uk quality code for higher education chapter b9: complaints and appeals on academic matters...
TRANSCRIPT
UK Quality Code for Higher Education
Chapter B9: Complaints and appeals on academic matters
Consultation discussion eventJanuary 2013
Programme
11.00 – 11.20 Introduction to the day, and to the Quality Code
11.20 – 11.45 Introduction to the Chapter scope and Expectation
11.45 – 12.30 Small group discussions
12.30 – 13.15 Lunch
13.15 – 13.30 Introduction to the Chapter Indicators of sound practice
13.30 – 14.45 Small group discussions
14.45 – 15.00 Tea/coffee break
15.00 – 15.30 Questions and closing plenary
•Setting and maintaining threshold academic standards
Part A
•Assuring and enhancing academic quality
Part B
•Information about higher education provision
Part C
UK Quality Code for Higher Education
www.qaa.ac.uk/qualitycode
Chapters of the Quality Code
A1: The national level
A2: The subject and qualification level
A3: The programme level
A4: Approval and review
A5: Externality
A6: Assessment of achievement of learning outcomes
B1: Programme design and approval
B2: Admissions
B3: Learning and teaching
B4: Supporting student achievement
B5: Student engagement
B6: Assessment of students and accreditation of prior learning
B7: External examining
B8: Programme monitoring and review
B9: Complaints and appeals
B10: Management of collaborative arrangements
B11: Research degrees
Part A: Setting and maintaining threshold academic standards
Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality
Part C: Information about higher education provision
General introduction
What is the UK Quality Code for
Higher Education?
How does the Quality Code
relate to legislation?
What are Expectations?
What are Indicators? What are the
overarching values?
Why does the UK need a Quality
Code for Higher Education?
How has the Quality Code
been developed?
Who is the Quality
Code for?
Who enforces the Quality Code?
How is the Quality Code organised?
General Introduction
Explanation
Indicators of sound
practice
Expectation: what higher
education providers expect of each other and which students and the public can expect of all higher education providers
Quality Code: components
Quality Code – under construction
The existing elements of the Academic Infrastructure put back together in a different
order
Some reworking to cover topics in a more
appropriate way
Some completely new chapters e.g. student
engagement
Review and editing of the whole for
consistency and to reduce duplication
Part A: Setting and maintaining threshold academic standards
Part B: Assuring and enhancing academic quality
Mar 2012 Part C: Information about higher education provision
Oct 2011 Chapter B7: External examining
Jun 2012 Chapter B11: Research degrees
Chapter B5: Student engagement
Sep 2012 Chapter B3: Learning and teaching
Dec 2012 Chapter B10: Management of higher education with others
Apr 2013 Chapter B9: Complaints and appeals on academic matters
Chapter B6: Assessment of students and accreditation of prior learning
Mar 2013 Chapter B4: Supporting student achievement
Chapter B1: Programme design and approval
Chapter B2: Admissions
Chapter B8: Programme monitoring and review
Oct 2013 Chapter A1: The national level
Chapter A2: The subject and qualification level
Chapter A6: Assessment of achievement of learning outcomes
Chapter A3: The programme level
Chapter A4: Approval and review
Chapter A5: Externality
Building the jigsaw
Creating the pieces
•Scoping
•Advisory Group
•Consultation
•Publication
In numbers...
Number of delegates at all consultation events = 1183
Number of consultation responses = 673
Chapter B9:Complaints and appeals on
academic matters
Timescales
July – August 2012 Scoping and planning
September 2012 First Advisory Group meeting
October 2012 Second Advisory Group meeting
26 November-31 January Consultation period
9, 11, 15 and 17 January Consultation events
March 2013 Third Advisory Group meeting
April 2013 Publication
Feedback from…
Equality Challenge Unit
Office of the Independent Adjudicator
Scottish Public Services Ombudsman
The role of the OIA
Cardiff17 January 2013
Imran AbrahamsAssistant Adjudicator
THE UK QUALITY CODE – STUDENT COMPLAINTS AND APPEALS
• The OIA – Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education
• Independent of HEIs and of Government• Majority of Board from outside the world of higher education• Operates in England and Wales
The OIA and the Quality Code
Not a regulator, but:• Member of the Regulatory Partnership Group• Part of QAA Advisory Group developing Chapter B9 of the
Code• Memorandum of Understanding signed with QAA, December
2012– Sharing of information including:
• Information gathered through complaints to the OIA that suggests broad concerns about academic quality
• Information gathered through the QAA Complaints and Concerns scheme that suggests issues with HEI complaints or appeals systems
• Appropriate remedies for higher education• Free service for students• Common system across England and Wales• Faster, cheaper, specialist alternative to courts• Feedback that can be used to improve complaints handling
and the student experience• Independent Adjudication, free from government or HEI
influence
The OIA provides:
Complaint handler of last resort• The OIA receives a small number of complaints compared to
the number of enrolled students in England and Wales• Around one in seven of complaints that have reached the end
of internal HEI procedures is referred to the OIA• Number of complaints increases each year; provisional figure
for 2012 is over 2000 complaints received (25 per cent increase on 2011)
• We review complaints about any act or omission of an HEI – Academic appeals, assessments and grades (2011: 70 per
cent).– Contractual and service issues (2011: 10 per cent).– Discrimination and Human Rights (2011: 3 per cent).– Others.
• Student must normally have exhausted HEI’s internal processes (appeal or complaint) before complaining to OIA
What does the Scheme cover?
What do we do?
• We review complaints to see whether they are Justified, Partly Justified or Not Justified :– Did the universities properly apply regulations and follow
procedures?– Was the university’s decision reasonable in all the
circumstances?• We also make good practice recommendations• Dissemination of good practice and feedback to HE sector
What we can’t look at (ineligible complaints)
• Academic Judgment.– Matters for which only the opinion of an academic expert will suffice
• Outside time limits (three years from event; three months from COP letter).• Matter is or was subject of court proceedings (unless formally stayed).• Admissions.
1: QAA Quality Code B9
• Trends in OIA complaints:– Procedural fairness– Lack of clarity in complaint/appeal processes– Perception of bias– Delay!
• OIA considers what is “good practice”• Significant factor: has HEI followed QAA indicators of sound
practice?
2: QAA Quality Code B9
• OIA’s Pathway 3 – sector wide consultation and report:– Early Resolution pilots – Jan to March 2013– Good Practice Framework – sector wide; voluntary; complement QAA
Quality Code
How to contact us
• By post:– Third Floor, Kings Reach, 38-50
Kings Road, Reading, RG1 3AA• Tel: 0118 959 9813• Online: www.oiahe.org.uk • Email: [email protected]
Themes and the Expectation
Definitions
• Complaint: the expression of a specific concern about matters that affect the quality of a student’s learning opportunities
• Appeal: a request for a review of a decision made by an academic body about student progression, assessment and awards
Scope
• All students including graduates• Admissions covered in B2: Admissions • Further guidance for research students
in B11: Research Degrees• Important to have clear arrangements
with partners (further guidance in B10: Managing higher education provision with others)
Themes (1)
• Equality and diversity embedded • Working in partnership with students in
the design and review of procedures • “informal” arrangements for resolution• Fit with independent review
Themes (2)
• Complaints and appeals as a source of information (but distinction between feedback and complaints/appeals)
• Positive engagement • information and guidance• Good design and implementation
Expectation
Higher education providers have procedures for handling student
complaints about the quality of learning opportunities and appeals against academic decisions which are fair,
efficient, accessible and timely and which promote enhancement.
Questions
• Is the scope and limits of the Chapter sufficiently clear?
• Have equality and diversity issues been adequately addressed?
• Is the wording and scope of the Expectation appropriate?
Indicators of sound practice
General principles (1-2)• Providing the opportunity
(scope/application)• Creating the confidence to use
the opportunity
Students have the opportunity to raise matters of concern
without risk of disadvantage.
• Engaging positively when do use the procedures
• alternative means – how much detail?
An approach that encourages positive
engagement and offers opportunities for early resolution.
Information, advice and guidance (3-4)
• Change of language – e.g. ‘publicly’ dropped
• Accessible – broad meaningAccessible
information on procedures
• Enabling informed decisions• Procedural advice versus advocacy• Inclusion of reference to staffAppropriate advice
and guidance for students and staff
Internal procedures: design and implementation (5-6)
• Separate indicators?• Separate roles?• Level of detail?Good design
enables...
• Reasonable or efficient?• Same words different
meanings?...procedures that are
timely, fair and reasonable
Action, monitoring and enhancement (7-8)
• Communication – reasons?• Remedies• Independent reviewAppropriate action is
taken
• Improving the procedures• Monitoring data - examples• Learning from – part of systematic
approach to enhancementMonitor, evaluate and
reflect
Questions
• Are the Indicators appropriately worded to reflect the Expectation?
• Are the indicators ordered and grouped in a logical order?
• Is anything missing from the Chapter?
Key points from earlier events
Expectation
• Generally supportive• ‘handling’ – no better alternative• ‘efficient’ – some reservations• Clarify ‘promote enhancement’• remit of chapter – academic matters – is clear
cf not sure about ‘learning opportunities’• Timely – different HEI and student
expectations?
Indicators
• Importance of interaction with other procedures – harassment, discipline
• Equality and diversity over repeated• 50/50 split on whether to keep 5 & 6 as two
indicators• Meaning of accessible• Split 2 – early res could be part of 5• Welcome reference to staff (4)• Include sharing of good practice as part of
evaluation (8)
Order of indicators
• Majority content with existing order• Some suggestions that 5&6 belong after
1
Website:www.qaa.ac.uk/qualitycode
Email:[email protected]
Sign up to QAA News:www.qaa.ac.uk/Newsroom/News/Pages/QAA-news-alert.aspx
Further information
Scoping events: Part A: Setting and maintaining threshold academic
standards, B1: Programme design and approval and B8:
Programme monitoring and review, B6: assessment of students and accreditation of prior
learning
• 25th February- Cardiff • 28th February- Belfast• 4th March- London• 5th March- Glasgow