1 / 12

QAA INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT

QAA INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT. MARCH 2009. KEY DATES. w/c 6 October ‘08 : Preliminary meeting with QAA Assistant Director 16 January ’09 : Submission of University AND students’ briefing documents 24 -26 February ’09 : Briefing meeting with audit team w/c 30 March ’09 : Audit visit.

travis-allison
Download Presentation

QAA INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT

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. QAA INSTITUTIONAL AUDIT MARCH 2009

  2. KEY DATES • w/c 6 October ‘08: Preliminary meeting with QAA Assistant Director • 16 January ’09: Submission of University AND students’ briefing documents • 24 -26 February ’09: Briefing meeting with audit team • w/c 30 March ’09: Audit visit

  3. KEY DATES (continued) • 17 April ’09: Letter outlining audit findings • 29 May ’09: Draft audit report • 26 June ’09: University response to draft • 21 August ’09: Final report published by QAA

  4. WHAT WILL THE AUDIT TEAM EXAMINE AND COMMENT ON? • effectiveness of : • internal QA structures and mechanisms in light of UK Academic Infrastructure and European Standards and Guidelines for QA in HE • arrangements for maintaining appropriate academic standards and enhancing the quality of PgR research programmes • approach to building systematically upon outcomes of internal QA procedures….approach to enhancing quality of provision • accuracy & completeness of information (published) about academic standards of awards and quality of educational provision.

  5. JUDGEMENTS Are on the confidence that can reasonably be placed in the soundness of the…present & likely future management of: • academic standards… • the quality of the learning opportunities available to students Three levels: Confidence; limited confidence; no confidence

  6. AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND FEATURES OF GOOD PRACTICE Recommendations may be: • Essential • Advisable • Desirable Features of good practice may be identified: • Where the audit team considers a particularly positive contribution is made to the management of academic standards and of the quality of provision

  7. REFERENCE POINTS • The UK Academic Infrastructure: • Framework for Higher Education Qualifications • Code of Practice (10 sections) • Subject benchmarking statements • Programme specifications • European Standards and Guidelines (principle of subsidiarity should apply)

  8. TAKEN IN EVIDENCE – No. 1 • Institutional & students’ briefing documents • Reports that can be accessed directly by the QAA about UEA & its provision (e.g. reports of PSRBs) • The ‘TQI’ website (n.b. now changed to UniStats) • Summary prepared by the QAA Information Unit • National Student Survey (singled out at recent QAA audit briefing event) • University documents, publications & websites

  9. TAKEN IN EVIDENCE – No.2 • Sampling trails • x 2 • focus on internal QA procedures and outcomes • institution may propose a supplementary trail • comparisons made with publicly available reports/information Note: NO SEPARATE DISCIPLINE AUDIT TRAILS

  10. TAKEN IN EVIDENCE – No. 3 • Meetings with staff and students (briefing meeting & audit visit) BUT not as many as in previous audit • Specific consideration of PgR provision • Comment on the approach to enhancing the quality of educational provision, taught & research • including systematic use of management information

  11. THE REPORT 8 Sections • Introduction and background • Institutional management of academic standards • Institutional management of learning opportunities • Institutional approach to quality enhancement • Collaborative arrangements • Institutional arrangements for PgR students • Published information • Recommendations and features of good practice

  12. What are we trying to do? Why are we doing it? How are we going to do it? Why is that the best way to do it? How do we know it works? How can we improve it? PURPOSES REASON METHOD OPTIMISATION EFFECTIVENESS ENHANCEMENT 6 Q/A QUESTIONS

More Related