section photograph

Applications for the grant of Foundation Degree-awarding powers

Guidance for applicant further education institutions in England

Introduction

1. This paper sets out the procedures for making applications for the grant of Foundation Degree-awarding powers in England. These notes of guidance and accompanying criteria have been approved by the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, the Higher Education Funding Council for England, the Learning and Skills Council and the Privy Council Office.

2. Section 19 of the Further Education and Training Act 2007 empowers the Privy Council to specify institutions in England within the further education sector as competent to grant Foundation Degrees. These further education institutions (FEIs) are those incorporated under Section 15 or 16 of the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act or designated under Section 28 of the same Act. In considering applications for such powers, the Privy Council seeks advice from the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills. In turn, the Secretary of State seeks advice from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA).

3. The Secretary of State maintains criteria against which applications are considered. In advising on applications, QAA is guided by the relevant criteria and the associated evidence requirements. QAA’s work in this area is overseen by its Advisory Committee on Degree Awarding Powers (ACDAP), a sub-committee of its Board of Directors.

General principles

4. Appendix 1 sets out and explains the criteria against which an application for the grant of Foundation Degree-awarding powers will be considered.

5. An FEI that wishes to award its own Foundation Degrees will be required to demonstrate that it meets the relevant criteria set out in Appendix 1. In particular, it must be able to show the effectiveness of its present regulatory and quality assurance arrangements and its capacity to meet the expectations on academic standards and quality management as set out in the national Academic Infrastructure1. The Foundation Degree Qualification Benchmark, which is part of the national Academic Infrastructure, is included as Appendix 2.

6. In seeking Foundation Degree-awarding powers, FEIs should be able to demonstrate that they have had no fewer than four consecutive years' experience, immediately preceding the year of application, of delivering higher education programmes at a level at least equivalent to Level I of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (FHEQ) published by QAA.

7. Scrutiny by QAA determines whether or not the applicant FEI is competent to exercise powers to award Foundation Degrees. The FEI must clearly demonstrate that there can be public confidence, both present and future, in its systems for assuring the academic standards and quality of its Foundation Degrees.

8. The criteria are designed to establish that the applicant FEI is a well-founded, cohesive and self-critical academic community that can demonstrate firm guardianship of its standards. To this end, QAA will be judging, through its examination of the evidence provided, and against the criteria, the extent to which an FEI can engender public confidence in its capacity to maintain the academic standards of the Foundation Degrees it offers. While some of the evidence that FEIs will provide will be quantitative, some will also be qualitative. All evidence will be subject to peer judgements by senior members of the academic community.

9. In all cases, QAA will consider applications on their individual merits and make a thorough assessment of the applicant FEI’s ability to maintain quality and standards.

10. The criteria make clear that an applicant FEI will need to demonstrate that it can guarantee the quality and standards of provision for students enrolled on its Foundation Degrees, wherever and however that provision is delivered; whether that is work-based learning, at another educational institution or by distance or e-learning methods. Specifically, the QAA will scrutinise the delivery methods that an applicant FEI uses or intends to use and the processes in place for monitoring the quality of provision for those elements of its Foundation Degrees which are delivered outside of the FEI environment. For example, the QAA will look at:

  • whether an FEI enrols significant numbers of Foundation Degree students who are then taught in another FEI which does not have the power to award Foundation Degrees (see paragraphs 55 and 56);
  • whether an FEI enrols students who are taught in an overseas institution (see paragraphs 55 and 56); and
  • whether work-place learning and assessment are closely monitored and quality assured.

11. Applicant institutions will also need to demonstrate that they have agreed and are promoting clear progression routes for learners wishing to proceed to a course of higher-level study on completion of the Foundation Degree. The QAA will need to be satisfied that the institution’s academic management is sufficiently robust to ensure that progression routes are and will be established and promoted both now and in the future. Progression routes or articulation agreements will need to take account of the guidance on progression set out in paragraphs 28–34 of the QAA’s Foundation Degree Qualification Benchmark statement (attached to this guidance at Appendix 2).

12. In particular, the institution will be expected to put forward proposals to demonstrate what it intends to do to secure that any student to whom it awards a Foundation Degree has the opportunity to progress on to at least one particular course of more advanced study. Progression routes should be agreed when each Foundation Degree programme is established, and should identify the link(s) between the Foundation Degree and other qualification(s). Such links may be to qualifications awarded by higher education institutions and/or by professional and other educational bodies. Institutions awarding Foundation Degrees will normally guarantee progression to at least one bachelor’s degree with honours, with the expectation that this should not normally exceed 1.3 years for a full time equivalent student in England. Alternatively, progression may be to an appropriate professional qualification or other qualification at level 6 in the National Qualifications Framework.

13. Progression may be to higher level qualifications awarded by higher education institutions and/or by professional and other educational bodies.

14. Membership of a Lifelong Learning Network does not in itself demonstrate that the applicant institution has agreed progression routes in place for all its Foundation Degree programmes.

15. Agreed progression routes are not expected to provide Foundation Degree students with a guarantee of a place on any specific higher level course. Progression routes are intended to signpost possible pathways for learners who wish to progress on to further study following completion of a Foundation Degree. The decision as to whether or not to admit a particular student remains the prerogative of individual institutions, and this guidance is not intended to place any obligation on institutions in this respect.

16. When an applicant institution is assessed for the award of Foundation Degree-awarding powers, the QAA will take a view as to the likely future performance of the institution’s academic management and, in particular, whether the institution can be relied on to renew progression arrangements or seek new ones if the old ones should lapse. The six-year ‘probationary’ period that the Privy Council will be advised to impose in the first instance on an institution successful in acquiring Foundation Degree-awarding powers (see paragraph 56 below) will be important to test the institution’s development and maintenance of progression arrangements.

Making an application

17. All applications for the grant of Foundation Degree-awarding powers should be submitted by the chair of the FEI’s governing body to the Senior Clerk to the Privy Council, Privy Council Office, 2 Carlton Gardens London SW1Y 5AA.

18. Applications should take the form of a critical self-analysis prepared by the applicant FEI, prefaced by a formal letter of application from the chair of the FEI’s governing body. The self-analysis should describe, analyse and comment clearly and frankly on the effectiveness of the means used by the FEI to satisfy itself that it is able to meet the criteria relevant to the powers being sought, as set out in Appendix 1. Although it is for FEIs to determine how they structure their self-analysis, close reference should be made to the relevant criteria and supporting ‘evidence requirements’.

19. The critical self-analysis should be accompanied by a list of the evidence used by the applicant FEI to test whether its systems and processes are operating as intended and to judge whether it is discharging effectively its responsibility for quality and standards in respect of the powers being sought. All of the documents cited as evidence by the FEI should be available to QAA upon request. The FEI is encouraged to supplement its self-analysis with ‘off-the-shelf’ documents (for example, prospectuses, strategic and operational plans, teaching quality handbooks, and staff handbooks) to help QAA acquire a full understanding of the FEI and its structure and function.

20. Institutions should also include comments from their validating partner(s) in their application so that these can be considered as part of the initial scrutiny (see paragraph 30 below). However, if these comments are not supportive it does not necessarily mean that the assessment process will not commence. QAA would still wish to discuss the application with the FEI's validating partner(s) in the interests of obtaining a full and frank appraisal of the perceived state of readiness of the applicant organisation for Foundation Degree-awarding powers.

21. The critical self-analysis will need to include a statement setting out how the applicant institution proposes to secure opportunities for progression to at least one course of more advanced study for any person awarded one of its Foundation Degrees. A course of more advanced study could be an honours degree, an appropriate professional qualification or a Level 6 vocational qualification. Before an Order granting Foundation Degree-awarding powers to an FE institution can be made, the Privy Council must have received such a statement, and must consider that the proposals are satisfactory and are likely to be carried out. This requirement is provided for by Section 19 of the Further Education and Training Act 2007. When preparing this statement, it may be helpful for applicants to refer to paragraphs 28 to 34 of the Foundation Degree Qualification Benchmark statement (Appendix 2). It should be noted that the provision of such a statement does not place any obligation on an institution to guarantee progression for any individual student from a Foundation Degree to a course of more advanced study.

22. Experience suggests that an effective critical self-analysis is likely to be some 60 pages in length, although there will be no penalty for shorter or longer submissions.

23. FEIs should submit the application to the Privy Council Office and a copy to the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS).  QAA will request further copies (normally 30) of the application from the FEI after the DIUS has approached it with a formal request for advice. The self-analysis remains confidential to QAA and those directly concerned with consideration of the application.

24. FEIs should also submit evidence to the Privy Council Office that they have consulted their students about whether they should seek to award Foundation Degrees, how that consultation was carried out and the outcome of that consultation.  The Privy Council Office will pass on the results of the consultation to the DIUS who will, in turn, inform QAA when seeking its advice.  Although an FEI will be expected to have carried out a consultation before the application will be considered, it is not necessary for the results to indicate support for the proposals.

Timing of applications

25. It is for each FEI to determine when to submit its application for the grant of Foundation Degree-awarding powers.  FEIs may wish to bear in mind that the first stage in QAA’s process for scrutinising applications is consideration by ACDAP (see paragraphs 29–33 below). ACDAP normally meets at quarterly intervals in mid to late March, June, September and December each year. QAA will normally need to receive both the request for advice from the DIUS, and the full application from the FEI, at least three weeks before the meeting of the Committee at which it is to be considered.

26. FEIs are strongly advised to approach QAA for informal discussions before lodging a formal application for Foundation Degree-awarding powers. QAA is willing to meet FEIs to discuss proposed applications at an early stage to ensure that they have a clear understanding of the criteria, documentation requirements and scrutiny processes.

The scrutiny process

27. The application scrutiny process has several stages. These are outlined in the sections that follow.

28. Before seeking advice from the QAA, the DIUS will seek the views of the Learning and Skills Council (or the relevant successor body) on the financial sustainability and risk assessment of an FEI. In the light of the advice given, the DIUS will decide whether to seek advice from the QAA.

Consideration by ACDAP

29. On receipt of a request for advice from the DIUS, QAA will inform the FEI of the arrangements for coordinating the processing of the application.

30. The application will be considered initially at the next available meeting of ACDAP.  ACDAP will decide whether there is a case for considering the application further, in the light of:

  • the documentation submitted by the applicant FEI;
  • a preliminary synoptic report on the application by ACDAP officers; and
  • where appropriate, comments received from validating partner institution(s).

31. If the Committee decides that the application should receive further consideration, QAA will make arrangements to undertake a detailed scrutiny of the applicant FEI, and will advise the FEI accordingly.

32. If the Committee decides that the applicant FEI has not made an adequate case for further consideration of its application, QAA will advise the DIUS and the FEI will be informed accordingly.

33. Exceptionally, ACDAP may commission an exploratory visit to the applicant FEI to examine specific matters arising from the initial documentation. Such visits will normally be undertaken by two assessors and the ACDAP Committee Secretary, and will result in a report to the next available meeting of ACDAP. In the light of the report, ACDAP will decide either to proceed with a detailed scrutiny, or to advise the FEI to undertake further development work before proceeding with its application.

Detailed scrutiny of the applicant FEI

Appointment of assessors

34. Where ACDAP decides to proceed with a detailed scrutiny, QAA will appoint a small team of assessors. Usually the team will consist of three assessors. The role of the assessors is to collect evidence on the application. In selecting assessors, QAA will seek to balance their academic seniority, experience of institutional operations, and understanding of the role of FEIs in delivering higher education.

35. Applicant FEIs are invited to advise the Agency of any perceived serious conflict of interest among the assessors, that might compromise the integrity of the process

Co-ordinating officer

36. Once ACDAP has agreed to proceed to detailed scrutiny, the Agency will appoint a co-ordinating officer - a member of the Agency’s staff.  This officer will arrange a briefing visit to the applicant FEI to discuss the nature and likely duration of the scrutiny process; key internal meetings (see paragaph 37 below) scheduled to be held during the anticipated period of the scrutiny; and the composition of the team of assessors.  Operational requirements will also be discussed in the course of such a visit.

The scrutiny

37. The detailed scrutiny will include:

  • review of documentation made available by the applicant FEI;
  • observation of formal meetings, including governing body meetings, internal committee meetings, validation/review events, and examination boards;
  • structured discussions with staff and students;
  • visits to work-based learning sites; and
  • consideration of external perspectives on the operation of the FEI, through structured discussions with external interest groups and scrutiny of reports arising from external programme/institutional-level review activities.

38. The detailed scrutiny process will be managed by the co-ordinating officer and regular monitoring reports will be submitted to ACDAP by the Committee Secretary.

39. The precise nature and length of the detailed scrutiny will vary according to the particular circumstances of the applicant FEI.   FEIs should be aware that the scrutiny process is both intensive and extensive. The scrutiny of applications for Foundation Degree-awarding powers is likely to extend for at least one complete annual cycle of academic activity.

40. In considering applications, QAA will make best use of existing evidence about the applicant FEI’s quality and standards. To that end, reports by QAA and other relevant external bodies will be made available to assessors. Information from the FEIs, and from awarding higher education institutions, will form an important part of the evidence base for the scrutiny of an FEI.

41. Though not a requirement, the applicant FEI may see merit in the establishment of an external advisory group to offer advice and guidance on organisational development, both as part of the application process and subsequent to it.  FEIs that see benefits in establishing such a group may wish to bear in mind the important contribution that can be made by representatives from their validating institution(s) or other external bodies.

Reporting

42. The detailed scrutiny will culminate in a final report to ACDAP by the assessors. The assessors will not make a recommendation on the application, but will offer peer-referenced views on the detail of the FEI’s operations in the light of the individual criteria set out in Appendix 1. They may also identify matters for further consideration by ACDAP.

43. On the basis of the assessors’ final report and its subsequent discussions, ACDAP will formulate its advice on the application.

44. Where the final report raises matters for further consideration or clarification, ACDAP may decide to convene a sub-panel of its members to undertake a short and focused visit to the FEI, prior to formulating its advice. Most sub-panel visits will be of one day’s duration and will normally involve meetings with governors, senior managers, teaching and other staff, students and relevant external interest groups. The visit will result in a further report to ACDAP. On occasion, ACDAP may wish to supplement the membership of a sub-panel with additional external expertise.

45. When ACDAP has concluded its consideration of an application, it will make a report and recommendation to QAA’s Board. Subject to the approval of the Board, these will then be transmitted to the DIUS. The advice will be given in confidence. The Secretary of State will determine whether QAA’s advice should be disclosed to the applicant FEI. A final decision on an application, and the notification of that decision, is a matter for the Privy Council.  The assessors’ final report will be issued to the applicant FEI, once the Privy Council has notified the applicant FEI formally of the outcome of its application.

46. Where the intended method of delivery of provision outside the college environment is deemed to be unsatisfactory or undesirable, then the QAA is unlikely to recommend the FEI for Foundation Degree-awarding powers.

Feedback

47. QAA’s responsibility is to offer confidential advice to the DIUS. As a result, the detailed scrutiny process has important differences from other review activities undertaken by QAA and places some constraints on the nature of the interaction that it is possible to have with applicant FEIs. QAA is conscious, however, of the desirability of maintaining an effective and constructive dialogue with FEIs and the schedule of activities for the period of detailed scrutiny will, therefore, include provision for meetings between QAA’s co-ordinating officer and organisational representatives, to discuss progress and identify any matters requiring further clarification.

48. The applicant FEI will be provided with an opportunity to check the factual accuracy of the evidence cited in the assessors’ draft final report, prior to the submission of the completed report to ACDAP.   FEIs will normally be provided with the text not less than five weeks before the relevant meeting of ACDAP, and asked to inform QAA of any factual inaccuracies within no more than two weeks. QAA reserves the right to edit the text submitted to the FEI, to the extent necessary to protect the confidentiality of the process and the anonymity of those who have given evidence to the assessors.

Role of the validating institution(s)

49. Where an applicant FEI has one or more validating partner institutions, that is, institutions that award the Foundation Degrees delivered by the FEI, QAA will invite those institutions to offer comments on the nature of the operational relationship that has been established and a judgement as to the suitability of the FEI’s intention to seek Foundation Degree-awarding powers. As set out in paragraph 20 above, validating institutions will not have a power of veto over an application in this respect: negative comments will not necessarily invalidate an application, but will be considered by QAA as an element of the overall evidence submitted.

Costs

50. QAA cannot meet the costs of this activity from its other sources of income. It will therefore levy a charge on applicant FEIs for the costs incurred in scrutinising the application and providing advice to the DIUS. The charge will cover the direct costs of ACDAP and the assessors, and the associated staff and overhead costs incurred by QAA. Charges will be set at a level that recovers these costs. No surplus will be sought from the activity.

51. An initial charge will be made to cover costs incurred up to, and including, the assessors’ final report to ACDAP. Should any substantial additional expenditure be incurred, this will be charged at the end of the process. Since the amount of the remaining work may vary between applications, such further charges will be set individually.

52. Details of the QAA charges for the application for Foundation Degree-awarding powers are available from the QAA.

53. Before submitting applications, FEIs should consider carefully the internal resource costs arising from the preparation and subsequent consideration of the application.

Subscription to QAA

54. Once an FEI is awarded Foundation Degree Awarding Powers, it will be expected to subscribe to the QAA.  Details of subscription rates are available from the QAA.

Limitations to powers

55. If an FEI is successful in its application to the Privy Council, it will be granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers by an Order of Council.  However, Section 19 of the Further Education and Training Act 2007 gives the Privy Council authority to limit the Foundation Degree-awarding powers by making the Order subject to the following restrictions:

  • preventing an FEI from authorising another institution to award a Foundation Degree on its behalf; and/or
  • preventing an FEI being able to award Foundation Degrees to students not enrolled with the FEI at the time they completed the course of study for which the award is granted.

56. Based on advice from the QAA, the DIUS will recommend to the Privy Council whether an FEI should have restricted powers and whether the powers should be time limited. The Privy Council are likely to determine that Orders granting Foundation Degree-awarding powers should be time-limited to six years and should include the limitations set out in paragraph 55 in the first instance. Subject to a satisfactory QAA assessment at the end of this six-year ‘probationary’ period, the DIUS will advise the Privy Council on the scope of the powers to be awarded as set out in paragraph 55.

Re-application

57. QAA’s review of the use of Foundation Degree-awarding powers, at the end of the probationary period, will normally be based on evidence gathered during the routine periodic review of HE provision in FEIs, which takes place at least every five years. The current pilot of the Integrated Quality and Enhancement Review (IQER) process includes an assessment of how FEIs assure the standards of awards for which they have responsibility. Following the granting of Foundation Degree-awarding powers, the QAA will consider whether a modified version of this assessment process could be introduced, or whether an additional, separate, process will be required. In considering this question, the QAA will take into account the need to ensure both that the main purpose of IQER is not jeopardised, and that proper safeguards for the standards of Foundation Degrees are in place, and that the principles of Better Regulation are observed. If necessary, an additional visit to the FEI, six years after the award of powers, may be used to supplement the evidence available from IQER. QAA’s standard ‘causes for concern’ procedure will also be available to deal with any serious shortcomings that may emerge between routine reviews.

58. Having received advice from the DIUS, the Privy Council will determine whether to make a new Order granting Foundation Degree-awarding powers. Such an Order could again be time limited, or could be made indefinitely. The Privy Council will also take a decision as to whether the restrictions mentioned in paragraph 55 above should be applied to any new Order. These will be separate considerations, but may be informed by the same body of evidence. It should be noted that progression from limited to full Foundation Degree-awarding powers will not be automatic; re-applications will be considered on a case-by-case basis, following reassessment by the QAA.

Complaints and representations

59. Complaints relating to QAA’s processing of applications for the grant of Foundation Degree-awarding powers should be made in accordance with the procedures published on QAA’s website (www.qaa.ac.uk/aboutus/policy/complaints.asp).

60. QAA’s role in considering applications for the grant of Foundation Degree-awarding powers is to offer confidential advice to the DIUS. QAA and its committees do not themselves make final decisions about applications. Any complaints about QAA’s advice, or representations against subsequent decisions by the Privy Council, should be addressed to the DIUS and not to QAA.

Further information

61. Initial enquiries about the submission of applications for Foundation Degree-awarding powers should be made to the Secretary of ACDAP at the following address:

 

Dr Irene Ainsworth

Head of Degree Awarding Powers/University Title
Reviews Group
Quality Assurance Agency
Southgate House                                           
Southgate Street 
Gloucester 
GL1 1UB

Tel:  01452 557019
Fax: 01452 557011 
E-mail: i.ainsworth@qaa.ac.uk

or

 

Mr Nick Pack

Project Officer (Degree Awarding Powers/ University Title)
Reviews Group
Quality Assurance Agency
Southgate House                                           
Southgate Street 
Gloucester 
GL1 1UB

Tel:  01452 557039
Fax: 01452 557011
E-mail:n.pack@qaa.ac.uk

A schematic representation of the Foundation Degree-awarding powers scrutiny process

The foundation degree awarding powers scrutiny process

Appendix 1

Criteria for Foundation Degree-awarding powers

A: Governance and Academic Management

Criterion A1

A further education institution granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers is governed, managed and administered effectively, with clear and appropriate lines of accountability for its academic responsibilities. Its financial management is sound and a clear relationship exists between its financial policy and the safeguarding of the quality and standards of its higher education provision. As is generally the case for other organisations receiving degree-awarding powers that are not primarily a higher education institution, its principal activities are compatible with the provision of higher education programmes and awards.

Explanation

Foundation Degree-awarding organisations must be soundly based in all respects (constitutionally, managerially, financially and academically) so that there can be full public confidence in them and their Foundation Degrees. It is important that appropriate safeguards are in place to ensure that financial exigencies and other pressures do not jeopardise academic standards or the quality of programmes as specified in the programme specifications.

Evidence requirement

The applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that:

  • its financial planning, quality assurance, and resource allocation policies are coherent and relate to its higher education mission, aims and objectives;
  • its higher education activities take full account of relevant legislation, the UK Academic Infrastructure and associated guidance;
  • makes reference to the QAA’s Foundation Degree Qualification Benchmark which is part of the Academic Infrastructure. 
  • its higher education mission and associated policies and systems are understood and applied consistently both by those connected with the delivery of its higher education programmes and, where appropriate, by students;
  • there is a clarity of function and responsibility at all levels in the organisation in relation to its governance structures and systems for managing its higher education provision;
  • there is depth and strength of academic leadership across the whole of its higher education provision;
  • it develops, implements and communicates its academic policies and systems in collaboration with those who have responsibility for the delivery of its higher education programmes, and with relevant stakeholders;
  • its academic policies, systems and activities are monitored and reviewed and that appropriate and timely action is taken when deficiencies are identified;
  • its academic risk and change management strategies are effective;
  • it has in place robust mechanisms to ensure that the academic standards of its Foundation Degree awards are not put at risk; and
  • it has the capability of managing successfully the additional responsibilities that would be vested in it were it to be granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers.

B: Academic Standards and Quality Assurance

Criterion B1

An organisation granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers has in place an appropriate regulatory framework to govern the award of its higher education qualifications.

Explanation

The security of the academic standards of Foundation Degrees depends in large measure on the regulations which govern their award. These can be expected to cover a wide variety of topics ranging from the approval of degree schemes through to the conduct of student assessments and appeals against academic decisions. Many of them are dealt with in the Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education ('the Code of Practice') published by the QAA. Organisations that award Foundation Degrees are required to have in place a comprehensive set of regulations covering these matters.

Evidence requirement

The applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that:

  • the regulatory framework governing its higher education provision (covering, for example, student admissions, progress, assessment, appeals and complaints) is appropriate to its current status and is implemented fully and consistently; and
  • it has in prospect a regulatory framework appropriate for the granting of its own higher education awards.

Criterion B2

An organisation granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers has clear and consistently applied mechanisms for defining and securing the academic standards of its higher education provision, wherever, however and by whomsoever it is offered.                                        

Explanation

Organisations with Foundation Degree-awarding powers need to ensure that their qualifications meet the expectations of the Academic Infrastructure for higher education, published and maintained on behalf of the academic community in the UK by the QAA. Within the Infrastructure the different levels of higher education qualifications and their distinguishing features are described in the appropriate FHEQ. In order to meet these expectations, organisations seeking degree-awarding powers will need to ensure that they have appropriate and effective quality assurance structures and mechanisms in place. This is particularly important where elements of a programme are offered outside the college’s own environment. The public interest in the consistency and comparability of higher education qualifications requires that all degrees awarded by recognised degree-awarding organisations in the UK should at least meet the expectations of the FHEQ.

Evidence requirement

The applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that:

  • its higher education awards are offered at levels that correspond to the relevant levels of the FHEQ;
  • the management of its higher education provision takes appropriate account of the QAA's Code of Practice, relevant subject benchmark statements, national guidance on programme specifications, and the requirements of any relevant professional and statutory bodies;
  • in establishing, and then maintaining, comparability of standards with other providers of equivalent level programmes, it explicitly seeks advice from external peers and, where appropriate, professional and statutory bodies;
  • its programme approval, monitoring and review arrangements are robust, applied consistently, have at all levels a broadly based external dimension and take appropriate account of the specific requirements of different levels of award and different modes of delivery;
  • where its programmes are delivered outside the college’s own environment, appropriate and effective quality assurance mechanisms are used to ensure the maintenance of academic standards and quality; and
  • there is an explicit and close relationship between academic planning and decisions on resource allocation.

Criterion B3

The education provision of an organisation granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers consistently meets its stated learning objectives and achieves its intended outcomes.

Explanation

Organisations offering higher education awards are expected to consider carefully the purposes and objectives of the programmes they are offering. They are also expected to design their curricula and learning support provision in a way that will give diligent students the best chance of achieving the purposes and objectives and the necessary academic standards for the qualification being sought. Organisations offering higher education awards must have the means of establishing for themselves that their intentions are, in practice, being met.

Evidence requirement

The applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that:

  • its strategies for learning and assessment are consistent with stated academic objectives and intended learning outcomes;
  • relevant staff are informed of, and provided with guidance on, its policies and procedures for programme design, monitoring and review;
  • responsibility for amending or improving new programme proposals is clearly assigned and subsequent action is carefully monitored;
  • coherence of programmes with multiple elements or alternative pathways is secured and maintained;
  • close links are maintained between learning support services and the organisation's programme planning, approval, monitoring and review arrangements;
  • robust arrangements exist for ensuring that the learning opportunities provided to those of its students that may be studying at a distance from the organisation are adequate;
  • through its planning, approval, review and assessment practices, it defines, monitors, reviews and maintains its academic standards;
  • its assessment criteria and practices are communicated clearly to students and staff;
  • its assessment practices fully cover all declared learning objectives, learning outcomes and modes of delivery;
  • appropriately qualified external peers are engaged in its assessment processes and that consistency is maintained between internal and external examiners' marking;
  • the reliability and validity of its assessment procedures are monitored and that its assessment outcomes inform future programme and student planning; and
  • clear mechanisms are in place for use when a decision is taken to close a programme or programme element, and that, in doing so, the interests of students are safeguarded.

Criterion B4

An organisation granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers takes effective action to promote strengths and respond to identified limitations.

Explanation

An organisation that has powers to award its own Foundation Degrees must have in place the means of reviewing critically its own performance. It needs to know how it is doing in comparison with other similar organisations and have in place robust mechanisms for disseminating good practice; it must also be able to identify limitations or deficiencies in its own activities and take timely and effective remedial action when this is called for. This implies both internal and external elements in the periodic review of its activities.

Evidence requirement

The applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that:

  • critical self-assessment is integral to the operation of its higher education provision and that action is taken in response to matters raised through internal or external monitoring and review;
  • clear mechanisms exist for assigning and discharging action in relation to the scrutiny, monitoring and review of agreed learning objectives and intended outcomes;
  • ideas and expertise from within and outside the organisation (for example on programme design and development, on teaching, and on student learning and assessment) are drawn into its arrangements for programme design, approval and review; and
  • effective means exist for encouraging the continuous improvement of quality of provision and student achievement.

C: Scholarship and the pedagogical effectiveness of academic staff

Criterion C1

The staff of an organisation granted powers to award Foundation Degrees will be competent to teach, facilitate learning and undertake assessment to the level of the qualifications being awarded.

Explanation

The capacity and competence of the staff who teach, and who facilitate and assess learning, are central to the value of the education offered to students. Organisations awarding their own degrees have a crucial responsibility to ensure that students' chances of receiving a worthwhile education and securing the necessary academic standards for their Foundation Degree qualification are maximised by effective teaching. This includes a responsibility for ensuring that staff maintain a close and professional understanding of current developments in scholarship in their subjects and that structured opportunities for them to do so are both readily available and widely taken up. It also means that teaching for degree-level qualifications should reflect, in a careful, conscious and intellectually demanding manner, the latest developments in the subject of study. Organisations also have a responsibility for making certain that the assessment of their students is carried out in a professional and consistent way that ensures the maintenance of the academic standards of their degrees.

Evidence requirement

The applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that all teaching staff engaged with the delivery of its higher education programmes have relevant:

  • academic and/or professional expertise;
  • engagement with the pedagogic development of their discipline (through, for example, membership of subject associations, learned societies and professional bodies);
  • knowledge and understanding of current scholarly developments in their discipline area and at a level appropriate to a Foundation Degree and that such knowledge and understanding directly inform and enhance their teaching; and
  • staff development and appraisal opportunities aimed at enabling them to develop and enhance their professional competence and scholarship.

In addition, the applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that staff with key programme management responsibilities (for example, programme leaders and assessment coordinators) have relevant:

  • experience of curriculum development and assessment design; and
  • engagement with the activities of providers of higher education in other organisations (through, for example, involvement as external examiners, validation panel members, or external reviewers).

D: The environment supporting the delivery of Foundation Degree programmes

Criterion D1

The teaching and learning infrastructure of an organisation granted Foundation Degree-awarding powers, including its student support and administrative support arrangements, is effective and monitored.

Explanation

The teaching and learning infrastructure - all those facilities and activities that are provided to maximise students' chances of experiencing a worthwhile education and of obtaining the qualification they are seeking - is a means to an end. Organisations that award their own Foundation Degrees are expected to have in place mechanisms for monitoring whether their teaching and learning infrastructure is meeting stated objectives and for responding to identified limitations in a timely and effective manner.

Evidence requirement

The applicant organisation will be required to provide evidence that:

  • the effectiveness of its learning and teaching activities is monitored in relation to stated academic objectives and intended learning outcomes;
  • students are informed of the outcomes of assessments in a timely manner;
  • constructive and developmental feedback is given to students on their performance;
  • feedback from students, staff, (and where possible) employers and other institutional stakeholders is obtained and evaluated and clear mechanisms exist to provide feedback to all such constituencies;
  • students are advised about, and inducted into, their study programmes in an effective way and account is taken of different students' needs;
  • available learning support materials are adequate to support students in the achievement of stated purposes of their study programmes;
  • the effectiveness of any student and staff advisory and counselling services is monitored and any resource needs arising are considered;
  • its administrative support systems are able to monitor student progression and performance accurately and provide timely and accurate information to satisfy academic and non-academic management information needs;
  • it has in place effective and confidential mechanisms to deal with all complaints regarding academic and non-academic matters;
  • the staff involved with supporting the delivery of its higher education provision are given adequate opportunities for professional development;
  • the information that it produces concerning its higher education provision is accurate and complete; and
  • equality of opportunity is sought and achieved in its activities.

Appendix 2

The Academic Infrastructure

Foundation Degree qualification benchmark2

Preface

1. Foundation Degrees were introduced by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) in 2000 to provide graduates who are needed within the labour market to address shortages in particular skills. Foundation Degrees also aim to contribute to widening participation and lifelong learning by encouraging participation by learners who may not previously have considered studying for a higher level qualification.

2. Foundation Degrees are located within the Intermediate level of the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ) for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and are recognised as an award that would be generally equivalent to level 5 (of 8) within the National Qualification Framework (September 2004 version). Foundation Degrees do not however, represent an end of first cycle higher education qualification in terms of the Bologna declaration; further study and assessments are required to complete the first cycle, which in England, Wales and Northern Ireland is typically represented by the award of a bachelors degree with honours.

Qualification benchmarks within the Academic Infrastructure

3. A qualification benchmark describes the distinctive features of an individual qualification at a particular level within the FHEQ. It describes the qualification in terms of its particular purpose, general characteristics and generic outcomes, but it does not include subject-level detail.

4. A qualification benchmark should be regarded as an important reference point in setting and assessing standards, and should be considered alongside the other elements of the Academic Infrastructure.

5. The Academic Infrastructure provides a means of describing academic standards and assuring their quality, through use of a series of components that allow for diversity and innovation within academic programmes offered by higher education. The components of the Academic Infrastructure are:

  • the FHEQ;
  • subject benchmark statements;
  • programme specifications;
  • the Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education (the Code).

The components are not designed to be used prescriptively.

6. The FHEQ was developed through national consultations and agreement, and identifies a series of levels within which HE institutions locate their awards. The associated qualification descriptors exemplify the outcomes of the main qualification at each of the five levels within the framework (certificate, intermediate, honours, masters and doctoral).

7. Subject benchmark statements are written by specialists within academic communities; they describe the general characteristics, attributes, capabilities and standards associated with specific levels of award in a particular subject area.

8. Programme specifications are concise descriptions of the intended learning outcomes of a higher education programme. Each specification clarifies the knowledge, understanding, skills and other attributes a student will have developed on successful completion of that programme. It also provides details of teaching and learning methods, assessment and how the programme relates to the qualifications framework.

9. The Code sets out guidelines on good practice relating to the management of academic standards and quality. The sections of the Code include precepts (principles) and explanatory text that an institution should consider within its quality assurance processes.

10. This Foundation Degree qualification benchmark is designed to be used as a 'reference point'. It does not expect or require compliance and it should not be used to prescribe or to regulate. Rather, it should be used with other reference points to inform and clarify matters concerning purposes, expectations and achievements, and quality assurance.

11. Other documents that are likely to be of particular importance as further reference points for those concerned with the design, delivery and quality assurance of Foundation Degrees include:

  • the prospectuses on Foundation Degrees provided by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and for Wales (HEFCW);
  • the frameworks for Foundation Degrees developed by some Sector Skills Councils;
  • the Guidelines for preparing programme specifications (QAA, 2000);
  • the requirements of professional bodies, where relevant;
  • National Occupational Standards.

Further information on the use of QAA's reference points is available at www.qaa.ac.uk under Academic Infrastructure.

Introduction

12. At the request of the DfES, a Foundation Degree qualification benchmark (final draft) was developed and published, by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), in November 2002. This document is a revision of that draft and supersedes it.

13. This qualification benchmark describes the distinctive features of a Foundation Degree in terms of its purpose, general characteristics and generic outcomes. In doing so it provides a reference point to:

  • assist those directly involved in designing or validating Foundation Degree programmes;
  • provide general guidance for describing the generic learning outcomes for the Foundation Degree;
  • provide general guidance for strategies on teaching, learning and assessment;
  • support internal and external quality assurance;
  • help interested parties to understand the purpose, generic content and outcomes of Foundation Degree programmes; and
  • to answer the question: what are Foundation Degrees?

What are Foundation Degrees?

14. Foundation Degrees integrate academic and work-based learning through close collaboration between employers and programme providers. They build upon a long history of design and delivery of vocational qualifications in higher education, and are intended to equip learners with the skills and knowledge relevant to their employment, so satisfying the needs of employees and employers.

15. Foundation Degrees are designed to appeal to learners wishing to enter a profession as well as those seeking continuing professional development. They can also provide pathways for lifelong learning and the opportunity to progress to other qualifications. The qualification may be offered through flexible modes of learning, enabling learners to 'earn and learn' and accommodate the learning needs of different types of students.

16. The design and delivery of Foundation Degrees are likely to be informed by the Framework(s) for Foundation Degrees of appropriate Sector Skills Council(s). Although many Foundation Degree programmes are designed to meet the needs of the local employment market, some Foundation Degree programmes are targeted at national and international employment needs.

17. Foundation Degrees provide self-standing qualifications of specific value, but are also expected to provide for opportunities for further (life long) study which could take a number of different forms (e.g. professional body qualifications, higher level NVQs, etc). In addition, Foundation Degrees will normally link to at least one programme leading to a bachelors degree with honours.

18. Foundation Degrees thus have a range of distinctive characteristics not necessarily present in other qualifications at the Intermediate level, nor found in the initial parts of programmes that lead directly to bachelors degrees with honours.

The design of Foundation Degree programmes

19. It is important that the balance of intellectual and practical skills and the related opportunities to apply such learning within the workplace are considered carefully when designing a curriculum which has clearly defined intended learning outcomes, that are supported by the provision of experiences to enable these to be achieved.

20. Learning and work are closely interlinked within Foundation Degree programmes. Learning in the work place can take many forms and serves a variety of purposes. When designing Foundation Degrees it is important that consideration is given to the ways in which the work-based learning is appropriate to the particular needs of the relevant employment sector or type of employer, and how the programme helps to provide the knowledge and transferable skills needed for employment.

21. In Foundation Degree programmes, academic knowledge and understanding integrate with, and support the development of, vocational skills and competencies, taking account of the need for appropriate academic rigour. External reference points such as the FHEQ, the NQF, subject benchmark statements, National Occupational Standards, Sector Skills Council frameworks, and the HEFCE prospectus (HEFCE 00/27) are important reference points, and should be considered during the design and validation of Foundation Degrees.

22. Programme specifications for Foundation Degrees should include the intended learning outcomes, and the appropriate balance between intellectual and practical skills, and show that these are set appropriately for a qualification that falls within the Intermediate level of the FHEQ.

23. Authentic and innovative work-based learning is an integral part of Foundation Degrees and their design. It enables learners to take on appropriate role(s) within the workplace, giving them the opportunity to learn and apply the skills and knowledge they have acquired as an integrated element of the programme. It involves the development of higher-level learning within both the institution and the workplace. It should be a two-way process, where the learning in one environment is applied in the other. Work-based learning can be achieved through many forms, including full-time or part-time work, integrated work placements, and real work environments. Payment is not a defining characteristic of the work, and 'working' is in itself not sufficient. Work-based learning requires the identification and achievement of defined and related learning outcomes.

Defining characteristics of Foundation Degrees

24. The distinctiveness of Foundation Degrees depends upon the integration of the following characteristics: employer involvement; accessibility; articulation and progression; flexibility; and partnership. While none of these attributes is unique to Foundation Degrees, their clear and planned integration within a single award, underpinned by work-based learning, makes the award very distinctive.

Employer involvement

25. Foundation Degrees are intended to provide students with the knowledge, understanding and skills that employers need. In order to achieve this it is important that employers are fully involved in the design and regular review of Foundation Degree programmes. It is beneficial if employers are involved, where possible, in the delivery and assessment of the programme and the monitoring of students, particularly within the workplace.

Accessibility

26. Foundation Degrees are intended to increase access and widen participation into higher education with programmes of study that are designed with work based learning as an integral part of their programmes. The accessibility of Foundation Degree programmes should increase opportunities for learning since they can enable learners to 'earn and learn'.

27. Further education colleges can play an important role in the recruitment into, and the delivery of, Foundation Degree programmes. They can also provide valuable links with local communities, and the knowledge and skills needs of their employment markets.

Articulation and progression

28. Foundation Degrees are intended to make a valuable contribution to lifelong learning by providing access to higher education for learners from different starting points and with different entry qualifications, eg apprenticeships, access programmes, and NVQs. They can provide opportunities for progression to other higher education, including bachelors degrees with honours, professional qualifications, and/or higher NVQs.

29. It is important that recognition is given to the knowledge, skills and understanding that an applicant for a Foundation Degree has already developed. These may have come as a result of learning through work, that may have been paid or unpaid, and through other individual activities and interests. Such knowledge, skills and understanding can include certificated, non-certificated and experiential learning. It is important that rigorous arrangements for the accreditation of prior experiential and/or certificated learning (APE/CL) are established and fully used to accredit the variety of learning and to assist learners in their entry to Foundation Degree programmes. Further information on APE/CL is available in the Guidelines on the accreditation of prior learning (QAA 2004).

30. Clear routes that facilitate opportunities for successful progression from Foundation Degrees towards another qualification are an important feature of Foundation Degrees. Such routes should be established when Foundation Degrees are validated, and identify the link(s) between the Foundation Degree and other qualification(s). Such links may be to programmes validated by higher education institutions and/or by professional and other educational bodies. Institutions awarding Foundation Degrees normally guarantee progression to at least one bachelors degree with honours, with an expectation that this should not normally exceed 1.3 years for a full time equivalent student in England, and two years in Northern Ireland. Progression from Foundation Degrees to another qualification may require a bridging programme. Such arrangements, when established at validation, can ensure that learners progressing onto the next programme are adequately prepared.

31. The arrangements for progression, which are determined by the awarding bodies through their admissions policies and procedures, should be implemented consistently and fairly. The identification of explicit progression arrangements should be available to learners on Foundation Degree programmes through course handbooks and prospectuses.

32. In cases where a learner could gain additional professional accreditation and/or qualifications in the course of studying for a Foundation Degree, institutions should include the requirements of professional and vocational bodies as part of the validation process.

33. Foundation Degrees are intended to provide the knowledge and skills that are necessary to enable employees to be versatile and adaptable in progressing to and within work. Employability is a key aspect in Foundation Degree programmes and its inclusion should equip and assist learners to enhance their employment opportunities, and/or allow them to prepare for a career change.

34. Careers guidance is important in enabling learners to take responsibility for managing their own careers and lifelong learning. For more information on careers guidance see Section 8 of the QAA Code on Career education, information and guidance.

Flexibility

35. Flexibility on the part of the institution, the learner and the employer is central to many aspects of Foundation Degrees. It facilitates responsiveness to, for example, the needs of learners from a variety of backgrounds and to

the progressive and changing demands of employment. It is important that institutions delivering Foundation Degrees consider the range of requirements of the learners likely to enter their programmes. These requirements may include:

  • flexible delivery modes and study patterns, including full time, part-time, distance, work-based, and web-based learning, with the flexibility to study, within reasonable limits, when and where it best suits the learner;
  • flexible progression routes, including links with other professional awards and with at least one identified honours degree programme; flexible admissions requirements, including the establishment of effective APE/CL procedures to assist applicants from diverse backgrounds who may be able to demonstrate their suitability for entry onto a Foundation Degree in a variety of ways.

Partnership

36. Partnerships between employers, HEIs, further education colleges and Sector Skills Councils are central to the concept of Foundation Degrees, and vital in providing programmes that are relevant, valid and responsive to the needs of learners and employers. Effective partnerships, which are strategic and sustainable, should foster broad acceptance of the Foundation Degree, reinforce ownership of the qualification among all stakeholders and establish the currency of the award.

37. It is important that partnership agreements clearly identify the needs and expectations of all parties. Additional information on aspects of such partnerships is available through HEFCE (eg Indirectly funded partnerships: codes of practice for franchise and consortia arrangements HEFCE 00/54) and QAA (eg the section on the Code on Collaborative provision).

38. Each Foundation Degree must be validated and awarded by an institution with degree-awarding powers. It is this institution that has the responsibility for assuring the standards of the award, and also for ensuring that the quality of the learning opportunities leading to its awards are managed effectively, even when this is delegated to a partner. The institution will need to be able to satisfy itself that the terms and conditions under which their Foundation Degree was originally approved have been, and continue to be, met.

39. The successful delivery of Foundation Degree programmes can depend upon a range of partnerships that may include higher and further education institutions, employers and employer bodies, professional bodies, Sector Skills Councils, Regional Development Agencies, Learning and Skills Councils, and others. It is important that all involved recognise the primary responsibilities of the awarding HEI for the standards and quality of the degree programmes offered under its powers.

40. Students can have an important part in negotiating programmes of study to meet their own learning needs in both the work and academic learning environments. These learning needs can be achieved, with guidance and agreement from the institution and employer, through learning contracts.

Knowledge, understanding and skills

41. Foundation Degree programmes are designed to enable learners to benefit from the interpretation of ideas and the experience of practice, within the wider context of employment and one in which knowledge, understanding and skills are clearly integrated. By focusing on learning within a work context, that is underpinned by both vocational and academic understanding Foundation Degrees should demonstrate learning outcomes that are explicitly relevant to both employers', and perhaps also professional, needs. Furthermore, consideration of sustainability in the application of the knowledge, understanding and skills achieved should enable successful progression both within employment and to honours level or to other qualifications.

42. The generic outcomes identified below are taken from the descriptor for the qualification that has been used to represent the Intermediate level within the FHEQ. By comparison, holders of Foundation Degrees should be able to demonstrate:

  • knowledge and critical understanding of the well-established principles in their field of study and the way in which those principles have developed;
  • successful application in the workplace of the range of knowledge and skills learnt throughout the programme;
  • ability to apply underlying concepts and principles outside the context in which they were first studied, and the application of those principles in a work context;
  • knowledge of the main methods of enquiry in their subject(s), and ability to evaluate critically the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems in their field of study and apply these in a work context;
  • an understanding of the limits of their knowledge, and how this influences analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge in their field of study and in a work context.

Typically, holders of Foundation Degrees would be able to:

  • use a range of established techniques to initiate and undertake critical analysis of information, and to propose solutions to problems arising from that analysis in their field of study and in a work context;
  • effectively communicate information, arguments, and analysis, in a variety of forms, to specialist and non-specialist audiences, and deploy key techniques of the discipline effectively in their field of study and in a work context;
  • undertake further training, develop existing skills, and acquire new competences that will enable them to assume responsibility within organisations;

and have:

  • qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment and progression to other qualifications requiring the exercise of personal responsibility and decision-making;
  • the ability to utilise opportunities for lifelong learning.

43. The knowledge, understanding and skills associated with Foundation Degrees may be delivered through a diverse and innovative range of methods that will reflect the diversity of learners' needs. The providing institution's teaching and learning strategy should identify appropriate teaching styles and learning opportunities for Foundation Degree learners as well as elements that may require additional resources, for example the management of work-based learning.

44. Foundation Degree programmes should encourage lifelong learning by providing sufficient opportunity for self-directed learning and reflection. This may be achieved by supporting learners to develop action plans to assist the learning process, and demonstrate that their learning outcomes have been achieved

45. In the interests of lifelong learning students should be encouraged to use personal development plans, in conjunction with learning agreements where relevant, as a reflective learning tool throughout the programme. They should also be provided with a record of the learning and achievement in the form of a transcript.

46. Where learning contracts are agreed between the learner and the provider, they should refer to expectations regarding knowledge, skills and understanding.

Assessment

47. The assessment of each element of study within Foundation Degree programmes, including the assessment of work-based learning, should be specified at the time of validation. An assessment strategy should reflect the type of learning/learner and the nature of each element of study within the qualification. Assessment may include a variety of formal and informal, and formative and summative techniques, provided that they are all capable of rigorous testing and independent verification. Through the combination of assessment of work-based learning and other more traditional means of assessment, Foundation Degree can integrate a variety of delivery modes and assessments undertaken by institutions and employers.

48. Employers should, where possible, be involved in the assessment of work-based learning. Arrangements between institutions and employers should be specified fully at the outset of any partnership, and should include any training for employers that may be required in, for example, assessment procedures. Such arrangements should be reviewed regularly as part of the ongoing monitoring and review of the programme. In cases where employers are involved in the support of the learner and in their assessment it may be necessary to provide support in the form of mentoring or other types of professional development

49. The awarding institution and the provider are responsible for ensuring that all assessment, including that of work based learning, is applied consistently and is appropriate to the expected learning outcomes relevant to a qualification that is located within the Intermediate level of the FHEQ .

50. Appeals procedures and mechanisms to resolve disputes on academic matters should be explicit and available to all, including learners.

51. For further information and guidance see the sections of the QAA Code on Assessment of students and Placement learning.

Monitoring and Review

52. Employers should participate in the regular review of those Foundation Degree programmes that they are involved in. Review procedures should ensure that evaluation of the provision of all work-based learning is undertaken as part of the review, and involves feedback from all work-based learning providers. There should also be opportunities for the learners to comment on their work-based learning experiences, and their comments should be considered in annual monitoring processes. Additional guidance may be found in the section of the QAA Code on Placement learning.

1 The Academic Infrastructure comprises the two Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications (FHEQ), one for England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the other for Scotland; subject benchmark statements; programme specifications; and the Code of Practice for the Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education.

2 This document is the current text of the QAA’s Foundation Degree Qualification Benchmark statement, and is provided for information. No changes have been made in light of the proposals in the Further Education and Training Bill about the powers of Further Education institutions in England to award Foundation Degrees. It should be noted that some of the statements made in the Qualification Benchmark statement would become factually incorrect if these proposals were enacted. The document might therefore require revision at a later stage in order to make its statements fully consistent with the introduction of Foundation Degree-awarding powers for Further Education institutions in England. Any such revision would be made in the normal way following consultation led by the QAA with the relevant sectors and stakeholders.

TopTop