Introduction
A team of auditors from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) visited the University of Salford (the University) from 18 to 22 February 2008 to carry out an institutional audit. The purpose of the audit was to provide public information on the quality of the learning opportunities available to students and on the academic standards of the awards that the University of Salford offers.
To arrive at its conclusions, the audit team spoke to members of staff throughout the University of Salford and to current students, and read a wide range of documents about the ways in which the University of Salford manages the academic aspects of its provision.
In institutional audit, the institution's management of both academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities are audited. The term 'academic standards' is used to describe the level of achievement that a student has to reach to gain an award (for example, a degree). It should be at a similar level across the United Kingdom (UK). The term 'quality of learning opportunities' is used to describe the support provided by an institution to enable students to achieve the awards. It is about the provision of appropriate teaching, support and assessment for the students.
Outcomes of the institutional audit
As a result of its investigations, the audit team's view of the University of Salford is that:
- confidence can reasonably be placed in the soundness of the institution's present and likely future management of the academic standards of the awards that it offers
- confidence can reasonably be placed in the soundness of the institution's present and likely future management of the quality of the learning opportunities available to students.
In addition to the two judgements above, the audit team also produced commentaries on the University's arrangements for quality enhancement, collaborative provision, postgraduate research students and published information.
Institutional approach to quality enhancement
The University expresses, in the briefing paper, its view that it has 'an established and strategic approach' to enhancement which has been systematically taken forward over a number of years. It goes on to explain that it is putting effort into generation of an understanding of enhancement as 'deliberate planned actions' and is exploring how far its current practices meet this definition and how greater awareness of this definition can further improve the effectiveness of what the University does.
The change process that the University is currently engaged in, while as yet not completed, sees a new Pro-Vice Chancellor (Academic) taking responsibility for enhancement of the student experience, and chairing a new Learning, Teaching and Enhancement Committee. At the time of the audit the detailed responsibilities and support for this post were still to be decided when the appointee takes up their post.
The audit team was assured in meetings that the enhancement of the student experience and the new Learning, Teaching and Enhancement Committee functions had been fully mapped into the new structure but as yet little detail on implementation was available to the team as to where responsibility for enhancement, as previously carried out by two units, would be taken forward in the future.
Postgraduate research students
Research policy and procedures are determined on behalf of Senate by Research Committee and Postgraduate Research Studies Sub-Committee, chaired by the Pro-Vice Chancellor (Research) and the Director of Graduate Studies respectively.
All research activity, including postgraduate research programmes, is located in the nine Research Institutes. Postgraduate research students are formally based in Research Institutes and all supervisors are full members of Research Institutes. The Research and Graduate College provides central support and administrative functions for research and postgraduate activities; it includes the Postgraduate Office which has responsibility for postgraduate research student records and administration. Quality and progression across the postgraduate research student lifecycle are monitored at local level by Research Institutes and at institutional level through Postgraduate Research Studies Sub-Committee and the Postgraduate Research Award Board, both chaired by the Director of Graduate Studies.
Published information
Overall, the University publishes clear and accessible information for its students in printed form and, increasingly, on its website. Publicity materials from partner colleges that the audit team viewed stated clearly the locus of the University as the appropriate awarding body.
Students whom the audit team met supported the view that the centrally produced pre-entry published and web-based materials were generally comprehensive, helpful and accurate. The team looked at examples of programme specifications for both collaborative and non-collaborative provision and found them to be detailed and useful.
The audit found that reliance could reasonably be placed on the accuracy and completeness of the information that the University publishes about the quality of its educational provision and the standards of its awards.
Features of good practice
The audit team identified the following areas as being good practice:
- the range and depth of the Academic Audit Committee's investigations into the effectiveness of the University's policies and procedures, its independence in choosing areas for audit, and its authority and status as a committee of Senate
- University's action to ensure that the Academic Quality Assurance continues to be a robust and increasingly accessible foundation of its quality framework
- the establishment of the Academic Quality Standards Unit and its continuing work contribute significantly to the effectiveness of the University's management of standards and quality management and that the practice of reviewing the impact and effectiveness of new or significantly revised quality assurance procedures after the initial year is a feature of good practice
- the robust and thorough processes for the annual review of programmes, their oversight at school, faculty and institutional level, and the commitment to provide institutional level feedback on the issues identified from overview reports
- the identification of good practice in the induction of external examiners in one school leading to its adoption at university level
- the increasing range of student-related data and statistical analyses produced by Academic Quality Standards Unit that are available to the University, faculties and schools to assist in their monitoring, review and planning processes
- the steps the University has taken to improve its overview of interaction with professional, statutory and regulatory bodies at programme, school and faculty level
- the introduction and support of student liaison representatives in extending and increasing the effectiveness of the constructive engagement of students in the quality assurance process and quality enhancement
- the development and use of the summary Guidelines to the affiliation process for partner institutions
- the opportunities available to regional partner staff to access University-led staff development opportunities, particularly where these are encouraged through the appropriate joint board of study
- the regular updates for members of Partnership and Collaboration Sub-Committee on national issues and debates on higher education collaborative matters
- the Graduate Teaching Assistant scheme and its associated training programme
- the easily accessible and well laid out 'Student' and 'Staff' Channels on the University website
- the regular updating of the Procedures and Policies for Academic Quality Assurance: Programmes and Students (AQA) and in particular the current review of the Assurance as part of a wider University staff communications strategy.
Recommendations for action
The audit team recommends that the University consider further action in some areas.
The team advises the University to:
- in developing its new Senate committee structure in the 'Realising our Vision' project, retain its robust arrangements for the management of academic quality, including the current high level of professional support
- ensure that it has in place adequately robust arrangements to assure the quality of all its future collaborative activities.
- It is desirable for the University to:
- maintain the independence and thoroughness of its current arrangements for academic audit as carried out by the Academic Audit Committee
- extend the development of appropriate data collection and analysis processes relating to postgraduate taught students in the context of plans to develop postgraduate taught provision
- encourage the continuing improvements in the consistency of use of the virtual learning environment, especially within programmes of study
- develop further its approach to quality enhancement to ensure the dissemination of good and/or effective practice is more systematic and overt
- regularly update students studying in partner institutions on their entitlement to the use of University resources for learning and teaching
- ensure that a University framework is in place for the pedagogical staff development needs of partners teaching at higher education level with whom the University intends to establish strategic relationships
- clarify its entry regulations for postgraduate research doctoral degrees in the light of its current practice regarding entry requirements.
Reference points
To provide further evidence to support its findings the audit team investigated the use made by the University of the Academic Infrastructure which provides a means of describing academic standards in UK higher education. It allows for diversity and innovation within academic programmes offered by higher education. QAA worked with the higher education sector to establish the various parts of the Academic Infrastructure which are:
- Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education (Code of practice)
- frameworks for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and in Scotland
- subject benchmark statements
- programme specifications.
The audit found that the University took due account of the elements of the Academic Infrastructure in its management of academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities available to students.
>> Report
ISBN 978 1 84482 842 5
Top