University of Ulster Authorised Validating Authority
December 2000

Web site for University of Ulster

Contents

• Foreword
• The review process
• The AVA context
• Governance and committee structures
• Organisational structures
• The development, validation and evaluation of Access programmes
• Management, evaluation and review of courses
• Assessment, moderation and 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 University of Ulster AVA (UU AVA) undertaken by QAA. The Agency is grateful to UU AVA and 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;
• the sufficiency and consistency of standards achieved by students granted 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 and approved by the ARLC. The preparation for the review of UU AVA included an initial information visit to the AVA by 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 UU AVA 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 discussions between QAA and UU AVA to finalise the programme and other arrangements for the review visit.

7 The review visit took place on 8 and 9 December 1999. The visit to UU AVA by the review team consisted principally of meetings with representatives of the AVA including members of the Access Courses Sub-Committee (ACSC) and the secretariat to the Committee; Access Course Directors; members of the Inter-Centre Access Forum (ICAF); University Assessors; representatives of the Northern Ireland Open College Network (NIOCN); HE admissions staff; and former Access students.

8 The review team consisted of Professor Beverly Sand, Dean of Lifelong Learning, University of Derby, and Ms Miriam Griffiths, Director, The Open University in Wales. The review was coordinated for QAA by Ms Kath Dentith, Assistant Director (Access), Institutional Review Directorate.

The AVA context

Background

9 The University of Ulster (the University) has been involved in the recognition and delivery of courses for mature students seeking an alternative route into higher education since 1973, when it introduced its Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students programme which was offered by the University's Magee College. This programme was subsequently delivered at a number of FE colleges, and the University was granted its licence to act as a recognised AVA in 1990-91, this status being subsequently confirmed at its review by HEQC in 1993. The University continues to act as the AVA, as well as delivering Access courses and being a major receiver of Access students progressing to HE.

10 With the advent of the national framework for the recognition of Access programmes, the 'kitemark' was attached to those programmes which led to the University's Certificate in Foundation Studies for Mature Students. This continues to be the case and the Access 'kitemark' has been extended to a number of University Certificate courses. All Access courses are, therefore, in effect, dual accredited, receiving both a University award, as well as QAA Access 'kitemark' recognition.

Current context

11 The University sees benefits for its courses being 'kitemarked' within the national Access Recognition Scheme and, during the review visit, some representatives of the University spoke of its value as a respected qualification with an approved national standard. Others, however, considered that the 'kitemark' was not widely known in Northern Ireland, and both admissions tutors and providers placed greater emphasis on the importance and value of University certification to mature students seeking HE places.

12 The restrictions imposed on HE institutions in Northern Ireland by Maximum Aggregate Student Numbers creates competition for the limited number of full-time undergraduate places, one result of which is that Northern Ireland is a net exporter of students seeking progression to HE. This situation creates a particular difficulty for Access students who, as mature students, are generally less mobile than school leavers, and are therefore less likely to be able to travel to other parts of the UK to continue their studies. As a result, it is particularly important for the great majority of students on UU AVA Access courses that they are able to progress to HE within Northern Ireland, primarily either to the University of Ulster or to The Queen's University of Belfast. In this competitive climate, it is University certification, which is very well established and widely recognised, that is seen to be the students' key to local HE progression, rather than the QAA 'kitemark'.

13 Although the number of students progressing to HE institutions other than the two universities in Northern Ireland is relatively small (the AVA's statistics record 20 in 1996, 14 in 1997, and 22 in 1998), it was nonetheless generally accepted that the 'kitemark' would be important for students seeking progressing to institutions in England and Wales, for whom it would have a particular value as a guarantor of quality and mark of national recognition.

Providers and provision

14 The UU AVA's Access course provision in FE colleges is a part of the University's collaborative provision profile. Since the establishment of the AVA in 1990-91, both the range and extent of provision has increased considerably, with 23 courses being offered in 1999, leading to five named University awards. In addition to the standard Humanities/Social Science courses which have been offered for many years, more recently-established named awards reflect development in an increased range of discipline areas, including Science and Technology; Women's Studies; Business and Management; and Information Technology and Professional Development for Women. Courses leading to these awards are delivered by a number of providers in a range of locations across Northern Ireland. As well as the University itself, providers include 11 of the 16 non-specialist FE Colleges in Northern Ireland, and, recently, the Workers Educational Association (WEA).

15 The Account identifies the 'kitemarking' of the University's Certificate in Information and Technology and Professional Development for Women as one of the main innovations since the last review. This initiative, supported by EU project funding as part of the Peace and Reconciliation Programme, has enabled women to access IT and personal development opportunities in an environment that is supportive of their needs. The AVA has also approved proposals for delivery in community and rural locations, and the relocation of a course to a neutral community location in order to encourage both sides of the divided community to participate. A further innovative development has been the validation of a course within the business and management area, targeted primarily at trades union members, developed and run by the WEA. This course makes use of the facility for simultaneous accreditation by both UU AVA and the NIOCN, and is described using the Open College Network format as well as the University's template.

16. The AVA has also seen a substantial expansion in student numbers, with 186 enrolments recorded in 1990-91 and 957 recorded for 1998-99.

Financial position

17 The AVA, being an integral part of the University's own activities, is largely resourced through the University's own structures, in particular the Academic Office, which is responsible for servicing the AVA. The University charges a capitation fee to the providing institutions for their courses; for University-based courses, tuition fees rather than a capitation fee are charged. In addition, partner colleges contribute through staff time and travel costs associated with the quality assurance function.

Mission, aims and objectives in relation to Access to HE provision

18 The Account states that 'The UU AVA operates within the context of the University's Mission and strategic priorities with the provision of Access courses being one strand of a comprehensive widening participation agenda', and this context is itself a reflection of Government priorities in this area. The University's Mission includes the objective 'to promote and enable access to and participation in higher education for the benefit of the community and elsewhere', and the Mission is supported by a number of strategic priorities stated in its Corporate Plan, including the priority 'to continue to respond effectively to fresh initiatives, particularly in regard to widening access, increasing participation and the promotion of opportunities for lifelong learning'. The review team considered that, while these priorities and objectives provided an appropriate context to support the broad development of Access-related activities by the University, the absence of any aims or plans which related specifically to Access to HE provision, and the emphasis on 'new initiatives' in the Corporate Plan, did not provide an assured place for the continuing development of Access provision for the AVA itself. In addition, the lack of any such AVA-specific objectives could result in a lack of clear direction for AVA activities, and a lack of clearly defined measures against which the AVA might measure its achievements.

19 The Account suggested that, as a result of the change in remit of the Access Courses Sub-Committee (ACSC) to include the promotion of Access courses, the AVA 'may now consider articulating specific aims, objectives and a strategy within the broader University agenda for widening access in collaboration with partner providers'. The review team sought to clarify the status of this statement with the ACSC, but was told that it was not a 'serious consideration'. In the absence of evidence in recent minutes of the ACSC or the Academic Policy Committee (APC) of any agreement or discussion about this possible development, or any other evidence of any preparatory steps, the team concluded that it did not yet have formal approval. The team concurred with the view expressed in the Account that the identification of aims and objectives for the AVA would enable it to 'develop a more focused and proactive role and image both within and outside the University' and to 'engage in a more structured review of its operation'.

Current client groups, target groups and targeting policies and strategies

20 The providers play an essential role in determining priorities for their own areas and curriculum development, and the AVA works with them to facilitate such developments. The AVA then requires that providers, when proposing new Access courses, provide evidence that they have taken account of demand and the needs of specific groups. A number of courses have been developed which provide for various under-represented groups (see above, paragraphs 14 and 15), and the AVA's structures have accommodated this development. The UU AVA has not, to date, however, adopted a strategic approach to the management of targeting in the development of new Access provision, and has not received the detailed statistical data about learner profiles that would be required to monitor the success of the AVA in improving the progression opportunities of particular target groups.

21 Until recently, the only data collected by the AVA in respect of Access provision has related to numbers of enrolments by course and by gender. However, more extensive data collection started in September 1999 in the light of recent QAA requirements. This has begun to stimulate interest, and generate some debate among providers in relation to which groups are, and are not, being attracted to Access courses. More comprehensive data should enable both providers and the AVA to articulate strategies in relation to targeting and recruitment.

Current and planned AVA developments

22 The review team learnt, through its reading of the AVA's Account and in discussion with the AVA's representatives at the review visit, of a number of matters of topical concern that were of interest to those working in the Access area in Northern Ireland. These were of varying importance and priority, and ranged from the implications of the development of the Northern Ireland Credit Accumulation and Transfer Scheme (NICATS) and national developments in Access, to progression both into and from Access courses; articulation with pre-Access provision; credit transfer from OCN-accredited provision; the further development of joint procedures with the Northern Ireland Open College Network (NIOCN); and the development of distance learning and key skills within Access courses. These are being taken forward by various bodies and at various levels, both within the AVA and outside it, although the absence of a set of aims and objectives or a strategic plan explicitly for the AVA (see above, paragraphs 18 and 19) impedes its ability to address future developments in a systematic way. The review team considered that, if it is to articulate and plan future developments successfully, and respond to external developments fruitfully, the AVA might need to consider the formal mechanisms by which such matters as those mentioned above can most effectively be addressed and influence its work.

Governance and committee structures

Legal status and constitutional position

23 Since it is the University itself that holds the AVA licence, the University is the AVA. The AVA has no formal constitution separate from that of the University. The AVA's legal personality is therefore that of the University. The University of Ulster is the only university in England, Wales and Northern Ireland which holds an AVA licence, rather than acting as one member in a consortium of equal HE and FE partners as is the common practice in AVAs elsewhere. In this respect, its constitutional model is exceptional.

Summary of committee structures

24 The University manages its AVA quality assurance procedures and other Access activities through its committee structures, and through procedures overseen by the ACSC. Responsibility for 'the planning, approval and standards of delivery of courses offered by the University and under validation arrangements with other educational institutions (including courses approved by the University as an Authorised Validating Agency)' lies with the APC, which makes recommendations to Senate on these matters, on the basis of recommendations received from the ACSC. These structures formally locate ultimate responsibility for the approval of 'kitemarked' Access courses recognised by the UU AVA with Senate.

Access Courses Sub-Committee

25 The Chair of the ACSC is appointed by the APC. Its remaining 16 members comprise one representative from each of the University's six faculties; three members of University staff engaged in Access delivery; five representatives from FE providers; and two representatives from NIOCN. It is serviced by staff from the University's Academic Office. The Account states that the ACSC usually meets three times a year, and minutes supplied to the review team showed that, during 1998-99, it met in November (for the Annual Review of Access Courses), in February and in May. Since the review, the University has informed QAA that the ACSC normally meets four times a year.

26 Though the terms of reference of the ACSC are couched in terms of its accountability to the APC, it is empowered to make certain limited decisions on behalf of that committee and it is, effectively, the main decision-making body for Access. The terms of reference are clear, and delineate in some detail its regulatory role in relation to initial evaluation, subsequent validation, and the monitoring, review and updating of Access provision. All matters for action and report are carefully documented and appropriately followed through by both committees. On the evidence seen and heard during the course of the review, the review team concluded that these processes were thoroughly and properly conducted.  

27 To date, the focus of the ACSC's work has been primarily on its regulatory obligations and activities, but its terms of reference have recently been amended to include a new responsibility 'to engage in activities which promote Access provision'. This addition has been made in response to QAA's requirements, and was approved by Senate in November 1999. The review team considered this was a positive indicator, and the association in the Account between this development and 'a more proactive approach to the promotion of Access provision' and 'the consideration of aims and objectives and a strategy for the UU AVA' suggests a welcome change of focus for the AVA. Inevitably, as it is a very recent amendment, this change has not yet been reflected in the Committee's procedures, and the team was unable to judge the likely extent of its impact for the AVA as a whole.

28 The review team considered, however, that if the wider changes alluded to were to be effected, the ACSC, in its current form, might have difficulty in fulfilling this additional role adequately, in addition to maintaining its current roles, and the AVA should consider whether its existing structures and processes would benefit from revision to enable it to carry out this function. As an example, the 'more proactive approach' in relation to promotion of Access provision might be more easily achieved with greater involvement of Access providers at both practitioner and senior management level. Similarly, the pursuit of the AVA's objectives might be more readily achieved if ownership of those objectives were ensured by a joint process of development between those who deliver Access courses and those who receive Access students in higher education. The team concluded that it would be of benefit to the AVA to consider these matters through a review of the modus operandi and balance of membership of the ACSC, and its relationship to other bodies, in particular the ICAF.

Inter-Centre Access Forum

29 The ICAF represents providers of all Access courses in Northern Ireland, including those delivered by The Queen's University of Belfast, which are not a part of the 'kitemarked' scheme. The current organisation came into being in July 1999, being reconstituted after attendance at meetings of a predecessor organisation, the Inter-Centre Access and Foundation Forum (the forum), had fallen substantially, following organisational and personnel changes in FE, and the retirement of its long-time organiser and Chair. It is described in the AVA's Handbook for the Quality Assurance and Delivery of Access Courses as 'a vehicle for the exchange of views and experience of those concerned with the day-to-day operation of these courses and encourages the development of best practice'. It is organised by and for providers, who spoke with enthusiasm of the possibilities offered by the ICAF. The University of Ulster has also demonstrated its commitment to maintaining the activities of the ICAF, with the provision of a 'pump-priming' grant of £500.

30 The Account notes that the ICAF is expected to provide a vibrant forum for the discussion of issues of common concern to Access practitioners'. While its exact terms of reference have not yet been determined, a draft proposal was being planned for presentation to the ICAF's spring meeting, its proposed activities including staff development; conferences; general raising of awareness of issues relating to widening participation; greater inclusion of a range of agencies involved in access-type activity; lobbying and promotion; the dissemination of good practice across Northern Ireland; as well as some involvement in quality assurance matters. The Account also notes that 'Through the activities of the Forum the UU AVA would hope to encourage providers of non-kitemarked Access courses to seek the kitemark' and, during the review, a number of groups emphasised the potential of the ICAF to fulfil a generally developmental function for Access, within Northern Ireland. Representatives of The Queen's University of Belfast, indicated their interest in improved links and closer working, particularly in relation to issues of equivalence, and saw the ICAF as the forum within which this might be pursued. This range of intended activities for the ICAF is ambitious and has the potential to be of considerable benefit to Access providers and practitioners across Northern Ireland. Clearly, the extent to which the ICAF will be able to achieve its goals will depend on factors both within and beyond its control, not least the commitment of the individuals involved and the resources available to it. In the review team's meeting with representatives of the ICAF, members of the Forum spoke of the need to build structures that would allow it to have continuity, recognising from prior experience the vulnerability of an organisation which depends on goodwill and the energies of individuals. At the time of the review, the ICAF was looking at the way in which it connected with the formal structures of the AVA, and the resources which might be available to support it.

31 It was clear that, in the past, the predecessor organisation had performed a valued role in providing an opportunity for practitioners to come together to exchange views, but that it had never had a tight constitution or formal reporting or accountability line. The review team was informed that the ICAF had recently been discussing the possibility of reporting to the ACSC through the minutes of the ICAF's regular business meetings, but that the details of how this would operate had not been worked out. This suggested that a more formal relationship was intended but had not, at that point, been established. The fact that the Chair of the previous forum had also been a member of the ACSC, and a member of the University's academic staff, had provided a useful channel of communication by which practitioners' views might be conveyed to the AVA's formal structures, but this cross-membership was not established as principle of membership of either body. The current Chair of the ICAF is also a member of the ACSC, but this overlap of membership is apparently equally serendipitous. While the ACSC has asked the ICAF to be responsible for nominating the five FE representatives on the ACSC, suggesting a more formal relationship, membership of the ICAF itself is not stipulated in the membership of the ACSC, nor is a place explicitly reserved on the ACSC for the Chair of the ICAF. It would therefore have been possible in the past, in principle, for both bodies to have acted entirely independently and, at the time of the review, there were no established principles of membership or reporting, or terms of reference which described any obligations of one body to the other. Reviewers were told in more than one meeting by University representatives that the ICAF was nothing to do with the University and that it was meant to be, and indeed was, separate from the University. These responses strongly suggested that the ICAF lay outside of the formal structures of the AVA.

32 The University has since represented to QAA that it is not true that the ICAF lies outside the formal structures of the AVA, since it reports formally to the ACSC, and is asked by the Sub-Committee to debate matters and report back on the views expressed by the Access practitioners, although it is still described as a 'free-standing body'.

33 In the light of this, the review team concluded that there was insufficient clarity about the status of the ICAF within the AVA and its relationship, in particular, to the ACSC. If it were intended to be a part of the formal structures of the AVA, this was not clear to members of the ICAF. The team also observed that, if it were going to be relied on as a mechanism through which the AVA was going to be able to deliver any part of its wider plans or agenda for development, then its position in relation to the formal structures of the AVA would need to be clarified and its functions more clearly established. This is especially so where there is a potential overlap with the responsibilities of the ACSC, for example in one of the purposes of the ICAF listed in the Account: 'to ensure the quality and standards of Access provision among providers'. It is also likely that it will need administrative support to enable it to achieve some of the current proposed aims, and if this is to be secured by the AVA, it will also need to be made explicit.

Organisational structures

Operational and administrative arrangements

34 While the effective operation of its AVA functions is supported by a number of the University's central departments and structures, administrative arrangements for the AVA are mainly the responsibility of the Academic Registrar's Department, and are primarily located in the Academic Office. The administrative support within the Academic Office for this area of work comprises an administrative assistant and a clerk/typist. These staff are responsible for the co-ordination of the AVA's activities, for advising and servicing its committees, and for extensive liaison internally with academic and support departments across the University as well as with course providers and external agencies. Most of the tasks related to the University's AVA function are carried out by the administrative assistant.

35 The Academic Office is involved in all aspects of the AVA's processes, from course planning through to annual and periodic review. This involves both providing advice and support to course teams in the preparation of documents, as well as the administration of processes. The Academic Office is responsible for arranging and servicing evaluation panels and, following the panel, for compiling a report of the meeting, ensuring that conditions and recommendations are recorded and subsequently followed up, and that a definitive document is lodged with the Office. The Academic Office maintains contact with course teams during the year, and is also responsible for producing guidance material, updated on an annual basis, such as the Handbook for the Quality Assurance and Delivery of Access Courses, to assist providers in the processes of course planning, validation and review.

36 All reports from course directors are scrutinised when they arrive in the Office, and the administrative assistant identifies matters of concern to inform the decision-making process of the ACSC in its annual course review role. Following the meeting, a report is compiled for onward transmission to the Academic Policy Committee, and any concerns are followed up to ensure that all are satisfactorily addressed, and are checked before the next annual review.

37 Academic Office staff clearly play an important role in these procedures. In particular, the administrative assistant has had a key role in ensuring not only the smooth administration of the quality assurance operations of the AVA, but also in providing valued support to practitioners.

Communication with providers

38 The communication process involves many departments and individuals throughout the University. The AVA communicates directly with providers through the Academic Office, which liaises with them both formally and informally. The administrative assistant has been able to use her knowledge and experience in this area, to put providers in contact with each other so that they can share good practice and assist each other with specific issues of concern, thus fulfilling an informal networking function as well as her more formal role.

39 As well as the work undertaken by the Academic Office, Registry Office, Examinations Office and Finance Office, all of which have roles in respect of the administration of Access courses and the implementation of the AVA's quality assurance procedures, University faculties are also involved, particularly through the functions of the University Assessors. The University Assessors are members of the University's academic staff, nominated by the faculty with which the course is associated, 'to act as the "link" person between the University and the institution offering the course'.

40 The Account describes the role of the University Assessor as 'key...in liaising between the institution and the University, providing advice on course developments and University procedures and in monitoring standards', and he or she is expected to sit on the course committee for the course. Their role in relation to quality assurance is described more fully in paragraphs 52, 53 and 63.

41 The Account comments that the quality of documentation from providers has improved over time, but that compliance with deadlines, matters of accuracy, and internal arrangements in relation to authorisation and endorsement of proposals still give some cause for concern, and attributes some of these procedural inadequacies to 'an institution's internal procedures for monitoring quality'. Although, as the Account records, the University has taken measures to improve the situation by suggesting (in two successive years) that 'colleges should consider nominating one member of non-teaching staff as the contact with the University for all matters related to franchised (including Access) courses', 'only one college has responded to this suggestion'. The Account also makes reference to its intention to address these concerns by 'promoting good practice...' and 'reinforcing the importance of such procedures...'. The review team would suggest that, if change to institutions' procedures is needed in order to resolve these difficulties, some fuller engagement at the institutional level, perhaps through the involvement of senior college personnel in the AVA's structures, may be of benefit.

Data management, collection and analysis

42 Data available for the review covered the period 1994-95 to 1998-99 and included cohort information by course and by gender; information on student performance; and career destinations of students. Because it has so far been University policy not to require new courses and those undergoing periodic review to complete annual course review forms (the source of the data), information on those categories of courses was unavailable to the review team. The absence of this data has made it difficult for the AVA to undertake a meaningful statistical analysis of all its activities. In future, comprehensive data will be required from all providers on an annual basis in the format specified by QAA, which will also give a more inclusive learner profile.

The development, validation and evaluation of Access courses

Regulations

43 The AVA has a set of standard regulations for Access courses. The Account lists the purposes of these regulations as: 'to ensure that regulations for Access courses comply with University of Ulster regulations for Certificates and Diplomas'; 'to assist practitioners in drafting regulations for their courses by producing a template from which they could work'; and 'to ensure consistency in the production of course regulations for Access courses'. This provides a strong framework for the regulation of Access courses, within the University's overall framework, contributing to consistency across courses. Within this framework, any course seeking Access 'kitemark' approval must conform to the University's standard requirements and regulatory arrangements for University Certificate courses (with some minor modifications). The system for the development and validation of Access courses adopted by the AVA is thus the system used by the University as a whole, and providers seeking the 'kitemark' for proposed courses will have to ensure that their courses meet the requirements for the University's own awards. The requirements are clearly laid out in documentation and include a modular structure which adheres to the University's credit and study hours requirements.

Development and validation of new provision

44 An institution wishing to introduce a new course contacts the University's Academic Office and, following advice and discussion, prepares a Course Proposal document which must be submitted to the ACSC by the end of March of the calendar year preceding the proposed introduction of the course. Following approval of the proposal, a more detailed standard University Course Evaluation document is prepared. An evaluation and recognition panel is appointed and visits the providing institution before the end of April of the year in which the course is due to start. The panel's report, including conditions and recommendations relating to the recognition of the institution, the award of a University Certificate and the 'kitemark' for the course, is submitted to the ACSC which in turn makes recommendations to the APC.

45 This system is thorough and well documented, and the University's validation requirements provide a rigorous and clearly articulated set of standards. In addition, the University's Academic Office provides much helpful procedural guidance and support at all stages. The regulatory emphasis and long timeframe for the validation process enable a commendable rigour and a clear template for course design.

46 The AVA allows joint accreditation of Access courses with NIOCN and, if the provider chooses this option, NIOCN will also be contacted for advice to ensure that documentation presented complies with OCN accreditation requirements. The review team heard from providers who had been through this process that some advantages were perceived in describing provision in terms of learning outcomes and OCN credits, and that benefits for students followed. Others reported, however, that the additional workload involved in preparing the information required by NIOCN, as well as that required by the UU AVA, discouraged such submissions.

Course length and structure

47 The standard course length and structure is that which has been in existence since 1973, which places Access courses within the University's modular structure with 120 credit points at level A. Although the minimum requirement for University Certificates is 60 credits at level A, all approved Access courses currently carry 120 credits. This credit rating implies 1200 study hours, and, as the Account explains 'Access Certificate courses validated by the UU AVA are expected to comprise 1200 hours of notional student effort rather than the 500 hours set by the Quality Assurance Agency as a minimum requirement'. The Handbook for the Quality Assurance and Delivery of Access Courses explains that, with a semesterised system, for full-time courses 'This amounts to some 36-42 hours of study per week.' Course completion in one year, however, is currently a possibility only on the small number of courses which are offered on a full-time basis and, as the Handbook also notes, 'The normal pattern of delivery is for students to complete the course over two academic years part-time.' The Account notes that additional flexibility has been built in to some courses by extending the period over which courses can be completed, and cites an example of a course which allows up to five years for course completion.

48 Although the Initial Criteria for the Planning of New Courses specifies that course proposals should both 'normally involve a minimum of 500 hours [study]' and 'fulfil the criteria for an award of the University (if sought)', the review team was told that no course had ever been presented which required less than 1200 hours, and the possibility of approval of course with fewer hours of study was therefore untested. It was acknowledged that, technically, it would be possible to approve for 'kitemarking' a course which offered significantly fewer hours, although the expectation that courses would comprise 1200 hours, as well as established practice, were evidently influential in determining the course length of submissions.

49 The importance of the University Certificate for progression (see above paragraphs 11 -13) is also influential in maintaining courses at this length and, in a meeting with Access Course Directors, the review team was given an example of a provider who had been considering proposing a course with fewer hours but, in preliminary discussions, had been persuaded that, because of the importance of the University Certificate as a standard admissions requirement, students on such a course would be at an extreme disadvantage.

50 The current identification between a 'kitemarked' Access course and the University Certificate course brings the benefits of a well-tried and trusted model to all Access courses. Undoubtedly, this model has proved successful in preparing students for higher education and providing a progression route for mature students. Nevertheless, in practice, this association appears to have the effect of placing restraints on the development of certain kinds of alternative model for Access programmes.

51 The review team's particular concerns relate to the adoption of the 120-credit model as the norm for their approved Access courses. The implications this has for the required length of students' study will be likely to provide a strong disincentive to certain groups of mature students, who will be anxious to progress to HE as soon as they are able, and who may have commitments of work or family which would prevent their being able to pursue a full-time course of this intensity. This is not to say that current courses do not provide an appropriate preparation for HE, nor to deny that some students need or benefit from a course of this length. However, experience elsewhere demonstrates that it is not always necessary to require Access courses to be of this length in order to provide a successful preparation for students seeking progression to HE.

52 The University has explained that, in comparison with courses elsewhere, this model provides an especially good grounding because it incorporates a significant proportion of work that elsewhere might be regarded as 'pre-Access', a view supported by NIOCN. If course success is determined in terms of outcomes, it should be possible for some potential students to benefit from a course which does not require so much study at the lower level, and could therefore require fewer hours of study. The review team would therefore suggest that the AVA should actively explore alternative models of a shorter course length for those able to benefit from such a course. Although this might be awarded outside of the University's current framework of awards, it might also be possible to award a University Certificate based on an alternative 60-credit model. At all events, it would be important for the integrity of the Recognition Scheme to ensure that such 'fast-track' courses did not provide an end qualification which was at a lower level, or in any way inferior to, the traditional 1200-hour courses.

Management, evaluation and review of courses

53 Courses are expected to have management arrangements consistent with University practice, including a named course director, a course team or committee and a mechanism for staff/student consultation. All Access courses which are not based in the University have a University Assessor appointed from a relevant faculty of the University, who sits on the course committee.

54 The Assessor, in addition to acting in the liaison role described earlier in this report, has a responsibility 'to act as an adviser to the course committee on University procedures and practices which affect or which enhance the operation and management of the course, and to ensure that the standards and quality of the course accord with the level of the award'. In addition to their advisory role, Assessors' specific duties include monitoring the selection of applicants and entry standards; the quality of staff appointments and staff development policy; the quality of course delivery and development, and of resources; and assessment. All courses also have an external examiner, appointed by the University, who attends the course examination board. There are guidelines for all the key roles and the Account points to the enhancement of the guidelines for University Assessors, in particular, indicating that 'a new booklet incorporating comprehensive guidelines and best practice is being produced'. University Assessors interviewed during review meetings welcomed the forthcoming production of fuller guidelines for their role.

55 The ACSC is involved in the periodic review of all Access courses during their final year of approval, through establishing panels and submitting recommendations to the APC. In addition, each November the ACSC constitutes itself as the Annual Course Review Panel for the formal review of the overall operation of Access courses on the basis of a detailed annual report from each provider. The process by which issues are identified and any action to be taken is thorough and properly recorded, and responsibility is clear for following up matters from individual course evaluation. The report of the review meeting is submitted to the APC and recommendations are transmitted as appropriate to the University Senate.

56 The Annual Course Review is the one occasion during the year when all practitioners and University Assessors are brought together to discuss courses, to monitor quality, to promote good practice, and to address wider issues of common concern. The event's usefulness for information-sharing was highlighted by various participants in review meetings, who noted that an additional benefit of the evaluation and review activities was that wider issues and areas for potential development could be identified. The Account notes, however, that the majority of time at the Annual Course Review tends to be taken up with 'individual expositions by course directors' and, with the growth in the number of Access courses, there has been limited time available at this event to undertake effectively all the activities such a meeting might wish to support. The Account reports that the ICAF intends, from 1999-2000, to hold one of its formal meetings at the conclusion of the Annual Course Review meeting and that this 'should allow greater opportunity for issues raised in the annual course review to be debated'. As such a meeting had, at the time of the review, yet to take place, the efficacy of this process had still to be tested. In spite of the apparent intentions, discussed earlier, of the ACSC to require reporting from the ICAF's meetings, as this process had not been established at the time of the review, there was some uncertainty as to the mechanisms by which the outcome of such debate by the ICAF would be formally considered, or how any recommendations of the ICAF would be progressed or subsequent actions monitored.

57 From the information available during the review about all of the AVA's evaluation and review procedures, it was apparent that the regulatory and quality assurance processes are rigorous and well administered, within the University framework.

Assessment, moderation and award of certificates

58 There are standard assessment regulations for UU AVA Access courses, which are clearly set out in relevant documentation. They include regulations for module size and credit value, as well as regulations covering progression and condonement. There have been some minor modifications to allow for adjustments to modular components in new courses while retaining compliance with the University's overall credit requirements for a programme.

59 The range of assessment methods which students on Access courses experience foreshadows the range of assessment methods to be encountered in the HE context with a balance of continuous assessment and examination methods. Former Access students reported that assessment procedures were clearly explained to them and considered that assessments had adequately prepared them for methods used in HE. Course documentation revealed a broadly similar approach between courses, with some variations arising from subject or curriculum specialisms. External examiners' reports also noted satisfaction with assessment methods and consistency of students' achievement across courses within their remit.

60 Marking and grading are also carried out within the University's framework, including the requirement to use percentages to grade student work. Module marks usually provide the basis for calculating the overall grade for the course attained by the student, and, as conditional offers for places at the University of Ulster are usually based on percentage grades, so the overall percentage grade is an important factor for students. A student achieving an identified threshold percentage is awarded a commendation and this is noted on the student's certificate. In the case of most Access courses, with the exception of the Certificate in IT Studies and Professional Development for Women, the threshold for a commendation is now 70 per cent while for other University Certificate courses, the threshold is 60 per cent.

61 The ACSC took the decision to recommend raising the percentage required for award of commendations in October 1999, and the Account records that 'The Academic Policy Committee accepted the case for the higher standard of 70% for a commendation in an Access Certificate.' The review team was informed that the ACSC took this decision in response to the reports of some external examiners, which had suggested that too many commendations were being awarded, and as a means to prevent any devaluing of the commendation. From information available during the review, there was no evidence that the AVA had pursued other avenues to address this concern or had explored the reasons for the large number of commendations being awarded to Access students (such as an investigation into standards of marking) before this decision was taken. The University considers that, since progression decisions are based on percentage marks, students are treated equitably in terms of progression. While this may generally be the case, the team noted in the extract which had been provided from the University of Ulster Undergraduate Prospectus for Entry 2000, that six of the courses listed stipulated 'Commendation' as the level of performance required for applicants from Access courses. The review team also considered that this inconsistency between the assessment of different Certificate courses might be representing students' achievement unfairly within the framework for awards, and would recommend that the AVA should re-consider this position.

62 External examiners, most of whom are appointed to more than one course, work to the University's Code of Practice on External Examining, and their role includes approval of examination papers, consideration of standards of assessment, attendance at meetings of boards of examiners and the submission of a report. University Assessors are also usually appointed to more than one course and have a role in ensuring consistency of approach and standards.

63 External examiners' and assessors' reports are fed into course team meetings and into the annual review. External examiners' reports are made on a pro forma, but a standardised approach has yet to be implemented for assessors' reports; this will form part of the intended guidelines for assessors which the AVA is planning.

64 It is the responsibility of the Board of Examiners to 'determine the results obtained by candidates', to make recommendations to the University for awards, and to forward to the Academic Registrar lists of successful candidates. The parchment awarded to students has not, to date, displayed the identity of the 'kitemark', or any indication of its recognition by a body external to the University. The majority of courses continue to carry the original 'Foundation Studies' title and, as none uses 'Access' in its title, the word does not appear on certificates either. The review team was informed that it is intended that certificates will carry the 'kitemark' logo from 2000.

65 The regulatory and procedural aspects of assessment and moderation are thoroughly carried out and clearly documented, externality is assured and standards are carefully monitored and maintained. The appointment of external examiners and assessors to more than one course, often to several, aids consistency of approach and outcome standards.

Learner experience, standards and progression

66 Former Access students confirmed to the review team that student feedback and evaluation on various aspects of course management was facilitated by either formal or informal consultative mechanisms. University Assessors, who visit a course twice per year, can feed back advice and comments during, as well as at the end of, the course, and those met by the review team expressed a good understanding of, and relationship with, the courses for which they were responsible. For their part, course directors expressed appreciation and understanding of the assessor's role.

67 Courses are required to have mechanisms for student representation, and for staff/student consultation, and these are evidenced in course documentation. Students' views are sought as part of the periodic review process, and are communicated through it to the ACSC; the effectiveness of the various mechanisms is monitored through the annual course review process. Former Access students interviewed during the review expressed satisfaction with their ability to comment on course management and cited various examples where concerns about practical matters, such as the provision of facilities, raised by students had been addressed by course teams.

68 Of students completing the course, something in the region of 54-58 per cent are identified as progressing to higher education in each of the last three years, with the slightly higher rate occurring in the most recent of those years. While the review teams appreciates the particular difficulties of local circumstances, these progression rates are low relative to other AVAs. Although the AVA records in its Account, in relation to the figures for the last three years, that it is 'pleased' that 14 per cent have progressed into employment, and finds it 'gratifying' that 12 per cent have entered further education and training, it might be seen as disappointing that so many students, having undertaken a course specifically designed for progression to higher education, are then either unable or choose not to use it for this purpose.

Conclusions

69 The University of Ulster is the only higher education institution in the UK which holds an AVA licence, and this AVA is, in consequence, an exception within the framework for Access Courses recognition. The AVA provides a mechanism by which the University can work in collaboration with FE providers to develop and approve courses, although this is not formalised through the joint ownership and shared responsibility between HE and FE which is characteristic of the consortium model of AVA common elsewhere. It is also one of the small minority of AVAs which remain as single institution AVAs, the University of Ulster being the only higher education institution involved, although there are some links at an informal level with The Queen's University of Belfast.

70 As it is the University itself that holds the licence, the structures and procedures for AVA quality assurance are, therefore, those of the University. These structures and procedures are designed to achieve the careful regulation of courses, and to assure standards of student achievement, and, in relation to Access course provision, their operation is reliable and rigorous. In terms of initial recognition, course monitoring and the award of certificates, processes are clearly described, consistently applied and well understood. The AVA also derives considerable benefit from the support provided by the University's resources and systems, both in terms of committee structures and processes, as well as the functions of the Academic Office.

71 The aims and objectives of the AVA are also those of the University, and while these are not inappropriate, they do not provide any clear direction for the specific development of Access to HE provision. There has, however, been a recent change in the terms of reference of the Access Courses Sub-Committee to add responsibility for the promotion of Access courses to its regulatory functions, which will allow the AVA to develop a more proactive role in relation to the development of Access provision. There is also some suggestion that the AVA is considering developing specific objectives for the AVA itself, although details have yet to be worked out of the process for the development of objectives, and how this process might make use of the wider range of data which will be available to it in the future. This data should, however, allow the AVA to consider the effectiveness of targeting on Access courses more fully and systematically than has occurred hitherto, and contribute to the development of provision appropriate to the needs of under-represented groups.

72 The University values its AVA status and strongly supports the award of the Access 'kitemark' to its courses, which acts as an additional guarantee that approved courses are of national standard, and enables a small number of students from UU AVA courses to progress to higher education outside Northern Ireland. However, in general, the local credibility of Access provision is attributable to the fact that it carries the University's own imprimatur, rather than the Access 'kitemark'. The courses are not generally known as Access courses and the 'kitemark' is less well known within the local circumstances in which the AVA operates and is less significant for student progression locally, than is the University Certificate.

73 There is currently no distinction between the Access award and one of a number of the University's Certificate awards, nor has such a distinction ever been explicitly made by the University. This established University Certificate provides a particular model for Access courses, which expects courses to conform to a certain course length which is more than twice the length of the minimum required by the Recognition Scheme. While the development and recognition by the AVA of Access provision which might not conform to these norms is a technical possibility, the AVA has not sought to develop courses which use a different model. Aside from the question of whether this provides comparability with Access provision in other parts of the UK, the absence of alternative, shorter courses by which students might achieve the same ends could exclude potential mature students, for whom time is always a premium and whose circumstances often do not allow full-time study, from progression to higher education.

74 The University of Ulster AVA is the only AVA in Northern Ireland and, as such, it performs a valuable role in providing for the progression to higher education of mature students with few prior qualifications. Its background and the context in which it operates, previously described in this report, are unique. In terms of its experience and expertise as a validating body, and the robustness and rigour of quality assurance procedures, it provides a secure framework for the award of 'kitemarked' Access certificates. In terms of its structure and ownership, however, the UU AVA does not conform to the usual expectations of the Recognition Scheme. The recommendation that the AVA's licence should be renewed is made in order to allow it to continue to offer students in Northern Ireland the opportunity to benefit from the provision of recognised Access courses. This recommendation is made, formally acknowledging that UU AVA would be permitted to operate as an exception within the Scheme. Exceptional status is granted for the standard term of licence of six years. At the end of this period, the AVA's exceptional status will not be extended.

Recommendation to the ARLC

75 The review team recommends that University of Ulster AVA be granted a conditional renewal of licence with conditions to be met by the dates specified below.

Conditions

76 Subject to the approval of the ARLC, UU AVA's licence is renewed on condition that the AVA:

i establishes a process of strategic planning, specific to its work in relation to Access to HE courses, which;

• involves both providers of Access courses and those who receive Access students in higher education;
• develops aims and strategic objectives for the AVA, including those relating to targeting;
• includes mechanisms to monitor the achievement of objectives;

ii reviews the membership, modus operandi and terms of reference of those committees responsible for the development and quality assurance of Access courses, with reference, in particular, to;

• more even representation of further and higher education members on the ACSC;
• clarification of the status and role of the ICAF, and its formal relationship to the ACSC;

iii develops and actively promotes models of Access provision which allow students to qualify for the 'kitemarked' Access certificate with fewer hours of study than the current 1200 hour norm;

iv discontinues the inclusion of the word 'commendation', or any other allusion to grades awarded, on 'kitemarked' Access certificates;

v takes steps that will bring its structure, and the type of Access provision which it approves, into line by 2006 with those generally operated elsewhere in the UK, and demonstrates some progress to this end by September 2003. Steps taken should include attempts to involve more fully other institutions of higher education, both within and beyond Northern Ireland in the AVA's work; and the promotion of an understanding within the University of the meaning and value of the 'kitemarked' Access certificate as an adequate and nationally recognised qualification for entry to higher education.

(Conditions i - iv to be met by 1 April 2001; condition v to be met by 1 September 2003.)

Recommendations

77 The review team recommends that UU AVA re-considers the value of the use of commendations and, if they are deemed to have continuing value, to ensure that the level of achievement required for the award of a commendation on an Access course is no higher than that which is required for its award on other equivalent courses.