1 / 12

How was it for you? A College perspective of the IQER Catherine Hill

How was it for you? A College perspective of the IQER Catherine Hill Director of Quality and Standards. COLLEGE BACKGROUND. HE constitutes 1/6 th of the colleges provision, with a Hefce grant of approximately £6m 1,230 full-time and 540 part-time HE students 6 HEI partners 68 HE courses

rafael
Download Presentation

How was it for you? A College perspective of the IQER Catherine Hill

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. How was it for you? A College perspective of the IQER Catherine Hill Director of Quality and Standards

  2. COLLEGE BACKGROUND • HE constitutes 1/6th of the colleges provision, with a Hefce grant of approximately £6m • 1,230 full-time and 540 part-time HE students • 6 HEI partners • 68 HE courses • HE delivered through 10 curriculum schools that include FE provision, 1 school with dedicated HE provision

  3. OUR TIME LINE • August 2006 – Put ourselves forward with agreement of our HEI Partners • 25th September 2006 – Selected as one of 15 pilot colleges • 11th October 2006 – Briefing event for pilot colleges • 2nd November 2006 – Cycle planning meeting • 22nd/23rd November 2006 - IN/Reviewer training

  4. OUR TIME LINE CONT... • 26th January 2007 – Self- Evaluation for DE submitted • 23rd February 2007 – DE preparatory meeting • 21st/22nd March 2007 – DE visit • 20th April 2007 – Self-Evaluation for SR submitted • 8th May 2007 – SR preparatory meeting • 22nd/23rd May 2007 – SR visit • 14th June 2007 – Panel judgement meeting

  5. OUR INTERNAL PREPARATIONS • We had support from all managers and most HEIs • This was aligning well with a significant ‘refreshing’ of our HE provision, towards vocational, Foundation degree provision • Colleagues could recognise that looking across the College at HE was something we had not done before. • We had produced a cross college self-evaluation document and improvement plan for the last 2 years but this was not against the Core Questions (and had not been written for external reading!) • INs/SRFs need to have sufficient knowledge and time to do their roles

  6. OUR INTERNAL PREPARATIONS CONT... • We had HE committees, but we started using our cross college groups to discuss HE operational issues as well as share Good Practice • Used our preparation for the DE/SR to develop or confirm staff understanding of the Academic Infrastructure • How their use of codes of practice, Benchmarks statements, Programme Specifications, FHEQ contribute to the Academic Infrastructure. • Some staff prepare and develop the HE courses they deliver (those validated by Lancaster) so were quite aware of the facets. • We had some difficulty with Edexcel programmes and programmes which we simply delivered!

  7. OUR INTERNAL PREPARATIONS CONT... • We involved staff delivering/managing HE provision in reviewing all our programmes prior to the DE • This was time consuming, but really allowed staff to ‘see’ Good Practice as well as talk about it. • Helped us to make an informed decision about the ‘sample’ for the DE and SR

  8. WRITING THE SE’S • Our assessment SE was weak. The two INs had purposely kept at a distance from this – this was a mistake • It was also not written against the Core Questions • Our Summative Review SE was much improved

  9. STUDENT SUBMISSION • Again we didn’t get this ‘right’ for the DE:- • We ran focus groups with specific HE programmes • Sample too small • We spent too much time explaining what IQER was all about • Didn’t get responses that were evaluative • Consequently although the submission was validated by the Students Union it was not a good example • For the SR we reverted to a questionnaire:- • We circulated it through our student representatives for HE • Could be completed as a group or individually • Good response which we analysed numerically and then passes to a group of students to write the narrative and thus validated it.

  10. PREPARING FOR THE VISITS • Have a tight, clear agenda and keep to it • Keep the documents manageable • Ensure you have the ‘right’ staff involved in meetings i.e. the ones who programmes are in ‘scope’ • Invite your partner HEIs to a specific meeting

  11. OUTCOMES • We were pleased with the report and outcomes of our DE (8 Good Practice, 3 recommendations!) • We have already made progress against the recommendations as the College was aware of these things prior to IQER • Summative Review????

  12. OVERALL • Definitely been a valuable process • Has drawn colleagues together from across college • Has facilitated sharing of good practice in HE • We know a lot more about all our Provision • Allowed us to cite and demonstrate areas of good practice e.g. employer engagement • Will inform our Quality Improvement Strategy • Has improved the confidence of the College in relation to its management of HE

More Related