Principles

  • Internal Subject Review (ISR) is a periodic review of the management of academic standards and quality of learning
  • It is based on self-evaluation by a subject team and uses a process of peer-review by an informed Panel
  • Members of the ISR Panel include student reviewers, staff reviewers and one or more external advisors.
  • The Chair is an experienced member of the Panel
  • A Standards and Enhancement Officer joins the Panel in the role of Secretary

Ground rules

  • All members of the ISR Panel have equal status and rights
  • ISR Panel members behave professionally and with respect for all participants in the process
  • All face to face interactions with subject representatives, the students and employers are conducted in a supportive and enabling manner and confrontational behaviour is avoided

Process and requirements

In committing to undertake an ISR, members of a Panel are agreeing to

  • read and evaluate the briefing paper and associated evidence provided by the subject team at least 7-10 working days before the review meetings/ event
  • plan a series of review meetings with staff, students and employers
  • provide the subject team with a list of lines of enquiry and any requests for additional evidence at least 5 working days before the related review meeting(s)
  • hold a series of review meetings with staff, students and employers
  • make judgements about the effectiveness of the subject team in managing academic standards, quality of learning opportunities, information and enhancement
  • assist the Chair and Secretary to draft the judgements and outcomes of the ISR
  • assist the Chair and Secretary to draft the report of the ISR, which is written by the Secretary and confirmed by the Chair

Aide-mémoire

Introduction

Internal Subject Review is an evidence based enquiry into the management of academic standards and quality, information and enhancement at subject level. It uses the UK Quality Code for Higher Education as its main reference point. In addition, it uses University requirements in respect of academic standards, quality, enhancement and information.

This aide-mémoire consists of questions and prompts to assist the Panel. It may be used to guide:

  • analysis of the briefing paper;
  • evaluation of the evidence for the claims made in the briefing paper;
  • preparation of the lines of enquiry and questions for face to face meetings with the subject team;
  • decision-making about outcomes;
  • the drafting of the report

The aide-mémoire covers the main features of the review process, and it is neither prescriptive nor exhaustive. Other questions might arise from reading the briefing paper and evaluating the supporting evidence.

Specific prompts for Panel members are set out under a series of headings, as follows. The process of Internal Subject Review focuses on

Section 1 / Brief contextual description
Section 2 / The subject’s track record in managing quality and standards
Section 3 / The setting of academic standards within the subject
Section 4 / Achievement of academic standards by students
Section 5 / The quality of learning opportunities within the subject
Section 6 / The information provided and used by the subject team
Section 7 / Enhancement of students' learning opportunities
Section 8 / Decision and outcomes of the Internal Subject Review

The aide-mémoire provides questions and prompts cross-referenced to the relevant parts of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education (the Code). Other key points of reference for the Panel include University requirements as given in designated strategies, policies, procedures, academic regulations and codes of practice.

Subject teams are required to ensure that the curriculum is aligned with the Teaching Excellence Research Informed (TIRI) agenda; the Learning Teaching and Assessment and Student Experience Strategies; designated enhancement themes; the Guidelines of the Consumer Markets Authority (CMA) in respect of information and the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) in respect of appeals and complaints; and to identify examples of Teaching Excellence.

The requirements of professional, statutory and regulatory bodies are an important reference point where they accredit or recognise programmes.

Possible questions and prompts for the enquiry are given below.

  1. Brief contextual description

How has the evolution of the University affected this subject area? How is the subject team constituted and what changes have there been to the programmes that they offer?

What are the strategic aims and priorities for future development in the subject?

  1. The subject’s track record in managing quality and standards

With reference to outcomes of previous annual monitoring activities, and responses to those outcomes, how effectively has the subject team managed standards, quality, information and enhancement?

This might include how well the subject has managed

  • recommendations from the last ISR
  • identification and building on effective (good) practice
  • action plans in response to annual monitoring and/or visits from Professional Statutory and Regulatory Bodies (PSRBs)
  1. Setting of academic standards

With reference to Part A of the Code, Panels will wish to explore and report on how well the subject team meets the Expectations in broad terms.

What does the available evidence show about how effectively academic standards are set, maintained and managed?

Are learning outcomes written in a way that matches the relevant level descriptors within the FHEQ or relevant qualification framework or qualification descriptor?

The Panel will wish to consider

  • a representative sample of the reports of external examiners
  • programme approval reports
  • any programme reviews by PSRBs
  • the subject area/ School’s response to the reports, where applicable
  1. Achievement of academic standards by students

With reference to the intended learning outcomes for the programmes, and the data on student attainment, the Panel is invited to comment on:

  • the progression of students
  • students’ achievement of the academic standards set for the programmes
  1. The quality of learning opportunities within the subject

University requirements for the students’ learning experience

Teams are asked to provide a short evaluative overview, of between 300-500 words, about how well the subject is achieving the following specific University requirements:

  • For the curriculum to beTeaching Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI);
  • For the curriculum to match the Curriculum Philosophy and Graduate Attributes for Employability Matrix (GAME)[1], introduced in July 2017;
  • To use innovative student-centred pedagogy and meet the principles of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy and the Student Experience Strategy. For example, in relation to the University’s model for early-intervention and transitional support for students:
  • To evaluate the evidence relating to Teaching Excellence
  • To enable students to enhance their digital literacy
  • To provide work based or work related learning opportunities that enhance employability and enterprise and access the support of the School’s Industry Advisory Boards.

Some possible questions:

  • How effectively do tutors ensure that the teaching is research informed and current?
  • How does the subject meet the principles of the LTA and SE strategies?
  • What are the arrangements for programme induction and welcome?
  • How does initial activity support the transition of students through from level 3-6?
  • How are expectations managed for different levels of study?
  • How is peer learning taking place in the subject?
  • Does a Peer Assisted Study Support (PASS) programme exist?
  • How does peer learning cement the development of the learning community in the subject?
  • Are students in HE levels 5-6 working with those coming through the system at levels 3-4?
  • How does the personal tutoring model satisfy the academic (curricular, co-curricular) and pastoral needs (extra-curricular, wellbeing) of the students?
  • What has been learnt from the NSS results and how is the subject team responding?
  • What examples of teaching excellence are there within this subject?
  • How does the subject evaluate the evidence from the NSS that shows subject level results for the survey and the response to the questions about:
  • Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’
  • Learning environment: ‘academic support’
  • How does the subject ensure that its staff and students are digitally literate?
  • How does the subject provide work based or work related learning opportunities and do they enhance employability and enterprise?
  • What has been the impact of the Industry Advisory Board on the subject?

UK Quality Code Expectations

With reference to Part B of the Code Panels will wish to explore how well the subject team has met the Expectations over the past two full academic years.

The Panel is asked to report onhow effectively the subject team meets the UKQC Expectations (B1-B11) and manages its responsibilities at the time of the review.

  • Are there features of good practice?
  • Are there examples of teaching excellence?
  • Is the curriculum teaching intensive and research informed?
  • Are there areas for improvement?
  • What action is the team planning to take in relation to areas for improvement?

Programme design, development and approval (Expectation B1)

How effectively does the subject manage the following:

  • Changes in the purpose and nature of programmes
  • Programme design, development and approval
  • Alignment with the principles of the Learning Teaching and Assessment Strategy?
  • Alignment with the principles of the Student Experience Strategy?

Some possible questions:

  • How well matched are intended learning outcomes with the descriptors given in the FHEQ the subject and qualification benchmark statements?
  • How effective is the fit between the intended learning outcomes and assessment?
  • How does research conducted by staff inform the curriculum?

Recruitment, selection and admission (Expectation B2)

Do recruitment, selection and admission policies and procedures adhere to the principles of fair admission? Are they transparent, reliable, valid, inclusive and underpinned by appropriate organisational structures and processes? Do they support the selection of students who are able to complete their programme?

This might include:

  • The basis for effective recruitment, selection and admission
  • Stages of the recruitment, selection and admission process
  • The effective retention of students

Learning and teaching (Expectation B3)

The focus is on the learning opportunities that the subject makes available to students and on the staff who teach and who support learning, including those staff who are not employees of the University and/or are not based at the University.

How does the subject articulate and systematically review and enhance the provision of learning opportunities and teaching practices?

Is every student enabled to develop as an independent learner, study their chosen subject(s) in depth and enhance their capacity for analytical, critical and creative thinking? This might include

  • The basis for effective learning and teaching
  • Alignment with the principles of theLTA and student experience strategies
  • The learning environment
  • Student engagement in learning
  • Whether there is evidence of TIRI
  • Digital literacy (see possible questions, below, in section G)

Some possible questions:

  • Is there a strategic approach to learning and teaching that is understood by staff, students and other stakeholders?
  • Do all students have an equal and effective opportunity to achieve the intended learning outcomes?
  • Do staff engage in reflection and evaluation of approaches to learning, teaching and assessment and relevant academic scholarship?
  • How does the subject ensure that its staff who are engaged in learning are appropriately qualified competent, up to date and supported?
  • Is there effective evaluation by staff of the strategic approaches to learning, teaching and assessment?
  • Do students receive clear and accurate information about their learning and the available support?
  • How does research conducted by staff inform the curriculum?
  • How well do stafftake deliberate steps to assist every student to understand their responsibility to engage with the learning opportunities provided and shape their learning experience?
  • How well are students given regular opportunities to reflect on feedback and engage in dialogue with staff?

Enabling student development and achievement (Expectation B4)

How effectively do the arrangements and resources enable students to develop their academic, personal and professional potential? This might include

  • Strategic approaches
  • Student transitions
  • Student voice
  • Facilitating development and achievement
  • Digital literacy (see possible questions, below, in section G)

Some possible questions:

  • Is there a planned approach to enabling student development and achievement in the subject?
  • Are there clear roles and responsibilities for enabling student development and achievement amongst internal and any external colleagues?
  • How well does the subject show a commitment to equity?
  • How effectively do staff inform students about opportunities for development and achievement, before and during their studies?
  • How effective are the arrangements for transition and progression?
  • How well does the subject provide students with opportunities to develop academic, personal and professional skills?
  • How does the subject ensure that its staffwho enable learning are appropriately qualified competent, up to date and supported?
  • How well does the subject make available appropriate learning resources and enable students to develop the skills to use them?

Student engagement (Expectation B5)

How effectively does the subject take deliberate steps to engage all students, individually and collectively, as partners in the assurance and enhancement of their educational experience? Where is the student voice and how well do staff members engage in dialogue?

This might include

  • Representational structures
  • Training and ongoing support
  • Informed conversations and the student voice
  • Valuing the student contribution
  • Monitoring, review and continuous improvement

The concept of student engagement has two domains relating to:

  • improving the motivation of students to engage in learning and to learn independently
  • the participation of students in quality enhancement and quality assurance processes, resulting in the improvement of their educational experience.

Expectation B5 is related to the participation of students in quality enhancement and quality assurance processes, which includes but is not restricted to representation of the student view through formal representation mechanisms.

Some possible questions:

Innovations in student involvement in quality assurance and enhancement (especially the nature of the student contribution, and how a diverse student body is included).

  • Can you cite any examples of student contribution to quality enhancement projects?
  • What do you do that you consider to be innovative in the way you approach student involvement with quality assurance?

Staff experience of/participation in student involvement in quality.

  • How do staff support the involvement of students in quality assurance processes?
  • What do staff see as the benefits of student involvement in quality assurance processes, and their contribution to quality enhancement agenda?

How contributions from students are acted upon, and how students know they are acted upon (often referred to as 'closing the feedback loop').

  • Do you have mechanisms in place for closing the feedback loop and what are they?
  • How is the student contribution to quality assurance processes and the enhancement agenda in your subject / at the University evaluated and disseminated?

Assessment of students and the recognition of prior learning (Expectation B6)

Are the processes of assessment used within the programmes equitable, valid and reliable? Do they enable every student to demonstrate the extent to which they have achieved the intended learning outcomes for the credit or qualification being sought?

This might include

  • The basis for effective assessment
  • Developing assessment literacy; Designing and using diverse methods of assessment in line with the LTA strategy
  • Conducting assessment; marking and moderation
  • Examination boards and assessment panels
  • Enhancement of assessment processes and procedures

Some possible questions:

  • Is there an effective and diverse balance of assessment for each programme?
  • Do students receive timely information about assignments and examinations in each module?
  • Are students clear about what is required of them in assessed tasks and examinations?
  • Is the assessment information that is provided for students clear and transparent?
  • Does the subject provide and use effective assessment criteria?
  • Do students receive timely and helpful/ informative written feedback on their assessed work?
  • Do tutors know how to assess students effectively?
  • Are the arrangements for marking plus internal and external moderation of assessed work in line with University requirements?
  • Do tutors understand the arrangements for marking plus internal and external moderation of assessed work?

External examining (Expectation B7)

Does the subject make scrupulous use of external examiners? This might include

  • Being clear about the role of the external examiner
  • The nomination and appointment of external examiners
  • How the subject learns from the experiences of members of staff who carry out the role of external examiner elsewhere
  • Recognition of the work of external examiners/external verifiers
  • External examiners'/external verifiers' reports and how they are used by the subject
  • Sharing the report from external examiners with students on the relevant programme
  • Serious concerns

Some possible questions:

  • Have external examiners attended a University induction/ briefingevent?
  • Do external examiners meet students on a regular basis?
  • Do external examiners approve assessment items/ assignment briefs and examination papers before they are used?
  • Do external examiners receive timely information about the dates of examination boards?
  • Do external examiners express any concerns about academic standards?
  • Do external examiners express any concerns about quality?
  • When external examiners have expressed concerns, how have they been handled by the subject team? Is there an audit trail of clear and effective responses?
  • Do external examiners receive good quality, timely formal written responses from the subject team to their written reports?
  • Do students know where and how to gain access to the reports of external examiners for their chosen programme of study?
  • Have the external examiner(s) visited any Off-Campus versions of the programmes, at least once during their tenure?

Programme monitoring and review (Expectation B8)