annual monitoring process - beds.ac.uk web viewfields are required to monitor course operation on an...

3 Annual Monitoring Process

Annual Monitoring Process2011-12 reporting

3 Annual Monitoring process

3.1 Annual Monitoring flowchart

3.2 Purpose of Annual Monitoring

3.3 Principles of Annual Monitoring

3.4 Process of Annual Monitoring

3.5 Timing of Annual Monitoring

3.6 Documentation requirements

Appendices:

o Unit Report Formo Course Journalo Annual Monitoring Report Guidanceo Annual Monitoring Report Formso Faculty Report Templateo Link Tutor Report


Field Chair / Course Leader report including

collaborative arrangements

Collaborative partner / Link Tutor report with action plan

Field Chairs / Course Leaders – Summary reports with action plans at field / course level and actions to be referred up with collaborative arrangements. Field / Course reports signed-off Heads of Division/School/Department and Faculty Dean

Sub-Dean report with summary action plan at Faculty / University level considered by Faculty Academic Board

TQSC

Academic Board

Central services

reports with action plans, e.g. (Quality Directorate/

Learning Resources

and Student Support

Services/Dean of Students

Action plans are addressed at each level / C

ourse / Field / Faculty / Institution for actions w

hich can be addressed at that level. Any other issues are referred up to

the appropriate level.

FTQSC – Consideration of all field reports with action plans

Unit Co-ordinator report

Course Journal (considered by Field / Course Committee)

3.1


3.2 Purpose of Annual Monitoring

1 The purpose of Annual Monitoring is to aid the University in its pursuit of excellence; specifically to:

examine and report on issues of standards and quality which affect students, staff and other stakeholders;

identify strengths and weaknesses with a view to improvement;

identify and disseminate good practice;

ensure that appropriate action is taken to remedy any identified shortcomings;

ensure the best possible student experience within the resources available;

support a University culture of self-analysis and dialogue;

build up information needed for the periodic evaluation process and for external reviews.

3.3 Principles of Annual Monitoring

1 The University’s Annual Monitoring process is managed through the Faculty Teaching Quality and Standards Committees (FTQSCs), and an overview of the matters of policy and quality enhancement arising from the process is prepared for the Teaching Quality and Standards Committee (TQSC) by the Quality Directorate.

2 The monitoring process has a developmental focus in addition to offering the University assurance about standards and quality.

3 The process requires all undergraduate fields and postgraduate courses to prepare a formal report to a specification agreed annually by the Teaching Quality and Standards Committee.

4 Individual courses are clearly identified in the undergraduate field / course reports, to facilitate academic accountability for quality and standards.

5 Fields are required to monitor course operation on an ongoing basis throughout the year, to take prompt action where appropriate, with feedback, and to document matters raised and their outcomes. The Annual Monitoring report is the summative element in this activity.

6 The Annual Monitoring of courses conducted at collaborative partners follows the University process and is managed within the appropriate course/field and with the assistance of link tutors.

7 At each level (unit, course, field, partner college, Faculty, University) an action plan is produced for those matters which can be addressed at that level. Any issues which are beyond the remit at that level are referred up.


8 The reports draw on evidence from a variety of sources including External Examiners, academic staff, institutional managers, professional, statutory or regulatory bodies, students and the student record system. They will comment on how research and professional activities of staff have underpinned teaching.

9 A separate summary report of all external examiner reports by the Quality Directorate and separate scheme review reports for undergraduate and postgraduate provision for consideration at TQSC complements the Annual Monitoring process of fields.

10 The Teaching Quality and Standards Committee will agree any changes to the Annual Monitoring process for the subsequent year.

3.4 Process of Annual Monitoring

1 Unit report

The quality of the unit as experienced by staff and students is at the heart of the academic process. Every Unit Co-ordinator therefore prepares a brief annual report, using a standard University template, drawing on the evaluations of students, the experiences of tutors teaching on the unit, assessment results, any comments by External Examiners, and identifying any actions for improving the unit. The report is copied to the Course Leader to be included in the course journal and then to be circulated to other Course Leaders teaching on courses which include that unit.

2 Course journal

The Course Leader is responsible for maintaining the course journal for a course or cluster of courses, as identified by the Field Committee. The journal provides a narrative comment on the academic health of the course and the journal entries may draw upon sources of information such as unit evaluations, student academic performance, External Examiner, and other relevant, reports (for example an accreditation visit by a professional body or other internal audit activity). For the purpose of dissemination, the course journal entries record good practice and identify those other issues which may be discussed at Field Committees and which need to be addressed to improve the course. The journal entries should reflect action and progress on the matters identified by the Field Committee.

3 Field / Course report

The Academic Directors are responsible for producing the Annual Monitoring reports for their fields using a standard University template, based on course and unit data and a review of the operation of the units and courses within their field as documented in the course journals, for identifying any actions to be taken at field level and for submitting the report to their Heads of Department and to the FTQSC for consideration at the committee.

4 Faculty report

The Sub-Dean of the Faculty will receive the field /course reports for consideration at the FTQSC. Critical readers will present each others’ reports to the FTQSC. The Sub-Dean will then produce a summary report with a Faculty action plan for consideration at the Faculty Academic Board and present this report at the University TQSC. The report will inform the Faculty’s annual strategic planning.


University-wide service reports

5 The University TQSC determines which central administrative and service departments must prepare an annual report. These will include those services with direct bearing on the quality of the student experience. The reports will be prepared by the appropriate heads of service, will be copied to the Quality Directorate and thence forwarded to TQSC.

6 Collaborative provision

Reports will be prepared by collaborative partner institutions and forwarded to the appropriate Course Leaders at the University, via the Link Tutor. The Course Leader will incorporate the report together with the Link Tutor Report in the course journal. The Academic Director will summarise the issues raised, by the collaborative partners and the Link Tutors in the field /course report, and give details of action taken or planned to address these.

7 In addition, the course reports produced by the Course Leaders of collaborative partner institutions will be sent to the Principal or nominee of that institution.

8 In order to meet the guidance of the QAA Code of Practice (section 2: collaborative provision) with respect to the monitoring of publicity materials, partner institutions are required to submit any course specific advertising materials for consideration by the University.

9. Pending finalisation of a revised reporting system for accredited institutions, AMRs produced for non-franchise provision in accredited institutions will be considered on the same basis as Faculty AMRs

3.5 Timing of Annual Monitoring

1 The Annual Monitoring of undergraduate provision is conducted between September and November with consideration by the appropriate Faculty Academic Board and a formal summative report being prepared by the relevant Sub-Dean (Quality Enhancement) for submission to the TQSC (on behalf of the Academic Board).

2 Postgraduate courses are monitored between December and February, with consideration by the appropriate Faculty Academic Board and a formal summative report being prepared for submission to the TQSC.

3.6 Documentation requirements

1 The Annual Monitoring reports will be submitted on the agreed Annual Monitoring report forms, see appendix.


Appendices:

o Unit Report Formo Course Journalo Annual Monitoring Report Guidanceo Annual Monitoring Report Formso Faculty Report Templateo Link Tutor Report


UNIVERSITY OF BEDFORDSHIRE

TEACHING QUALITY AND STANDARDS COMMITTEE

Unit Report Form

Unit Code: Unit Name:

Level: Credit Value:Unit coordinator: Other members of teaching team:

Is the unit year long? Yes No If no, please confirm period of delivery, or if not a standard period confirm the start and end date

Number of students registered on the unit:

Summary and outcome of previous year’s action plans for this unit

Summary of this year’s changes to the unit (if none please leave blank)

Commentary on assessment, grading and marking (supported by descriptive unit statistics showing mean grades, standard deviation and frequencies) Statistics to be attached

Description of Second Marking Process taken by Teaching Team

Teaching and LearningAspects of the unit that were successful

Intended areas for future development (identified in the unit action plan)


Student feedback on the unit(challenges, interesting practice, requested improvements etc)

Action taken for students identified at risk

Research and Scholarly Activity underpinning the delivery of unit (levels 6 and M units only)

Approaches to facilitate employability

The adoption of blended learning

Changes to the unit for next academic year (itemised also in action plan)

Other issues not covered previously in this review. (e.g. examples of good practice, difficulties or problems which impacted upon student experience)

Itemised Action Plan Action by whom by when

Form completed by Unit Coordinator:

Signature :………………………………………………………….. Date…………..………….

Action Plan Approved by Academic Director: (signature): Date……………………..

This form should be submitted to the Academic Director for inclusion within field and Annual Monitoring reports.



Guide to Course Journals

1. Why a course journal?

The course journal is intended to be a document that is owned by course teams where issues arising from the running of courses are identified, and actions and outcomes monitored. The journal is also a record of recognised good practice so that this can be disseminated across the Faculty and University. It is a mechanism for quality assurance and enhancement in that issues are recorded and actions taken, and provides information for feedback to students, and good practice.

2. How does the course journal operate?

The Field / Course Committee identifies a course, or a cluster of courses, for which a journal is to be maintained, and appoints an author. Each new course/cluster of courses would start from the point of approval, with the conditions and recommendations from the approval event, and identify actions taken in relation to them. Existing courses/clusters of courses would start with issues from the start of the academic year e.g. from induction. At each meeting the Field/Course Committee will identify issues for inclusion in the journal, and receive feedback on issues previously identified, and add to the journal any items of good practice.

3. How are issues identified for inclusion in the journal?

There are a range of sources that can be used to identify journal entries and the process depends on continuous self-evaluation by course teams using data from a variety of sources including:

Entry, progression, achievement and progression data Student feedback, from committees or USP External Examiner reports Professional and statutory body comments and reports Reports from unit leaders Collaborative partner journals and other feedback Faculty TQSC action plans

There are a number of key questions that course teams need to consider for self-evaluative purposes such as:

Is the content of the course(s) relevant and up-to-date and do the course and unit information forms reflect this?

Do unit and course outcomes and the actual level of attainment in the outcomes allow the aims of the course(s) to be met?

Are teaching and learning methods appropriate to the outcomes of the courses and the needs of the student group, including those from potentially disadvantaged backgrounds?

Are clear and appropriate learning outcomes stated for the course(s) and units? Is there a satisfactory level of student demand? Are student entry profiles appropriate to aims and learning outcomes? Are pass/progression rates satisfactory in relation to stated targets? Are award success rates satisfactory in relation to key targets? Do students have appropriate access to learning resources, regardless of disability? Is a safe and supportive environment provided for students?


Are staff appropriately developed in relation to course needs?

The journal is used to record key points arising from this continuous self-evaluation by course teams and the actions taken as a result. For example, it may be considered that the completion rate on a course is unacceptably low, and investigations undertaken to ascertain why this is the case with actions to be identified in order to improve the completion rate.

4. How is good practice identified for inclusion in the journal?

There is much good practice in teaching and learning in the University that is not always identified and disseminated across a Faculty or the University, in order to enhance the student experience. The journal provides an opportunity to record good practice and mechanisms for its dissemination.

It is difficult to define good practice in a University with diverse subject disciplines, but it may include:

Well-established ways of working that have always been successful; New ideas generated to address specific issues; Innovations that have a demonstrable outcome, such as increased student satisfaction

or attainment; Ways of working that students have reported as particularly useful in helping them

succeed.

Sources of information will be the same as those identified above for issues, with a particular emphasis on those identified by third parties to the course team e.g. External Examiners, students, professional and statutory bodies.

5. How are good practice and issues recorded?

The journal is a basic Word document that can be maintained electronically, and may be shared via BREO by course teams.

5.1 Good practice

When the Field/ Course Committee identifies an item of good practice it will be recorded as follows:

Date entry made; Good Practice – a brief description of the practice; Source – there may be more than one source that has recognised the practice; Aspects to be disseminated – what parts could other course teams adopt?; Action taken to disseminate – what can be done to help spread the good practice.

Worked examples are shown in the attached sample journal.

5.2 Issues

Date

Referencing is important as it provides every issue / item of good practice with a unique referencing number, making each one clearly identifiable. The referencing is based on


the academic session and also indicates the chronological order of the issue. For example:

An issue raised in the academic session 2007/8 will carry the prefix 07. Therefore, the first issue raised in 2007/8 would be referenced 07/01, the second 07/2, etc.

The date refers to the date an entry is made in the journal rather than the date the issue is raised.

Issue

The issue must be clearly and succinctly defined, whilst providing the reader with a clear grasp of the heart of the issue. An easy mistake is to list the subject of the issue rather than the specific nature of the issue, e.g. ‘student evaluations’ as opposed to ‘low return (30%) of student evaluations’.

Action

The action you identify must be:

Specific; Measurable; Achievable; Realistic; and Time-set, such that a successful outcome can be anticipated.

An individual will be allocated responsibility for progressing the issue, although in some instances may be supported by a team. If the action identified falls outside the remit of the course team(s) and Field / Course Committee you must record the mechanisms for reporting the issue to the appropriate forum / individual and nominate a team member to track that the action is taken. The identified date for action must be specific, e.g. ‘end of February 2008’.

Expected outcome

As indicated above you should record here the outcome anticipated through completion of the actions identified.

Outcome

You must identify whether the issue is closed or ongoing and ensure that this information is kept up-to-date. Usefully this could be in bold to distinguish from the progress reports provided to keep the user up-to-date. For example: 25/4/08 – emailed Dean, awaiting response. 4/5/08 – response received, problem now resolved. ISSUE CLOSED

Minute references

Where an issue has been discussed at a meeting e.g. a Field / Course Course or FTQSC, the specific minute reference of the discussion at that meeting should be included here, e.g. DISC Field/ Course Committee, 22/1/08, minute 146. The information should be entered for every meeting where the issue is discussed.


Archiving

The journal is a continuous document and all entries should be kept for a period of at least three years. However there is a danger that the journal could become a very lengthy document. Whilst it should not be treated as an annual report it is recommended that the journal is reviewed at the start of each session and completed entries archived such that the journal author will have two electronic files: a manageable live journal, plus an archive file. The archive file should be accessed if issues re-occur and/or for inspection and review activity.

6. How is the journal monitored?

The journal is part of the Field / Course Committee’s management activity, but fits into a wider quality management process. The journal author, with the course team, has a responsibility for ensuring that the journal is well maintained and kept up-to-date. The Field / Course Committee also has responsibility for monitoring the journal and should receive a copy at each meeting to be discussed and updated. The Field / Course Committee may decide that other issues need to be added or may provide further information on how an issue is being progressed, so that the journal can be updated. When an issue is discussed at the Field / Course Committee then the journal should indicate the minute reference of the discussion, the date and name of the meeting. Similarly, the recording of the discussion in the minutes should cross-refer to the journal reference number.

Each FTQSC will also monitor the journals and will develop a method of doing so. This could be by sub-committee, or by considering a journal at each meeting over the year. From 2009/10 each academic year the Quality Directorate will evaluate the course journal process.

7. How do collaborative partners operate the journal?

The course journals for courses delivered by University partners will be maintained by the local course team, and will be monitored by the relevant Field Committee as above.

8. How does the journal relate to other QA and QE processes?

8.1 Annual reporting

The journal provides a good source of information for Annual Monitoring and should ease the process by being used to demonstrate how issues have been addressed during the year. Items from Faculty action plans will provide issues for identified course teams to address.

8.2 Periodic Course Review

The journal provides evidence of continuous improvement and demonstrates clearly how issues affecting the student experience have been identified and addressed. It also provides clear evidence of good practice and its appreciation by students, External Examiners, and other third parties. It is a good starting point in writing the self-evaluation as it records outcomes of continuous evaluation by course teams.

8.3 External Examining Process


The journal provides clear evidence of how course teams have acted in response to External Examiner feedback, and course teams can share their journal entries with their External Examiners where they find this appropriate.

8.4 External Review

The journal can be used to provide evidence of systematic continuous improvement as required by Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies, and the QAA. It is particularly useful in recording issues raised through student feedback mechanisms, and provides a vehicle for feedback to students on how issues have been addressed, as students are represented on Field / Course Committees.


University of BedfordshireCourse Journal

Course(s)_________________________ Field/Course Board: ________________________ Site of Delivery (If applicable):________________________

SUMMARY OF GOOD PRACTICEDate of entry

Good Practice Source* Aspects to be disseminated Action taken to disseminate

Summary of issuesReference/

Date of entry

Issue Source * Action - specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, time-set.

Desired outcome

Outcome Minutes ref.

trackingAction to be taken

Responsibility for taking action

Date for action

* Examples: EE Report, student feedback, TQSC etc




Field (UG) / Course (PG) Annual Monitoring Report Form Guidance

Please remove in-template guidance as you writeAll tables provided by Planning must be included, unchanged, as an appendix.

1. Proforma

Section 1b A list of all courses (leading to approved target awards) running in 2011/12 which are considered within the report, together with details of the relevant course leader and department.

Section 1c/d A list of any new courses approved during 2011/12 as well as major modifications to existing courses, such as a change of title, or changes to the assessment strategy of a suite of courses. Note also the addition of new units to courses. Use the grid to specify the title of the new or existing course(s), the level and nature of the validation or modification process, and the outcome.

Section 2 Using the dataset produced by Planning, provide a commentary on recruitment trends for courses relative to preceding year(s) and to departmental policy/action plans. Comment on the effectiveness of action taken last year in relation to recruitment and any action(s) planned for the forthcoming academic year. Update or include an addendum to this section when the finalised dataset is provided by Planning in September.

Section 3 Using the dataset produced by Planning, provide a comparative review of patterns of progression and retention on courses. Highlight any particular highs and lows and any evidence available on the reasons for them. Relate your commentary to departmental policy/action plans. Comment on the effectiveness of action taken last year in relation to retention and progression and any action(s) planned for the forthcoming academic year. In September, use the finalised dataset to update or include an addendum to this section.

Section 4 Using the dataset produced by Planning, provide a comparative analysis of student performance on courses and identify key findings relating to completion rates and fail/pass/commendation/distinction statistics.

Section 5 Using the course journal and any other sources highlighted in preceding sections, identify areas of good practice within the field or courses. Indicate what steps have been taken to communicate these areas to colleagues within and outside the institution.

Section 5a Provide a commentary on course design and delivery relative to the broad principles of the University’s Education Strategy 2008 – 13, CRe8 and use of BREO. Reflect on the consistency of course design and delivery with corporate frameworks and any areas where further development is indicated. Review the impact of the implementation of year-long units,

where applicable, and the new structure of the academic year on the student experience.

Provide a commentary on the way in which the University’s employability agenda is implemented within your field (UG level) or through the courses taught, including the embedding of career development within course curricula. Use Destination of Leavers from Higher Education data to assist you in evaluating the effectiveness of approaches and identify any actions taken or planned to strengthen employability.

Section 5b Give details of how research, scholarly and professional activities of staff have underpinned teaching, relating your commentary to departmental Research into Teaching (RIT) strategies. Provide specific examples of the relationship between staff scholarship and the delivery of course units, particularly at Level 6. Use RIT action plans to identify areas for further development and associated actions.

Section 5c Summarise the key human, physical and learning resource issues as they relate to the quality of the students’ learning experience. Specify the corresponding action(s) taken or planned to resolve these issues.

Section 6a Summarise any issues raised by students in relation to the field (UG level) or particular courses. Identify the forum within which the issue was raised e.g. formal complaint, field / course committee meeting, classroom, informal exchange, and action(s) taken in response.

Review questionnaires completed by students (e.g. the Unit Student Perception questionnaire) and Unit Evaluation Forms completed by unit leaders. Highlight any significant or recurrent issues requiring attention and identify the action(s) taken or planned in response.

Section 6b List all collaborative partners delivering courses (or linked to the department), and specify the date when the annual monitoring report for each course was received. Summarise any issues raised and give details of action taken, or to be taken.

Using the Link Tutor(s)’ reports, where applicable, provide a reflective commentary on activities undertaken during the year, specific issues raised by and/or in connection with collaborative partners, and areas of good practice. Highlight any actions required to respond to issues raised with Link Tutors by collaborative partners.

Section 7a Identify key issues to arise out of the External Examiners’ reports on courses, and action(s) taken or planned in response.

Section 7b Details of any visits by Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs), or any other significant engagement with a PSRB. Specify the nature of the visit or engagement, e.g. annual or periodic review, or report back on actions required as a result of a visit in a preceding year. Identify any issues to emerge from a visit/engagement and specify action(s) taken.

Section 9 Identify recommendations arising from periodic course reviews and course validation events which took place during 2010/11 and provide details of how they were responded to during 2011/12, if applicable. If

17

recommendations from 2011/12 have been dealt with please respond to these.

Use the proformas provided to review the 2010/11 action plan (Appendix 1) and write an action plan for 2011/12 in the light of issues raised in the preceding report.

18



Field Annual Monitoring Report Form (undergraduate and postgraduate)

1. Summary of provision

a) Introductory information

Field (UG)* Field Chair (UG)

Faculty: Session and additional cohorts*:

b) Courses

List all courses considered within this report (at UG level list all courses within the field considered in this report). Include full title in each case

Courses Course leader Department Delivery site Course report received*

c) New, modified and reviewed provision within the academic year under review

List all new course approvals (please attach as an appendix the conclusions and conditions of approval)

Course title Approval month

Conclusions and conditions met ()

19

d) List all modifications to courses arising through formal periodic review or faculty review processes

Course title Approval level*

Modification (please detail)

* i.e. Faculty, University (please refer to Quality Handbook for details of procedures for major and minor changes)

2. Course and cohort viability*

Using the dataset provided by the Planning Department comment on any implications and actions in respect of registered numbers and trends over time.

3. Learner retention and performance

Using the dataset provided by the Planning Department comment on aspects of retention and performance reflecting the definitions provided as an appendix.

4. Graduate outcomes

a) Academic outcomes: Using the dataset provided by the Planning Department comment on student achievement by course and any necessary actions taken and/or planned for improvementb) Employment: Using the most recent DELHE data available, comment on graduate employment outcomes

5. Enhancement, good practice and innovation1

a) Curriculum

1 Evidence for this section is likely to come from sources such as course journals and unit reports, USP.

20

Please comment on any curriculum changes (new courses/curriculum areas within courses) operating within the reporting year that represent significant developments in curriculum range and/or the integration of research and teaching activity, employability, assessment innovation, interdisciplinary working or practice-based learning.

b) Teaching Please comment on any developments in teaching that can be evidenced to have or are expected to have a positive impact on learner performance, experience or employability.

c) Learner experiencePlease comment on any developments in the support or management of learners that can be evidenced to have or are expected to have a positive impact on learner performance, experience (e.g. changes in personal tutoring) or employability.

6. Responding to feedback

a) On-campus provisionPlease comment on evidence of the impact of recent changes provided by feedback.Summarise the issues identified for action and give details of action taken or planned to address these.

Issue Forum/source Action

b) Collaborative provisionIdentify and comment on available evidence that standards and the quality of the learning experience have been maintained and are equivalent to those on-campus, and that partnership working has (where relevant) operated effectively.Summarise issues raised by and / or in connection with collaborative provision (UK and overseas) and detail of action taken or planned to address these (please attach as an appendix all link tutor reports).

Issue Action

21

7. External verification and review

a) External Examiners’ reportsList key issues from external examiners’ reports and the field’s actions in response to them. Please comment also on evidence provided in external examiners' reports that academic standards and the quality of the learning experience have been maintained and (where relevant) enhanced)

Issue Actions

b) External engagement

22

Confirm engagement/visits by Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Bodies during the year and add associated action plans within section 8 (below).

PSRB Course(s) covered Action plan attached ()

23

8. Quality management

a) Annual Monitoring systems

Please evaluate the operation of annual monitoring systems, to include commentary on any changes, problems or omissions requiring future action and the completion of Course Journals. You must confirm time and receipt.

b) Action Planning and implementation

Please evaluate the effectiveness of action planning and monitoring across the Field covered by this report, based on action plans provided.

Please identify:

Any Field actions not completed within deadline and requiring Faculty action

9. Action plans

Attach all current action plans, in most recently updated form, and in particular the following

a) action plan for previous field report, with all actions identified either as completed or transferred to the action plan arising from the current reportb) action plan arising from the current report, including any actions from previous field report currently incompletec) action plans arising from PSRB engagement, course approval, periodic review etc., in which actions remain ongoing.

Signed by:

Field Chair (UG)Course Leader (PG): Date:

Authorised by:

Head of Department Date:

Dean of Faculty: Date:

24

University of Bedfordshire

ACTION PLAN ARISING FROM FIELD REPORT FOR ACADEMIC SESSION __________________

FIELD:

Seria

l

Issu

e(O

utlin

ed

incl

udin

g ap

prov

al o

r re

view

re

com

men

d-at

ions

)

Act

ion(

s)

requ

ired

By

who

m(m

ain

pers

on

resp

onsi

ble

in b

old)

By

whe

n

Res

ourc

e ne

eds

with

an

y co

stin

gs

Succ

ess

Crit

eria

- exp

ecte

d ou

tcom

es

Mon

itorin

g

Cur

rent

st

atus

1.2.3.4.5.6.7.8.9.

10.11.12

Signed: Sub-Dean (Quality)

25



Notes on Field Annual Monitoring Reporting (undergraduate and postgraduate)

Please remove in-template guidance as you writeAll tables provided by Planning must be included, unchanged, as an appendix.Please read the note of AMR meetings conducted within the reporting year before writing this report

1. Summary of provision

Where a report is prepared for a single course, please specify the course and the course leader

The academic year should be identified here, along with any cohorts (additional to a single October-start cohort) commencing within that academic year. These should be reported as far as possible within this report, with summative evaluation of their progress at a particular stage reported in a subsequent report. Short-course provision approved by the University should also be included and identified here.

In section b) the final column should be used to confirm that course reports relating to collaborative delivery have been received. Where no such report is required, n/a should be recorded. For all collaborative provision a link-tutor report must be provided (see below)

Where provision has been subject to approval, review or modification such that an action plan is required, that action plan should be included in section 12 (below)

2. Course and cohort viabilityComments on course and cohort viability should address the potential impact of marked changes of cohort size (over 2-3 years depending on data availability) at each study stage on the academic standards and the quality of the learning experience, and actions taken to mitigate any adverse impact. Where external targets are set for a course, these should also be commented on in relation to the data.

3. Learner retention, performance and progressionDefinitions: For the purposes of reporting, definitions are provided in an appendix.

Data for comment will be provided on: 1. For levels 5 and 6 (FHEQ)

Full-time registered numbers by cohort (Oct 30)Numbers withdrawing during the year (voluntary and by UoB)Of those considered at Exam Boards (not incl. referrals), the numbers

Allowed to progress to next stageAllowed to undertake referralAllowed to return to same stage to completeNo decision made at BoardOf those not included in the above categories, those achieving various specified credit levels

Comment should include reference to trends over time

4. Graduate outcomesComment should be made on awards achieved (target and default), including honours classification and consideration of cohort diversity and site, and on the employment achieved by graduates (recognising data timing differences)

26

5. Enhancement, good practice and innovationPlease comment on and evaluate changes implemented within the session that have a significant (potential) impact on the learner experience, and evaluate changes made in previous sessions noted but not evaluated in previous reportsAlso comment on actions undertaken to enhance employability, with reference where appropriate to the employment outcomes noted in previous reports, and evaluate the actions of previous sessions.In neither case is comment required on ongoing activities and initiatives other than those initiated and/or evaluated for impact in the reporting period.

6. Responding to feedbackIssues identified should be drawn from course committee, USP, SEQ and NSS data, unit reports and (in b) ) link tutor and other collaborative provision reports as relevant

8. Action plans

This section should identify all extant and any proposed actions that constitute priorities for the Field, based on their evaluation of the evidence of the quality and impact of current provision and trends over time.

Any issue included in the current action plan(s) should appear in the relevant section of the report. The associated required actions should be included throughout the body of the report.

Where actions relating to previous field reports are not completed, they must be transferred to the Field Action Plan relating to the current report and identified as such in the updated plan relating to the previous field report.

All actions identified must be within the remit of the Field team or identified as recommendations. Where field representatives propose that actions are required beyond the field (e.g. at Departmental, Faculty, or University level), the action should be specified within the field remit (e.g. 'to inform/recommend/propose') and considered completed once this action is recorded. This does not prevent fields from commenting on the impact of response to their recommendations etc. within subsequent reports, but it does restrict field responsibility for action to those actions for which they can reasonably be held responsible.

27


Faculty Annual Monitoring Report Template

1. Summary of coverage and provision

a) Introductory information

Level Sub-Dean (Quality)

Faculty Session

b) Fields and coursesList fields covered in this reportA compiled set of Field Annual Monitoring Report course listings should be attached as appendix 1

c) Changes to provision

Please provide an overview of terminated (i.e. no longer operating), new and modified course provision (where that modification has required Faculty/University approval of provision, mode, cohort-start, partner involvement and/or delivery site) including any attempts to gain approval for new courses.

2. Course and cohort viability

Reviewing section 3 within Field reports, please evaluate the potential and/or current impact of significant changes and trends in cohort size on the nature and quality of the learning experience, and/or measures required/taken to maintain academic standards.

Where reference is made in this section to a course, please provide the associated Field AMR data in full.

3. Learner retention and performance

Reviewing section 3 of relevant field reports, please comment on changes in learner retention and performance in courses that are currently priority areas for Faculty monitoring, and identify any courses to be subject to such monitoring on the basis of this year’s field reporting.In each case identify key actions currently/to be taken, and where relevant note the evidenced impact of previous and currently ongoing actions.

In addition, please provide comment on Any courses showing significant improvement in retention and performance patterns and,

where possible, identify possible causes. Any courses showing significant or sustained reduction in retention and performance

patterns but which are not identified as priority areas for Faculty monitoring, and explain this decision.


28

4.Graduate outcomes

a) Academic outcomes

Reviewing section 4a) of relevant field reports, please comment on changes in academic outcomes in courses that are currently priority areas for Faculty monitoring, and identify any courses to be subject to such monitoring on the basis of this year’s field reporting.In each case identify key actions currently/to be taken, and where relevant note the evidenced impact of previous and currently ongoing actions.

In addition, please provide comment on Any courses showing significant improvement in outcome patterns and, where possible,

identify possible causes. Any courses showing significant or sustained reduction in academic outcomes but which

are not identified as priority areas for Faculty monitoring, and explain this decision.


b) Employment

Please review the DLHE data and analysis within Field reports and provide comment on Any courses/fields showing significant change in employment outcome patterns and, where

possible, identify possible causes. Any courses/fields for which Field AMRs provide evidence of enhanced practice that can be

demonstrated to correlate with improved employment outcomes and/or which the Faculty wishes to identify as emerging practice, to be evaluated in future reports

The impact of any changes in practice identified in previous Faculty AMRs.

5. Enhancement, good practice and innovation2

d) CurriculumPlease comment on any curriculum changes (new courses/curriculum areas within courses) operating within the reporting year that represent significant developments in curriculum range and/or the integration of research and teaching activity, employability, assessment innovation, interdisciplinary working or practice-based learning.

e) Teaching Please comment on any developments in teaching that can be evidenced to have or are expected to have a positive impact on learner performance, experience or employability.

f) Learner experiencePlease comment on any developments in the support or management of learners that can be evidenced to have or are expected to have a positive impact on learner performance, experience (e.g. changes in personal tutoring) or employability.

6. Responding to feedback

a) On-campus provisionReviewing secton 6a) of relevant Field AMRs, please identify and comment onAny matters of Faculty-level interest or concernAny emerging themes to be explored further during the forthcoming yearThe operation of feedback systems across the Faculty and within the reporting remitIssue Forum/source Action

2 Evidence for this section is likely to come from sources such as course journals and unit reports

29

b) Collaborative provisionReviewing 6b) of Field AMRs, please identify and comment on the development of collaborative provision during the reporting year (operational developments and changes; enhancements of practice and emerging trends or issuesAny matters of Faculty-wide interest or concern

Issue Action

7. External verification and review

a) External Examiner Reports

Reviewing Field AMRs please identify any issues (particularly those that have the potential to put academic standards at risk) requiring cross-Field or Faculty-level action and monitoring

30

Reviewing external examiner reports, identify significant areas of good practice, and any areas for Faculty-level action particularly relating to academic standards

Please provide as appendix 2 a list of any external examiner reports not available at the time of writing (and therefore for comment through the External Examiner Sub-Committee at a later stage.

Issue Actions

b) External engagements [Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies etc]

Please summarise engagements with PSRBs etc, including external annual monitoring reviews and applications for the accreditation of courses. Comment on outcomes of visits, responses to reports, any concerns relating to academic standards and identify key issues for future monitoring, based on relevant Field reports (section 7 b)).

Please list engagements expected/scheduled in the forthcoming academic year.

PSRB Course(s) covered Action plan attached ()

31

Section 8 Quality management

a) Annual Monitoring systems

Please evaluate the operation of Faculty annual monitoring systems, to include commentary on any changes, problems or omissions requiring future action and the completion of Field AMRs

c) Action Planning and implementation

Please evaluate the effectiveness of action planning and monitoring across the Fields covered by this report, based on action plans provided in relevant Field AMRs

Please identify:

Any Field actions not completed within deadline and requiring Faculty action Any Faculty actions required on the basis of Field planning and reporting Any issues to be raised at University level on the basis of Field or Faculty reporting

9. Action plans

Attach all current action plans, in most recently updated form, and in particular the following:

a) action plan for previous Faculty report, with all actions identified either as completed or transferred to the action plan arising from the current reportb) action plan arising from the current report, including any actions from previous Field report currently incompletec) action plans arising from PSRB engagement, course approval, periodic review etc., in which actions remain ongoing.

Any issue included in the current action plan(s) should appear in the relevant section of the report. The associated required actions should be included throughout the body of the report. Actions relating to External Examiners should be summarised at the end of the associated section.

10. Authorised by:

Faculty Academic Board (Chair): Date:

Dean of Faculty: Date:

11. Appendices:

1. Field Annual Monitoring Report course listings

32

2. External Examiner Reports not available at the time of writing the AMR

3. Short Course Monitoring Report

4. Definitions of key terms

33

LINK TUTOR ANNUAL REPORT

Name DatePartnership Centre Course (if course is delivered in more than one Partnership

Centre please complete separate reports for each Centre)

Course/Course Leader: Total hours this reporting period (excluding travelling)

Activities undertaken Dates of visits

Meetings with Course/Course Leader

Meetings with students

Moderation of assignment briefs/exam questions

Moderation of completed coursework/exams

Visits arranged to University

Attending course/course team meetings

Attending Management Liaison meetings

Development work with course leader/team

Other:

Positive developments & examples of good practice identified

Actions brought forward from last report Shaded areas to be completed by Link TutorIssue Latest action taken Next action to be taken Agent

34

New Issues Action taken Next action to be taken Agent

Matters requiring action by University

Definitions of key termsTerm Definition Numerator Denominator

Retention the number of students that remain active (i.e. enrolled) at the end of the year as a proportion of all the students who were enrolled during the year

Students who have not withdrawn, termination, interrupted/suspended their studies (based on the July dataset)

All students that are active during the year, with the exception of students who withdraw in the first two weeks of teaching (to be consistent with HESA/SNC reporting)

Progression Potential the number of students who have the ability to progress (i.e. move to the next year of the course) based on their first sitting as a proportion of those students who were active at the end of the year

Students with a progress code of 'pass progress' or 'pass refered' (which relates to students that pass and are not required to do referrals)

Students that were retained in-year (i.e. the numerator of the in year retention group)

Actual The number of students that actually progress in the subsequent academic year

students in the potential progression numerator who progress to the next course year in the following academic year

The potential progression numerator

Continuation Potential the number of students who have the ability to continue (regardless of whether they move to the next year of the course) based on their first sitting as a proportion of those students who were active at the end of the year

students with a progression code of 'pass progress', 'pass refered' or 'repeat year'

Students that were retained in-year (i.e. the numerator of the in year retention group)

Actual The number of students that actually continue in the subsequent academic year

Students in the potential continuation numerator who are active in the next academic year

The potential continuation numerator

Performance Results profile of those students who were still active at the end of the year (i.e. the end of July)

At a course level to do this we would calculate the average grade/mark from the unit results of each student including any non submissions (based on those students in the in-year retention numerator)

Outcome Degree Classification and award profile of final year students who were still active at the end of the year (i.e. the end of July)

Degree classification profile and details of any alternative awards conferred, i.e. awards other than the main qualification aim such as DipHE and DipCert awards for students enrolled on Honours Degrees (based on final year students in the in-year retention numerator)

annual monitoring process - beds.ac.uk web viewfields are required to monitor course operation on an...

Documents