to students by name’ (Academic Handbook)

39. ‘…Reports of External Examiners shall indicate shortcomings and/or recommend improvements as appropriate, for quality enhancement purposes’ (Academic Handbook)

40. QAA PRECEPTS [exploiting reports]Code of Practice Section 4 External Examiners • 14…Institutions should ensure that the reports are considered within the institution at a senior level • 15 Full consideration should be given by the institution to comments and recommendations contained within the reports of external examiners, and the outcomes of the consideration, including actions taken, should be formally recorded • 16 Institutions should ensure that external examiners are, within a reasonable time, provided with a response to their comments and recommendations, including information on any actions taken by the institution

41. Where does your report go?[University Level] • All reports are received, read and summarised by the Dean of Quality and Standards • Analysis of the reports results in an overview of actions necessary at university level (eg staff development, working groups, specific guidance, dissemination of best practice)

42. [University Level, continued…] • Dean of Quality and Standards holds individual meetings with each School Director of Learning and Teaching • to congratulate/confirm report comments • To discuss specific concerns • If serious concerns, Dean of Quality and Standards contacts Examiner directly

43. Where does your report go?[School Level] • After discussion a proforma (analysis grid) is completed to indicate Strengths, Issues and Action taken • All programmes’ external examiner reports are discussed at School level • The School Director of Learning and Teaching compiles an analysis for discussion at the Learning and Teaching Board • The Programme Director informs the Examiner of actions taken as a result of the report.

44. Annual Programme Reports Requirements • To include reports from external examiners • To present issues arising from reports • To detail action as a result of issues raised, and to provide a timescale for such action

45. OVERVIEW INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL DEAN OF QUALITY AND STANDARDS [Dr Pam Harris] Discussion at Programme Level Reads ALL Reports Contact Dean of School or (Where Serious Concerns) External Examiner Programme Director prepares analysis Discussed at School Level Provides overview of reports for the University Director of L and T compiles overview for presentation to Learning and Teaching Board Programme Director responds to External Examiner

46. KEY POINTS • Your reports are recognised as a cornerstone for quality assurance and enhancement • Timeliness of reporting and responding is essential (please!) • Any concerns you may have are thoroughly and seriously considered • Highlighting course strengths is also critical for improvement activity