Introduction
This guide is for student representatives, including course reps and students' union (SU) officers, or their equivalent, in higher education institutions (HEIs) in England and Northern Ireland. It will help you understand your role in institutional audit, which is the method used to review all HEIs by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA).
At the centre of the audit process is an emphasis on students and their learning. Therefore it is important that the audit is informed by student views. These views are represented in two ways, one through the submission of a student written submission (SWS) which is prepared by the student representative body, and the other is through meetings between the team conducting the audit and groups of students.
You will find out about the timing of your institution's audit by talking to your institution.
Timeline
Six months before the audit visit
Preliminary visit
An assistant director from QAA, who will coordinate your institution's audit, visits your institution to meet institutional representatives and SU officers, or equivalent.
This is an opportunity for you to learn more about what the process involves. The assistant director will answer questions about the audit and give guidance on the SWS, if you have decided to write one.
In order to get the most out of this meeting, it would be useful if you familiarised yourself with the Handbook for institutional audit: England and Northern Ireland, 2006 which is available on the QAA website (www.qaa.ac.uk).
10 weeks before the audit visit
The team conducting the audit will be made up of four or five senior academics and they need time to read the SWS as they prepare for the audit. The institution will be providing its briefing paper at this point so it is helpful if the SWS is also available.
The actual date of this deadline will be agreed at the preliminary visit.
Five weeks before the audit visit
Briefing visit
The audit team and assistant director visit the institution for three days to gather more information, to conduct three formal meetings, and to prepare the programme for the audit visit.
The SU officers, or equivalent will meet with the team and will be able to discuss the SWS and draw the team's attention to matters of interest. The team members will also be able to ask any questions that will help them understand your institution.
Audit visit
The audit team visits the institution normally for five working days, the assistant director joins the team for the final day.
The audit team meets with course/programme representatives to discuss issues pertinent to the audit. These discussions might be at an institutional level, or at a discipline level.
Two months after the visit
QAA sends a draft report to the institution so that it can check the accuracy of the factual content.
Six months after the audit visit
The final report is published.
What is the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education's role?
While HEIs themselves are responsible for ensuring they set appropriate academic standards and offer a good quality education, QAA's responsibility is to safeguard the public interest in sound academic standards of higher education awards. QAA achieves this by carrying out reviews of standards and quality in institutions.
What is meant by standards and quality?
The words 'academic standards' are used to describe the level of achievement that a student has to reach to gain an academic award (eg a degree). For similar awards, the threshold level of achievement should be the same across the UK.
Academic quality is a way of describing how well the learning opportunities available to students are managed to help them to achieve their award. It is about making sure that appropriate and effective teaching, support, assessment and learning opportunities are provided for them.
In institutional audit, both academic standards and quality are reviewed.
What is an audit?
Institutional audit is carried out by a team of academics who review the institution's quality and standards. They use their expertise and knowledge of higher education to do this. They also review what the institution does against a set of nationally-agreed reference points, known as the Academic Infrastructure. This consists of:
- the Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education
- The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland
- subject benchmark statements
- programme specifications.
More information about the Academic Infrastructure is available on the QAA website (www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure).
Before the audit visit, in addition to the SWS, the auditors look at the institution's briefing paper. This is a document that the institution produces about itself, setting out a mixture of facts and figures and self-analysis.
The audit team visits the institution for three days and, in that time, has three formal meetings, one with the head of the institution, one with senior members of staff, and one with student representatives.
The audit visit normally lasts five days, although each audit will be different. At the end of the audit QAA publishes a report on the audit team's findings, including the judgements it makes. The judgements are expressed as confidence, limited confidence, or no confidence in the institution's management of quality, and in the institution's management of standards.
Your institution will have been subject to an institutional audit previously, and it is likely that the student representatives in post at that time will have written a SWS. As the process has not changed significantly since the previous audit you may find it useful to see if there is a copy of the previous SWS, or go back to the audit report and see if any issues were raised that you could comment on.
How are the judgements reached?
To reach a judgement the audit team has to study the methods that the institution uses to manage the quality of the learning opportunities available and the standards of the awards. It does this in different ways, including:
- reviewing the information the institution publishes about its own awards
- reviewing institutional documents, such as policies and minutes of relevant meetings
- asking questions of relevant staff
- talking to students about their experiences
- exploring how the institution uses the Academic Infrastructure (see What is an audit? for details).
The audit team also gathers evidence by focusing on examples of the institution's internal quality assurance processes at work using trails. A trail may focus on a particular programme or group of programmes offered at that institution. Or, it may focus on a particular theme that runs throughout the institution's management of its standards and quality.
What is the role of students in our audit?
Student representatives are invited to produce a SWS and to be involved in meetings throughout the process.
- The SU officers, or equivalent, are involved in the preliminary meeting, the briefing visit, and possibly the audit visit, and are responsible for coordinating any student submission.
- Student representatives at the subject or course level are invited to attend specified meetings during the audit.
- Other relevant student groups, such as postgraduates, are invited to attend specified audit visit meetings.
What are the benefits of taking part in institutional audit?
The information you give to the auditors will help give them a full picture of your institution and make sure that accurate and useful judgements and recommendations are made.
The purpose of audit is to assure the quality and standards of higher education, vital for future and present students. By representing students in audit, you are playing a part in making sure the academic life of your student members is a continually improving experience.
When will our institution be audited?
Between 2007 and 2011 all institutions in England and Northern Ireland will have an audit. QAA does not publish the schedule because it changes over time. Each institution is given a lot of notice so your institution will be able to advise you when the audit is due.
What should we include in the written submission?
There is no formula for what the SWS should look like. The most important thing to remember is that there is information about your institution that only you can provide.
However, as the audit team's judgements are about the management of the quality of the learning opportunities available to students, and the management of the standards of the awards, there are some things that the team cannot take into account. Therefore, whilst it is useful to the team to know whether the student voice is listened to in committees, it is perhaps less useful to know about the floodlights on the football pitch.
To help you think about what it might be useful to include, you could consider the following.
- How accurate is the information that the institution publishes about itself, such as prospectuses, programme descriptors and advertisements?
- Do students know what is expected of them in order to be successful?
- What is the student experience as a learner like, including teaching and learning opportunities, support received and access to learning facilities?
- Do students have a voice in the institution and is it listened to?
Don't worry if you don't have the information to cover all these points, anything you tell the audit team about these areas is useful.
Whatever you include, you must explain how you compiled the SWS, who wrote it, and how far it has been shared and agreed with the student body as a whole. For example, if you have only included the views of full-time undergraduate students, you need to make this clear.
You should also make sure that the SWS doesn't include personal grievances or discussion of the competency of individual members of staff.
For more detailed information you can look at the report structure and headings in Annex B of the Handbook for institutional audit: England and Northern Ireland 2006. The Handbook is available on our website at www.qaa.ac.uk/reviews/institutionalAudit/handbook2006/default.asp
How do we start?
You may find that you already have a lot of information that could be useful when you first start to think about what you want to say and how you are going to say it. It might be useful to gather the information you have together so that you can see where there might be gaps. For example, student surveys organised by your institution, or the outcomes of the National Student Survey could provide a helpful starting point in generating particular points to be highlighted by you. As student representatives you will already know about the sorts of issues that are regularly raised with you and this may provide some useful pointers to issues you wish to raise. In addition, if you have a disabilities officer or an officer with responsibility for students from overseas, you may find that they have some useful input.
You may think about running your own survey of student views, but this is not an expectation of the audit team and you should be confident that such a survey will provide a sufficient number of responses to be representative of the students at your institution. It is difficult for the team to accept the findings of a survey that had a very small response rate, however beautifully the information is presented. Some targeted discussions with key individuals may be more useful in providing you with information than a more general survey with a poor response rate.
You might find it useful, when you sit down to start to write the SWS to think about the key messages that you want to give the team and then use the information you have to provide evidence to support those messages. So that, for example, if you want to comment on how well the student views are listened to you might wish to describe how student representatives are included in committees and discussions, but then go on to illustrate your point with a particular event or project where student views were sought, or could have been but were not. In this way the team will be able to understand how students are involved in processes within your institution.
How much detail should we put into our submission?
You should always make reference to the evidence upon which the views expressed in the SWS are based (for example, student surveys or feedback from student representatives). Giving evidence of your claims, such as reference to minutes of meetings, will help the auditors when they are making their judgements and writing their final report.
It is useful to remember that the team will have a lot of information to read, both from the institution and other publicly available documents. Therefore a short but focused SWS is better than a lengthy and rambling document. The team is not marking the SWS, just interested in the information contained in it, so there are no extra marks for colour or length!
Which students' views should be represented in the submission?
The audit generally looks at matters across the institution as a whole, so the opinions of all student groups will be relevant including, but not exclusively, undergraduate and postgraduate students, those on franchised courses, students who are part-time, mature students, overseas students and students with disabilities. Your institution will provide you with information on the scope of the audit.
You may find that it is not possible to reflect the views of some student groups and the audit team will understand this as long as you make it clear in your SWS whose views are being represented.
Can our written submission be confidential?
If you want to, you have the opportunity to keep your SWS confidential, subject to prevailing legislation.
Confidentiality will, however, restrict how your SWS can be used. The audit team needs to discuss issues, including those that you raise, with staff at your institution. It might be difficult to get useful information on something which you have included in your written submission if the audit team is not allowed to talk to staff about its contents. For this reason, QAA strongly recommends that you share the contents of your SWS with your institution.
If you do want the SWS to be confidential, you must make this clear on the front of the document.
How long is it likely to take to write?
How long it will take you to compile the SWS clearly depends on how much you want to tell the team. However, you should start the preparation after the preliminary visit so that it does not become a bit of a rush as the deadline approaches. This will also help if the preparation time overlaps with changes in the student representative body which is bound to happen in some cases.
Where can I go for help?
For each audit QAA allocates an assistant director who will be more than happy to provide any help and advice you need. If you have not already met them at the preliminary meeting, then your institution will be able to give you their contact details.
NUS with QAA run a number of events every year called Quality Takes Time. At these events we try to offer support to all student groups, whether affiliated to NUS or not, as they prepare for audit.
NUS also maintains a helpful website: http://www.officeronline.co.uk/quality; in addition the National Postgraduate Committee has some advice on including postgraduates in the audit (http://www.npc.org.uk). More general information is available from the NUS at education@nus.org.uk
What happens to the submission once it has been written?
The SWS should be sent to QAA 10 weeks before the audit visit. The final deadline will be agreed at the preliminary visit. The SWS will be read and considered by the audit team.
Is what we say going to make a difference?
Yes. The audit team considers all information given in the SWS and in meetings. The submission may not directly inform the final judgements that the audit team makes, but it could inform the types of questions the team asks throughout the audit.
The auditors have to interpret all of the information they are given, including the information given in the SWS and by students in meetings.
This may lead the team to find out something really good about how the institution works, or might lead it to something that students are concerned about. For example, if students don't feel that their opinions are valued by the institution, or conversely if they think the institution really listens to them, this is likely to become apparent through talking to the students and through reading the SWS.
What happens if the SWS conflicts with the institution's briefing paper?
The audit team uses both documents to inform the lines of enquiry that it will make during the visit. Conflicting information might inform an area for further scrutiny.
What are the outcomes of audit?
After each audit, QAA publishes a report. This consists of a summary, the findings of the audit and the main report. Audit does not result in any numerical 'scores'.
The audit team makes judgements on:
- the confidence that can be placed in the institution's management of the quality of available to students
- the confidence that can be placed in the institution's management of the standards of its awards.
The first judgement is an expression of confidence: either 'confidence', 'limited confidence' or 'no confidence'. The report also gives recommendations for action for the institution to take that might be 'essential', 'advisable' or 'desirable'.
The audit team will also comment on:
- the arrangements for maintaining the quality and standards of postgraduate research programmes
- the approach to implementing strategies for enhancing the quality of an institution's educational provision
- the accuracy and completeness of an institution's published information.
Do we see the report before it is published?
No, the SU, or equivalent, do not see the report before it is published. The reason the report is sent to the institution before it is published is to check for accuracy of information. It would not be in anyone's interests for the report to be published with inaccurate information in it.
What happens if the audit team have limited or no confidence in our institution?
If the report expresses limited confidence, it is published along with a programme of follow-up action. The institution then has to let QAA know what it is going to do about this plan, and give a progress report after three months. If there are still concerns after 18 months, QAA will visit the institution again.
Where a judgement of no confidence is given, the institution must also give quarterly progress reports on their action plan. After 18 months QAA will conduct a short follow-up visit. If there are still concerns after 18 months, QAA may bring forward the next audit.
Further information
All publications are available on QAA's website: www.qaa.ac.uk
Top