North Wales Access and Credit Consortium
November 2000

Contents

• Foreword
• The review process
• The AVA context
• The development, validation and evalutaion of Access programmes
• Assessment, moderation and the award of certificates
• Learner experience, standards and progression
• Conclusions
• Recommendation to the ARLC
• Conditions
• Recommendations

---

Foreword

1 The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) is responsible to the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) for the recognition of Access to Higher Education courses. QAA exercises this responsibility through a national network of authorised validating agencies (AVAs), which are responsible for the processes of individual course recognition and the award of 'kitemarked' Access to HE certificates to students on QAA's behalf. QAA has developed a scheme for the licensing and review of the AVAs, the principles and processes of which are described in the QAA Recognition Scheme for Access to Higher Education in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Recognition Scheme is regulated and administered by the Access Recognition and Licensing Committee (ARLC), a sub-committee of the QAA Board of Directors.

2 This is a report of a major review of the AVA function of the North Wales Access and Credit Consortium (NWACC) undertaken by QAA. The Agency is grateful to NWACC and to those who participated in the review for the willing cooperation provided to the review team.

Aims and objectives

3 The aims of the system of AVA review are:

i to provide the basis for an informed judgement by the ARLC about the fitness of the AVA to continue as a licensed agency;

ii to promote public confidence in Access to HE as a properly regulated and respected route into higher education by assuring:

• the quality and adequacy of AVAs' systems and procedures;
• the quality, comparability and range of AVAs' operations;
• the adequacy and comparability of AVAs' standards for approval, moderation and monitoring of programmes;
• consistency across AVAs in the operation of criteria for the granting of the Access to HE award;

iii to stimulate reflective and self-critical perspectives within AVAs, as an instrument to promote quality enhancement;

iv to provide an opportunity to identify and disseminate good practice of AVA operations;

v to provide a mechanism for ensuring necessary, and encouraging desirable, improvements and developments in AVAs.

4 The objectives of each AVA review are:

i to examine, assess and report on:

• the development of, and changes in, the AVA since its last review or initial licence, and its plans and targets for the future;
• the organisation's continuing viability and robustness and the ways in which the AVA demonstrates sound governance;
• the efficiency and effectiveness of the AVA's operational and quality assurance systems;
• the range and scope of the AVA's activities, and the appropriateness and value of these activities;
• the ways in which the AVA approves and monitors programmes and the ways in which these processes take account of the need for consistency and comparability;
• the ways in which the AVA satisfies itself of the adequacy and comparability of standards achieved by students gaining the 'kitemarked' Access award;
• the evidence available to indicate the AVA's success in achieving its aims and targets;

ii to identify and report on:

• strengths and good practice in procedures and operations;
• areas which would benefit from further development;
• areas requiring attention.

Outcomes

5 Following the review of an AVA, the reviewers' report is presented to the ARLC by a member of the review team. The Committee then makes one of six decisions:

i unconditional renewal of licence for a specified period;

ii conditional renewal of licence with conditions to be met by specified date;

iii provisional renewal of licence with conditions to be met and further review visit by specified date;

iv suspension of licence until specified conditions are met;

v withdrawal of licence for operation as an AVA;

vi temporary renewal of licence with request for further information by specified date (decision suspended).

The review process

6 The review was conducted in accordance with the process detailed in the QAA Recognition Scheme for Access to Higher Education in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The preparation for the review included an initial meeting between NWACC officers and the QAA Assistant Director with responsibility for Access to HE matters to discuss the requirements for the Analytical Account (the Account) and the process of the review; the preparation and submission by NWACC of its Account, together with a selection of supporting documentation; a meeting of the review team to discuss the Account and supporting documentation and to establish a draft programme for the review visit; and negotiations between QAA and NWACC to finalise the programme and other arrangements for the review visit.

7 The review visit took place on 6 and 7 April 2000. The visit to NWACC consisted principally of meetings with representatives of NWACC, including OCN officers; members of the Executive Committee and Quality Group; moderators for Access programmes; Access programme course tutors; HE admissions staff; and former Access students now studying in HE.

8 The review team consisted of Professor Steve Bristow, Principal and Chief Executive, Shrewsbury College of Arts and Technology; and Ms Christine Davies, Senior Co-ordinator/Advisor, Nottingham Trent University. The review was coordinated for QAA by Ms Kath Dentith, Assistant Director (Access), Institutional Review Directorate.

The AVA context

AVA statistics 1998-99

9

Providers offering Access to HE programmes - 7

Access programmes available - 22

Access programmes running - 22

Access learner registrations - 683

Access to HE certificates awarded - 214

Context

10 The North Wales Access and Credit Consortium (NWACC) was formally established in March 1990, has been a licensed AVA since 1991, and has been an Open College Network (OCN) since 1993. It is shortly to change its name to indicate its OCN status. NWACC has 34 organisations in membership, of which two are higher education institutions (North East Wales Institute of Higher Education and University of Wales, Bangor) and 10 are further education colleges. Currently, Access to HE provision accredited by NWACC is delivered by eight of its 10 FE members. As well as having members across the whole of North Wales including Deeside, it also provides services to Coleg Powys in Newtown, Llandrindod Wells and Brecon. Access registrations account for just over 5 per cent of the OCN's total of registered learners (around 700 of approximately 12,000 learners) or an estimated 30 per cent of the total credits awarded.

11 The AVA licence held by NWACC was last reviewed by HEQC in 1994, within a framework for the review of all three AVAs in Wales, coordinated by the Wales Access Unit. That review drew attention to six areas of good practice: the currency and credibility of the 'kitemark' with both HE providers and learners in the North Wales area; the strength and range of liaison between FE and HE providers; good systems for monitoring and targeting; a commitment to bilingualism; staff development and research activities, using funding from the Wales Access Unit; and progress with the unitisation of the FE curriculum.

12 The HEQC review team identified three issues requiring further attention by the AVA: the process of convergence of the AVA and National Open College Network (NOCN) systems of quality assurance and the extent of the administrative workload involved; the practice of retrospective accreditation of programmes already running, where the full range of quality assurance processes was not necessarily in place from the beginning of the programme; and the roles and functions of external examiners and moderators in the convergence of the Access and OCN systems.

13 NWACC was asked to address these issues through a number of specific actions, including the development of the administrative infrastructure; the discontinuation of retrospective validation; a review of the roles and functions of external examiners and moderators; and the implementation of staff development programmes to support these actions. These recommendations may formally have been satisfactorily addressed during the period since that review, but they continued to underscore much of the agenda for the present review undertaken by QAA.

14 In the six years since that last review, much has changed both in the external environment in which NWACC is operating and in its own structures and procedures. Both sets of changes have impacted on the strategy and operations of the AVA.

15 Externally, the context in which the AVA has been operating has been characterised by four important changes. In 1997, the Wales Access Unit (an All-Wales body originally funded jointly by the Welsh Office and the University of Wales) was disbanded and replaced by the Wales Access Federation, a consortium of the three OCNs in Wales (of which NWACC is one), with the mission of 'supporting and co-ordinating the Welsh OCN's in the promotion and development of access to life-long learning and inclusive learning through a framework of credit'. That framework of credit had been developed by FFORWM (the Welsh Colleges' representative body) as the CREDIS project, with substantial project funding assistance from the Welsh Office. The OCNs had played a central part in the quality assurance of credit-based units which together constitute the CREDIS database. Parallel developments in higher education - through Higher Education Credit Initiative Wales - meant that by the time of the present review, all Welsh further and higher education institutions were operating common credit systems (though different for each sector) and the Welsh Funding Councils had moved towards a funding system which funded by credit, rather than by qualification. The third change of significance was the creation of the National Assembly for Wales in 1998 and the implications of this for those organisations working exclusively in Wales, although linked professionally to UK-wide bodies. The final notable external change was the creation in 1999 of the Community University of North Wales, a development consortium dedicated to widening participation in higher education in North Wales. The Community University includes among its members the FE Colleges and HE Institutions in North Wales which are also counted among NWACC's members.

16 Internally, and in common with many other AVAs which had become OCNs, the AVA incorporated as a company limited by guarantee and took upon itself the disciplines which corporate status entails. Not only has this contributed to a more entrepreneurial approach to programme identification and validation (with a commensurate increase in the number of member organisations, learners and credits awarded) but it has led to a growth in staff numbers and professional specialism, and more formal and procedural approaches to quality assurance.

17 NWACC's strategy must be seen in the context of the Wales Access Federation's Strategic Plan (September 1999 - August 2002) agreed jointly by the three Welsh OCNs. The Aims outlined in that Plan are :

'to promote lifelong learning through credit by

• widening participation and addressing social inclusion
• responding to the labour market
• facilitating credit based progression routes for young people and adults;

to continuously improve services to members and users by

• reflecting the linguistic and cultural context of Wales
• developing effective communication and information systems
• supporting a programme of research and development
• monitoring activity and performance;

to promote Welsh Open College Networks;

to contribute to the development of a single credit framework'.

18 The Plan also makes clear the OCNs' commitment to the maintenance of their role as AVAs and, hence, their ability 'to keep open and further develop this important progression route for learners'.

19 Within this All-Wales strategic framework, NWACC has committed itself to 'continue to ensure that standards are set and monitored to maintain a high level of quality assurance in all aspects of its existing work'. Its Business Plan for 1999-2002 then identifies 21 separate objectives which will meet its strategic aims, together with two more 'house-keeping' objectives (on income, resources and infrastructure). Within these, there is no explicit reference to Access to HE provision, although the review team was assured that this commitment was implicit throughout.

20 The OCN has identified certain groups of adults which are currently under-represented: the rural dispersed (in the west and south of the NWACC area); unemployed adults (throughout the area); and those with seasonal employment (mainly living on the north-west coast). Despite efforts made to target these groups (such as a Welsh Studies Access to HE programme in rural Denbighshire, which ran for one year but then failed to recruit a further cohort), this remains an action which the OCN sees as important for its members to address during new or revised programme submissions. Within the Community University of North Wales Partnership there has been discussion about the extension of HNC/HND programmes and their ability to attract a wider range of potential learners into higher education. At the time of the review, it was not clear whether all NWACC's member institutions - or NWACC itself - saw new forms of credit-based programmes as the most likely way of addressing this question or, indeed, whether these would best be seen as a threat to existing Access to HE provision or as an opportunity for its further development.

Management and organisation

21 NWACC was incorporated as a company limited by guarantee in 1997 and it gained charitable status in the following year. It is financially self-sufficient, and, though currently based in accommodation rented from the University of Wales, Bangor, is shortly to move to entirely independent office premises.

22 The OCN employs a Chief Officer; a Development Officer, whose main responsibilities concern the oversight of the development and recognition of programmes; a part-time (0.4) Quality Assurance Officer, whose main responsibilities concern moderation and its follow-up; and an Administration Officer, who oversees all administrative procedures with a team of three Administration Assistants (one full-time and two part-time). Officers operate largely autonomously, working from home much of the time (except for the Administration Officer), and necessarily carry a good deal of delegated responsibility. Nonetheless, they work as members of a team, holding regular team-meetings and sharing agreed procedures and common aims. Administrative staff, who are office-based, are experienced and have a good understanding of the processes which they operate, and the OCN has contributed to appropriate staff development to support staff (with one member of staff supported to take an HNC and others IT and NVQ training). The OCN has devised a method of working which makes efficient use of its small staff team, and which is apparently responsive to the needs of the large area and dispersed community which it serves. The OCN manages to maintain effective contact with its members, and they seem very satisfied with the service they receive from highly regarded officers and an effective committee system alike.

23 Although financially self-sufficient, the OCN is concerned about increasing costs of membership of both the National Open College Network and the Wales Access Federation as well as its increased operational costs once it has moved to its new premises. It has a carefully constructed business plan for the period 1999-2002 which addresses sensibly potential budget deficits in 2000-01 and 2001-02. It is considering three possible strategies for improving its income position: additional funding sources such as European Social Fund Objective 1 and the Welsh Language Board; increased activity (both in terms of membership and learner registrations); and increased charges. It sees the more sophisticated use of information and communication technologies as an important part of its ability to improve the service which it provides throughout its geographically dispersed area.

24 It was clear to the review team that NWACC is a well-managed, professional organisation, supported by strong commitment from its members and a high degree of competence and efficiency from its officers and other staff.

Governance

25 NWACC's Memorandum of Association gives its objects as being to 'advance the education of the public in the Conwy County Borough, Denbighshire, Flintshire, Gwynedd, Isle of Anglesey, Powys and Wrexham County Borough counties of Wales, in particular but not so as to limit the generality of the foregoing by enhancing and developing learning opportunities for students especially those who have benefited least from education and training'. It does not specifically empower NWACC to act as an AVA or an OCN but neither does it preclude it from doing so.

26 The members of the Company elect the Executive Committee at every Annual General Meeting. Members of the Executive Committee act as the Company's directors. The Executive Committee (referred to extensively in the OCN's documentation as the Executive Board) has between 10 and 16 members, with appropriate sectoral and cross-sector representation. The review team noted the commitment, experience and detailed understanding of the issues facing the OCN demonstrated by its Directors (the Executive Committee). The Executive Committee is given wide powers by the Articles of Association, including the power to admit to membership 'societies, companies and unincorporated associations which support the objects of the Company' 'at its absolute discretion'. The Executive Committee has the power to delegate 'any of their powers to Sub-Committees consisting of such members of their body'.

27 The OCN supports two sub-committees (Finance and General Purposes and Quality Assurance) and two advisory groups (Business Development and Access to HE Development). The current structure gives reporting lines from all four of these committees directly to the Executive Committee. Each has clear terms of reference and the Finance and General Purposes Committee's membership conforms to the requirement that Sub-Committees of the Executive Committee should consist of 'such members of their body' (although the others do not). Three of the eight members of the Quality Assurance Sub-Committee (QASC) are Directors of the Company as are three of the twenty-six members of the Access to HE Development Group. Thus, the spirit of the Articles of Association is maintained, even if the letter is not strictly observed. The review team would wish to remind the OCN that the statement in its own review documentation that 'there have been members on the QASC who are also Directors of the Company but this has not previously been a particular remit and it is possible for the group to have no Directors elected' would, without any doubt, place this important Sub-Committee beyond the bounds of permission of the Company's Articles of Association. Similarly, although the Annual General Meeting held in November 1999 was properly constituted and conducted, its minutes do not record that it undertook its duty of 'the appointment and the fixing of the remuneration of the Auditor or Auditors' as required by the Articles of Association.

28 The OCN's documentation states that 'Access to HE matters are dealt with by individual representatives on behalf of their organisation areas within the Executive Committee and the Sub-Committees. A number of these members may also be involved with Access to HE and, until Incorporation, it was specified that the Chair of the Access to HE Development Group should be automatically elected to the Executive Committee.' Although there is no explanation as to why this practice lapsed, the OCN's AGM considered the reinstatement of representation for the Development Groups on the Executive Committee, and a proposal to effect this was planned to go before an EGM in summer 2000.

29 As an advisory body, the Access to HE Development Group does not have any decision-making powers included in its terms of reference, and there is some uncertainty about where decisions relating to Access to HE should formally be made. Nonetheless, on at least one occasion the Development Group has taken upon itself a decision-making role in relation to Access. The OCN's policy about the critical question of the minimum number of credits required for the award of the 'kitemarked' certificate on NWACC Access courses was apparently determined and implemented after a decision made by the Access to HE Development Group, and was merely reported to the Executive Committee. It appears that the Executive Committee was content with this process at the time, although, in discussion, some members of both committees expressed the view that the proper process would have been for the Development Group to have made a recommendation to the Executive Committee on this matter, for the latter to decide.

30 Although the governance structures have undergone some changes since November 1999 and the OCN considers that the new structures will lead to clearer lines of reporting and accountability, participants in the review also acknowledged that some of its structures still needed to be strengthened and that the place of decision-making needed to be addressed. In some places, lines of reporting are not sufficiently well-defined or properly understood and need to be clarified in order to ensure that decisions are made with the appropriate authority, and to ensure that practice is consistent with the formal terms of reference of the committees.

31 NWACC's members are, in the main, represented on the OCN's committees by appropriately experienced individuals, who are kept well informed about local and national issues. The work of the committees appears, in general, to be focused and effective, responding not only to local issues which affect the OCN, but also seeking to respond to a range of current agendas affecting post-compulsory education. In the case of matters relating specifically to Access to HE, the review team was satisfied that at each level in the structure there were individuals with a clear understanding of, and commitment to, Access matters, who were able to contribute to the effective performance of the OCN as an AVA.

Strategy and development

32 The AVA function of the OCN and responsibilities in relation to Access to HE are not separately defined, either strategically or operationally. Although there is a recognition that Access is a critical part of the OCN's operation, and the commitment and enthusiasm of practitioners is evident, this is not reflected in the attention given to the development of this area of the OCN's work. There are no specific Access-related aims or targets, and the strategy is that which has been developed with the other Welsh AVAs under the umbrella of the Wales Access Federation. By being subsumed within more general aims of the Strategic Plan, Access strategy is not visible and there is no mechanism for monitoring its development. At the same time, the OCN is keen to widen its portfolio and be active in pursuing other developments related to progression to HE, including initiatives to develop routes into higher education which do not depend upon the 'kitemarked' Access to HE Certificate, without any apparent consideration of the impact of such developments for its Access provision.

33 The review team was assured of the commitment to Access to HE of all individuals concerned, and there was evidence of this commitment through the continuing activities of the OCN in relation to Access. While the team recognises the extent and value of Access-related work undertaken within the OCN, and does not doubt the commitment of individuals and OCN members involved, without seeing an organisational commitment enshrined in the OCN's development plans, the team must remain concerned about the longer-term place of 'kitemarked' Access provision in North Wales.

34 It is not currently clear how Access needs are taken into account in the strategic planning process. The suggestion was made that the OCN might deal with this differently in the future, and will consult with, and feed back to, its various development groups. This suggests a more inclusive approach which has greater potential to address the need for the continuing development of Access to HE.

Quality assurance

35 As an organisation, NWACC is aware of the importance of quality assurance, is thorough in its approach to complying with NOCN quality standards, and is rigorous in applying the procedures it has developed. It appeared to the review team that the majority of procedures are widely accepted and understood, and are generally well embedded. In most respects, Access to HE is dealt with according to the same procedures as the rest of the OCN's provision.

36 In the last two years, the QASC has developed a number of procedures in order to meet NOCN licensing requirements, an area of development which has obviously been a priority for the OCN. The QASC's terms of reference give it a responsibility to 'ensure, oversee and develop the quality systems and procedures of the Network', and the work of the Sub-Committee is primarily concerned with checking the adequacy and efficiency of the OCN's procedures, and on checking that those procedures are carried out.

37 Although it appears to carry out these tasks efficiently, the Sub-Committee also has responsibilities to 'receive and act upon' moderator reports, recognition reports and annual reports from providers. However, the Sub-Committee does not receive actual reports, but is informed about any substantial matters arising from the OCN's quality assurance procedures through the Quality Assurance Officer's reports and the Development Officer's reports. While this process may provide an efficient and effective means of allowing the Sub-Committee to discharge its wider responsibility to oversee the OCN's quality systems, it does not appear to be consistent with several of its particular terms of reference. The OCN may wish to consider the QASC's duties in the light of this apparent difference between its specified terms of reference and current practice.

38 It appeared to the review team that the systems focus of the QASC's work did not readily allow it to consider the outcome of the procedures which it developed and oversaw, in terms of analysis or reflection on the quality and standards of the provision, and minutes of the Sub-Committee provided little evidence of any discussion about such matters. The team would suggest that, in considering the QASC's duties, the OCN might also consider the broader contribution that might be made by the QASC to the enhancement of the quality of Access provision for which NWACC has responsibility.

The development, validation and evaluation of Access programmes

Development

39 Ideas for new developments in Access provision are discussed by the Access to HE Development Group but this cooperative approach does not seem to lead to an established route or line of responsibility for taking recommendations forward. This may be resolved at the EGM in summer 2000 when reinstatement of an Access to HE Development Group representation on the Executive will be considered.

40 Although the Access to HE Development Group has no decision-making powers, it is clearly where the greatest Access to HE experience and expertise lies, and it plays a major role in maintaining a focus on Access within the OCN. In spite of the procedural oversight (see paragraph 29, above) in the making of the decision about the credit specification for the award of the 'kitemarked' Access certificate, this standardisation across the OCN of the minimum credits required for the award of the 'kitemarked' certificate is generally welcomed by member organisations, and is regarded as a development that will bring greater consistency across the OCN. The OCN produces a useful Access to HE Course Handbook that should be updated to reflect these latest changes and developments in Access provision.

41 A further contribution to the consistency of provision is made by the subject standing panels, especially as demonstrated by the Mathematics Standing Panel, which focuses exclusively on mathematics units for Access programmes. It regulates the development and use of units, and, through its responsibility for the moderation of all the maths elements of Access courses, also plays a role in ensuring the consistency of standards of student achievement. Its work not only addresses comparability of standards across Access programmes, but also between Access programmes and other equivalent qualifications, and across other OCNs in Wales. This example of good practice could act as a model for other subject standing panels. Such groups also provide excellent staff development for those involved, and the establishment of a wider range of subject panels, that include HE staff within their membership, would lead to further benefits for members of the OCN.

42 There is considerable interaction of staff from HE and FE within the OCN, although there appears to be little organised opportunity for HE tutors to influence the development of new Access programmes. The review team would suggest that the OCN facilitates the provision of more formal opportunities in order to check that the current provision is adequate to meet the needs of learners and receiving and providing institutions, and to consider possible new developments.

43 The Development Officer responds to requests from providing organisations by giving the necessary support for new developments and programme changes. The resources generally available for this are outlined by a service statement and the amount of resources actually committed is monitored. The OCN has recently revised the standard documentation used for submissions, including that for Access programmes. This incorporates a positive action checklist and also makes clear links with the documentation provided for members and Chairs of recognition panels.

Recognition

44 The Quality Assurance Handbook gives details of the requirements for the recognition process that is based on the NOCN standards and Code of Practice. The draft document for a new programme is usually submitted to the college's internal verification processes before being accepted for consideration by the OCN's panel. The review team heard that, in spite of this preliminary stage, some submissions have been referred for further development, including examples taken to panel against the advice of the Development Officer.

45 The main involvement of HE tutors in the recognition process appears to be at the panel stage. In the review team's view, the appropriateness of the provision for preparation for HE study, including a better matching of assessment methods, could be ensured by earlier discussions between FE and HE tutors with a requirement for this consultation included in the guidelines for submission.

46 Guidelines are available for the constitution of recognition panels but records show that there is, in fact, considerable variation in the overall size of the panel, the balance of FE and HE representation, the proportion from the presenting organisation, as well as the seniority and externality of panel members.

47 The emphasis on arriving at decisions by consensus at recognition panels (specified in the Quality Assurance Handbook) contributes to a lack of clarity about the roles played by those attending a panel, including that of the Chair. There is no distinction made between the status of those presenting the programme, who could make up a significant proportion of the total, and others. It appears that all attending are regarded as members and that they therefore share equal responsibility for the approval of the programme, although some review participants stated that it was understood that this was not the case.

48 Until relatively recently, all recognition panels were chaired by a member of the Executive Committee or the Quality Assurance Sub-Committee, but it is now usual for an OCN officer, quite often the officer who has been involved in the development of the programme, to chair panels. This officer, as Chair, will direct the panel towards areas of the submission which require particular consideration. He or she may also express a view about the outcome of the panel, as the Business Development Group has advised the OCN's officers that they should make it clear to a panel whether they consider that a programme is worthy of approval. Though the potentially competing tensions implied for the role of the Chair in these circumstances have been considered, it was not evident that they had been resolved.

49 The point at which the award of the Access 'kitemark' to a programme is made is not clearly defined. There is no evidence to suggest that it is a responsibility of any sub-committee to give formal approval. It would appear, rather, that final responsibility for the approval of a programme lies with the recognition panel, without any requirement for endorsement elsewhere. This presents a particular problem when conditions have to be met by the provider, prior to approval being given. Often, these conditions appear to be no more than typographic corrections to the submission document, which are then checked by the Administration Officer and her staff as an office procedure. Where they are more substantive, it is by no means clear (as it does not appear to be formally recorded) when and by whom the final approval is given, although the review team was told that this approval would be given by the Panel Chair - in most cases recently, the OCN Officer. The team was not convinced of the rigour or independence of this process and considered that a fundamental review of these procedures and operational practices was required.

50 The review team encountered some difficulty in conducting an audit trail of recognition processes because the panel reports contain little useful information for this purpose. The reports are generated by the AREV system that clearly has limitations and weaknesses, since the main content of the reports seems to refer to typographical errors, many of which could probably have been dealt with at the pre-panel stage. The review team recommends that consideration is given to the production of an alternative style of recognition panel report that includes reference to areas of substantive debate by the panel, as well as a clear statement of the outcomes of the process and subsequent actions to be taken in the case of conditions.

Monitoring, evaluation and review

51 Monitoring of Access programmes is in part achieved through the subject moderators. It begins with the process of checking the implementation of recommendations from the recognition panel and is continued via the subject and lead moderator reports in a prescribed format. In addition, each programme is required to submit an annual review, the composition of which is well explained in the Quality Assurance Handbook. These guidelines recognise that a degree of flexibility is needed in the format of the review and that Access programme coordinators must include additional information in order for the AVA to report fully to the QAA.

52 The review team heard that the OCN experiences difficulty in ensuring the receipt of some providers' annual reviews by the agreed deadline. There is similar difficulty in obtaining sufficient programme-related data, including student profiles as well as details of completions and progressions. Consequently, administrative staff are often unable to produce comprehensive statistics for the OCN. These issues are being addressed by the Quality Assurance Sub-Committee that receives summaries of issues from the Moderators' reports and annual reviews, in reports prepared by the Quality Assurance Officer.

53 An additional monitoring activity involves NWACC in the strategic review of the whole OCN provision within each member institution.

Assessment, moderation and the award of certificates

Assessment

54 Assessment is given adequate consideration at all stages in submission, recognition, moderation and review, with clear guidelines being provided for all those involved in these processes. While it appears that Access programmes fulfil the requirement of including a range of assessment methods, the review team heard that some students lacked experience of the formal examinations they were likely to encounter in HE. The team suggests that this matter should be addressed by the OCN, in consultation with Access tutors and course leaders in higher education, particularly in relation to those programmes where the progression destinations of students are known to include a significant proportion of this form of assessment, to ensure that all Access students experience assessment methods which they are likely to encounter in their chosen undergraduate programmes.

Moderation

55 The organisation, monitoring, development and oversight of the administration of the moderation process are the responsibility of the part-time Quality Assurance Officer who reports to the QASC. Subject moderators, provider lead moderators and the newly appointed Access to HE Lead Moderator have well defined and understood roles, and operate in a complementary way to achieve the overall moderation of Access programmes. The subject moderators are responsible for the assurance of quality at the curriculum delivery level through engagement with the tutors and students. A provider lead moderator focuses on systems operating in a college and works with the subject moderators and college quality assurance officer to ensure that there is consistency across the curriculum areas within its Access programmes and to produce an overall report. The fact that subject moderators (except for those also serving as provider lead moderators) are currently involved with only one Access programme suggests that the Access to HE Lead Moderator will serve a worthwhile purpose in ensuring consistency across programmes. The achievement of this will also be facilitated through links with the Subject Standing Panels

56 The Access to HE Lead Moderator was appointed through a formal interview process but other moderators are appointed by the Quality Assurance Officer on the basis of their Access to HE experience and expertise, and subject to the approval of the QASC. The systems in place ensure that moderators do not remain with any one programme for more than three years and that they are re-appointed through a new letter of contract each year, the format of which depends on whether or not the moderator is to receive payment. Moderators receive a pack of information that includes the Moderation Guidelines and for those new to a programme, copies of the previous moderator's report. All new moderators are required to undergo an induction process and then to take part in subsequent training events, arranged at various times of the year and in venues across the NWACC region. The training focuses on a range of topics and many of these relate specifically to Access to HE. The review team heard that moderators perform their duties confidently and professionally and that they are well supported by the officers and administrative staff of the OCN. A commendable scheme that is sometimes put into operation and could be extended, involves individuals new to moderation being given the opportunity to shadow an experienced moderator.

57 All aspects of the moderation process, including information for tutors preparing for visits from moderators, and opportunities to provide evaluation feedback, are well understood and thoroughly documented in the Moderation Guidelines within the Quality Assurance Handbook. The Guidelines provide the format for the interim and final reports that the moderators are required to send to the Quality Assurance Officer by a prescribed deadline.

58 The Quality Assurance Officer analyses and summarises the moderator reports, highlighting good practice and any issues for attention by the provider. The summary report, together with the full report and a covering letter asking for the issues to be addressed, is sent to the head of the institution and an action plan pro forma is included where the issues are substantial. The review team established that this process is followed rigorously and that there are procedures for dealing with non-compliance. The process appears to be effective, with appropriate corrective actions being taken by institutions at senior management level and reported back to the OCN. The provider lead moderators are kept informed at all stages in the process, and the loop is completed through the annual review and the subsequent monitoring of the implementation of actions during the next run of the programme. This enables the Quality Assurance Officer to maintain a good overview of the provision and any problems arising with the system operated by the OCN.

59 Although the QASC does not directly fulfil its role 'to receive and act upon moderator reports' (see above, paragraph 37), it receives reports from the Quality Assurance Officer, which include relevant matters relating to quality assurance and highlight issues for attention. The Sub-Committee has agreed procedures to be put into operation if providers fail to comply with outcomes of the moderation process, requiring them to construct an action plan to remedy issues of quality and standards. In addition, all members of the Sub-Committee have access to the moderators' reports via the OCN office and the records kept by the administrative staff. These are particularly referred to by the Chair of the Sub-Committee in order to fulfil his responsibilities associated with the NOCN audit.

60 The introduction of internal verification (IV) within FE colleges has presented some challenges for the OCN's moderation systems, particularly because of the variation with which IV is being implemented. The OCN has yet to determine definitively how its moderation systems will articulate with colleges' IV systems, and how it will ensure that, where it relies on any of those systems for its own processes, they will be sufficient for its own procedures. However, the OCN is addressing this matter actively and constructively by considering a range of IV examples and reviewing current moderation processes in order to establish the best ways of inter-linking the two systems. In addition, the new Access to HE Lead Moderator's job description includes a responsibility for monitoring of IV systems.

61 The 'reciprocal arrangement' for the provision of moderators by member institutions has worked well in recent years resulting in the sharing of good practice and in staff development as an acknowledged benefit, without any suggestion of quid pro quo. Systems have always been in place to ensure reciprocity of curriculum areas and to prevent any compromising of impartiality. It is now increasingly difficult to implement a system on this basis because of the difficulty faced by moderators in being released from their institutional commitments, and it is now more common practice for moderators to be paid for carrying out their duties. During discussions, regret was expressed to the team about the decline in the number of HE moderators, who currently comprise approximately a quarter of the subject moderators on Access to HE programmes. The review team considered that these difficulties would be best addressed at a strategic level by the OCN, in collaboration with its FE and HE partners.

62 Generally, the moderation of Access to HE programmes works well and is rigorous and thorough, but it does rely very heavily on the part-time Quality Assurance Officer maintaining an overview of all provision, being aware of any problems arising within the OCN's systems, and ensuring that these are dealt with effectively. Although the review team had no doubts about the officer's control of these responsibilities, it was reassured to note that the Access to HE Lead Moderator had a specified role in supporting the Quality Assurance Officer.

Award of certificates

63 Recommendations for Award of Credit forms are sent to providers in accordance with the registrations of learners which have been notified to the NWACC office. The Access coordinators make the initial recommendations for the award of the 'kitemarked' certificates but this must be confirmed by the moderator's signature on the form and the lead moderator is usually also involved in the verification process.

64 The administrative staff employ rigorous systems for checking the achievements of learners against the criteria for the award of the 'kitemarked' certificates. Usually they are using the specification detailed within the submission document, and records are kept of any changes made to this to ensure that the most up-to-date version is available. Such changes may be necessary because of conditions imposed by the recognition panel or, as in the case of the standardisation of the minimum number of credits necessary for the 'kitemarked' certificate, implemented across the OCN. The review team recommends that the OCN continues to pursue the development and use of a separate standardised form for maintaining up-to-date specification records for use when checking the award of the 'kitemarked' certificates, rather than the full submission documents.

Learner experience, standards and progression

Learner experience and preparedness for higher education

65 Evidence provided through discussions with former Access students and staff from receiving HE institutions, confirmed that students who have completed NWACC Access programmes and achieved their 'kitemarked' certificates are, in general, well prepared for undergraduate study. They are equipped with most of the necessary skills to cope with the transition into and progression through higher education, although some of the students indicated that they could have been better prepared in library research skills and for the formal examinations experienced on undergraduate programmes (see above, paragraph 54).

66 Former students emphasised the importance of personal tutors on their Access programmes in helping them to adjust to the demands encountered on returning to learning, especially where cohorts were relatively large at the start of a programme. Some students described how the high level of support they had received led them to continue to seek assistance from their Access tutors even after entering local higher education. While the value of this is recognised, and the commitment of the tutors is to be commended, the review team draws this support need to the attention of HE members and would encourage them to raise awareness of the student support systems within their own institutions.

69 Students seen by the review team clearly understood the currency of the 'kitemark' for entry into higher education. They indicated that although this was an important reason for choosing to undertake an Access programme, the main attraction had been the special nature of Access provision, tailored to meet the specific needs of adults returning to learning.

70 The majority of the OCN's Access students progress into HEIs within the NWACC area or close to the borders of this area. While the opportunity to visit local HEIs is provided by some Access tutors, the OCN does not play any formal role in these links. There was evidence from the students seen by the team of the benefits of such 'taster' sessions and they also explained how they are often invited to provide witness sessions in their former FE colleges for current Access to HE students. The review team encourages the OCN to take a more proactive role in the organisation of visits to HEIs across the region and in the engagement of former Access to HE students to promote the benefits of their chosen progression route into HE.

71 Tutors from local HEIs expressed confidence in the OCN's Access provision as a whole, not differentiating between separate providers, though expressing less confidence in - and less understanding of - Access programmes accredited by other AVAs, and of the Access 'kitemark' in general. The review team was assured by HE participants in meetings that NWACC Access students were very successful in their local HEIs, and performed as well, if not better, than students entering by other routes.

Progression

72 Statistics on completions provided for 1998-99 indicated that only 31 per cent of those who registered were successful in achieving the 'kitemarked' certificate (a similar figure was recorded for 1997-98), while 65 per cent were credited. It appears that this is partly explained by the lack of alternative suitable provision in some FE colleges, and this results in Access registrations that are unlikely to reach completion but that lead to the award of a number of credits below that required for the Access certificate. The team recommends that this trend is monitored and appropriate action considered.

73 Discussions confirmed that the confidence and trust of local admissions tutors in NWACC-recognised Access provision results in most students being giving a standard offer of achievement of the 'kitemarked' certificate. However, concern was expressed by students, Access tutors and NWACC officers that some students are being made unconditional offers by admissions tutors before the end of their Access programmes, and this contributes to the low completion figures. Additionally, mature students were increasingly gaining access to HE programmes with a lower number of credits than is required for a full 'kitemarked' certificate. A further difficulty involves the trend of admission tutors for some popular HE programmes making offers in terms of credits over and above those required for the achievement of the 'kitemarked' certificate. Additional credits are thereby being used as a means of selecting students and in some cases, to assist the learners, Access tutors are ensuring that programme design allows for the achievement of such additional credits if this becomes necessary. The team suggests that the OCN should monitor these trends and seek to assess their impact on provision and on student success.

74 There is currently only limited information available on progression and destinations of Access learners, although this should improve in response to QAA's requirements for the submission of statistics in this area. The HE tutors whom the review team met confirmed that there is little, if any, formal tracking of Access students currently being undertaken, and that any individual feedback to FE providers is of an informal nature, although some changes to this are in the process of being implemented. The team suggests that the OCN should seek to play a proactive role in working with member HEIs to improve the data on progression and performance of NWACC students within local HEIs.

Conclusions

75 The OCN has many evident strengths. It is an efficient organisation which makes good use of a very capable staff base, and which operates to the clear benefit of a wide range of providers and learners. It has well-developed systems and procedures for quality assurance through which both the provision and its own operation is monitored. In addition, the OCN appears to be open to suggestions for change and keen to address any operational weaknesses and improve its practice. It is well placed to carry forward an agenda for Access to HE within the area it serves, once it has developed such an agenda.

76 On the other hand, there are some significant weaknesses. These have in common an apparent lack of awareness of the central importance of being able to demonstrate exactly where the locus of decisions about Access to HE programmes should reside - whether in terms of policy, of development, or in terms of formal approval. By not ensuring the externality of those acting as Chairs of recognition panels, and by not clarifying the difference in the roles of different panel members, the OCN is not in a position to assure a wider audience of the independence and rigour of panel processes and decisions.

77 More widely, despite the very evident understanding of, and commitment to, Access to HE provision among committee members and officers alike, there is a real possibility that the lack of explicit strategic purpose for the OCN's work as an AVA might, in time, and with a change of key staff and supporters, weaken the strength and quality of the provision currently made and supervised by the OCN.

78 The review team commends NWACC for:

i its successful engagement of a wide range of staff at all levels in its member organisations in the work of its committees and panels. This is particularly noteworthy given the geographically dispersed nature of the region which it serves;

ii the work of its subject standing panels, which ensure comparability of standards across Access programmes, between Access programmes and other equivalent qualifications, and across other OCNs in Wales;

iii its investment in the training and development of its administrative staff.

Recommendation to the ARLC

The review team recommends that NWACC be granted a conditional renewal of its AVA licence.

Conditions

Subject to the approval of the ARLC, NWACC's licence is renewed on condition that it:

i locates ultimate responsibility for the award of the 'kitemark' to an Access programme with the AVA itself, in order to meet the need for monitoring and the verification of consistency within the validation process;

ii clearly identifies a single locus of authority and responsibility for Access to HE within the OCN's governance structure, and clarifies its relationship with other advisory or decision-making bodies for Access;

(conditions i and ii to be met by 1 January 2001)

iii reviews its procedures for the recognition of Access to HE programmes and, in particular;

l clarifies the roles of the different participants at recognition panels including a) the role of those who are attending in order to present the programme being considered, and b) the role of Chair panels, in order to ensure and demonstrate appropriate independence and impartiality of judgements;

l clarifies the procedures for the meeting of conditions set at recognition panels;

iv ensures that its strategic planning and development processes take account of the planning needs of Access to HE.

(conditions iii and iv to be met by 1 March 2001)

Recommendations

79 The review team recommends that NWACC:

i reviews the Quality Assurance Sub-Committee's terms of reference and responsibilities, in the light of current practice;

ii gives consideration to the production of an alternative style of recognition panel report that includes reference to areas of substantive debate by the panel, as well as a clear statement of the outcomes of the process and subsequent actions to be taken in the case of conditions;

iii continues to pursue the development and use of a separate standardised form for maintaining up-to-date specification records for use when checking the award of the 'kitemarked' certificates, rather than the full submission documents;

iv monitors students' non-completion of a full Access to HE Certificate and considers appropriate action;

v initiates discussions with HE admissions tutors to raise awareness about the OCN's agreed minimum specification for the award of the Access to HE certificate, and ways of making appropriate offers for Access students, other than through requiring the achievement of additional numbers of credits.