Enhancement Led Internal Subject Review

Update to initial ELISR process

In June 2008 the Scottish Funding Council issued the Circular SFC/30/2008 “Council Guidance to higher education institutions on quality”. The ciricular informs higher education institutions of changes in the Council's guidance on issues relating to quality assurance and enhancement of learning and teaching, arising from the outcomes of the Joint Quality Reviw Group. In order to comply with the Funding Council guidelines the following changes are proposed to the initial GCU Enhancement Led Internal Subject Review process (approved in June 2003):

• The reviews should consider the impact of central and school based student support activities in enhancing the student experience
• The reviews should consider the experience of international students both on and off campus
• The views of the student representatives on the School Boards, Programme Boards and Student Staff Consultative Groups should be sought on the Self Evaluation Document
• The conclusions of the report and associated action plan must be made available to the students within the School

Process

The process will follow a five-year cycle and will take place at School level or at some other level of aggregation appropriate to the School’s portfolio. As far as is possible, the programme approval/re-approval process will be subsumed within ELISR. The Quality Office will be responsible for the organisation and facilitation of the review process.

Characteristics of the review process

Reviews will:

• promote dialogue on areas in which quality might be improved, identify good practice for dissemination within the institution, and encourage and support efforts to reflect critically on practice
• take full account of student feedback
• provide an objective review of provision based on an understanding of national and international good practice
• take full account of benchmarks and the QAA Code of Practice and, where appropriate, the requirements of professional and statutory bodies
• take full account of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework
• consider the effectiveness of annual monitoring arrangements and follow-up actions
• consider the impact of central and school based student support activities in enhancing the student experience
• consider the experience of international students both on and off campus

Scope

• the student experience
• taught provision at all levels
• CPD activity
• research-student supervision
• the extent to which research/scholarly/professional activity informs the curriculum
• collaborative provision
• central and school based student support
• international students both on and off campus
• any other provision leading to the award of credit
• knowledge transfer and consultancy

Process

• preparation of a self-evaluation document by the area being reviewed
• collation of documentation
• review event
• production of a review report
• follow-up action

The Self Evaluation Document

The self-evaluation document is a statement which demonstrates that the School has evaluated the following, in a constructively self-critical manner:

• the appropriateness of the academic standards it has set for its provision
• the effectiveness of the curriculum in delivering the aims and the intended outcomes of the provision
• the effectiveness of assessment in measuring attainment of the intended outcomes
• the extent to which the intended standards and outcomes are achieved by students
• the quality of the learning opportunities provided for students
• the success of the School’s quality enhancement planning
• the success of the School in implementing the University Learning, Teaching, and Assessment Strategy
• the extent to which research/scholarly/professional activity informs the curriculum
• the effectiveness of research-student supervision
• student engagement and the student experience in the School
• the international student experience both on and off campus
• the effectiveness of central and School based support in enhancing the student experience
• the success of the School’s CPD provision
• the level of knowledge transfer and consultancy

Self-evaluation should discuss both the strengths of the provision and areas where improvement is necessary, as perceived by the School. The document is an opportunity for the School to demonstrate how the strengths of the provision identified in previous subject reviews or accreditation events have been built upon, and how any areas for improvement identified have been addressed. Where areas for improvement remain, plans for addressing these via the School’s enhancement plan should be summarised. Reference points for the evaluation will include benchmark statements, the QAA Code of Practice, the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework, and the requirements of professional and statutory bodies. Further guidelines on the content of the self-evaluation documentation are given in Appendix 2(b) of Section 2 of the Quality Assurance and Enhancement Handbook.

The student representatives on the School Boards, Programme Boards and Staff Student Consultative Groups should be given the opportunity to comment on the final draft of the document before it is submitted to the Quality Office. The views obtained should be added to the document as an appendix.

The Quality Office will provide guidance on the process of preparing the self-evaluation document.

The Review Event

The time taken for the review event will be determined by the extent of the provision being reviewed but will normally last at least three days and no longer than five. An appropriate senior academic will chair reviews, normally a Dean.

Review Panels:

• must include cross-School representation
• must normally include appropriate academic and professional external peers and other stakeholders (as appropriate)
• must include student representation
• must include a member from Learner Support
• must include a member from the Caledonian Academy
• may include other groups as appropriate to the subject area

Care must be taken to ensure that a sufficient number of externals are appointed to the panel to adequately cover the subject provision in the timeframe available.

Before the Review Event

The Head of Learning, Teaching and Quality will be the point of contact with the School prior to the event. The draft self-evaluation document will be submitted to the Quality Office six weeks prior to the review event. The panel will receive the document not later than twenty working days prior to the event.

Panel members will submit any comments they may have, including requests to see any additional documentation during the event, to the Quality Office at least two weeks prior to the review.

The documentation provided for the event will include:

• external assessors’ reports
• annual monitoring statements
• biennial monitoring statements
• quality enhancement section of School Plans
• progression/retention data
• programme specifications
• programme handbooks

The Chair of the panel, in conjunction with the Quality Office, will confirm the final timetable for the process at least two weeks prior to the review.

Event structure

The length of the event will be determined by the extent of the provision being reviewed and the extent of the approval and re-approval activity subsumed within the process. The description below assumes a three day process. In the case of longer reviews, the activity within the first day may be extended to either two or three days.

Where programme approval/re-approval is subsumed within the ELISR process, the documentation specified in Appendix 4(c) and/or Section 6.2 will require to be submitted to the Quality Office at the same time as the self-evaluation document.

The review event will seek to assess the claims made in the self-evaluation document. The principal means of assessment testing shall be in meetings with staff, students, and recent graduates and in the review of any additional documentation requested.

Day 1

The beginning of the process will concentrate on programme approval and review. These processes are detailed in Sections 4 and 6. Each programme approval or re-approval panel will contain at least one member of the ELISR panel. This panel member’s task will be to evaluate the programme provision, and feed this information back to the main panel. In the event that the review process contains no programme approval or re-approval, the middle portion of the process will concentrate on the evaluation of the subject provision.

Day 2

The focus of Day 2 will be for the panel to consider the outcomes of the programme approval and re-approval processes, the review of any additional documentation requested by the panel and beginning of the programme of meetings.

Day 3

By the end of the third day the review team will have come to an agreed set of conclusions which can be shared with the School. The review report will follow normally within twenty working days of the conclusion of the event.

The Review Report

The report in draft form will be circulated to panel members for comment before being passed to the School (within twenty working days) for comment on factual accuracy. The School will be given five working days to comment at which point the report’s status is confirmed.

The review report will have a narrative on the success of the School in addressing the main headings of the self-evaluation document. The report will also identify areas of good practice and areas which require attention. The report will be prefaced with an executive summary of the conclusions.

In the event that the area being reviewed disputes any of the contents of the report, the dispute will be referred in the first instance to the Director of Quality. If a resolution is not possible, the matter will be referred to the Principal in her role as the Chair of Senate.

Follow-up Action

Within one month of the production of the review report the School will be required to produce a response in the form of an action plan which will be initially considered and approved by the Chair of the Panel.  Any action plans required by support departments will be included as an Appendix. The report and associated action plan will then be considered and approved by the Learning and Teaching Subcommittee on behalf of the Academic Policy Committee and Senate.  In the event of any serious issues arising from the report, the Academic Policy Committee will draw these issues to the attention of Senate.

The conclusions of the report and the School action plan must be made available to the students within the School at this point. This should be done via Blackboard.

Six months after the review, the Chair of the Panel, Director of Quality and Dean of School will meet to discuss progress on the approved action plan (LTSC will be informed at that stage if there are any problems with action plan implementation).  Further follow-up will take place after twelve months and thereafter the progress of the action plan will be monitored through the quality enhancement section of the School Plan.

Framework

The full framework for the Enhancement-Led Internal Subject Review process is outlined in Section 2 of the Quality Assurance and Enhancement Handbook. This section also includes further definition of enhancement and key questions (Appendix 2(a))

Last updated: 19-Feb-2010