ANNUAL STANDARDS AND QUALITY EVALUATIVE REVIEW

FACULTY POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH DEGREES

TEMPLATE

Purpose and Process

  • The focus of this review is on standards and quality assurance / enhancement.
  • The review should provide a commentary on the overall picture of the health and vibrancy of the Faculty’sresearch PGRS provision including explicit consideration of the Student Voice in all matters.
  • The review should include reflection on the Professional Doctorate Awards. (Course Leader reports on the ‘taught elements’ will be provided to the FRD Coordinator ‘for information’).
  • The reviewshould be grounded in readily available qualitative and quantitative data, and be evaluative, reflective and forward-looking.
  • It has the important purpose of allowing identification of issues affecting academic standards and quality so that these can then be subject to further consideration that informs key strategies.
  • It should take account ofFaculty action plansthat feed into the University Strategy.
  • The report will be discussed at Faculty Research Degrees Committee and in a meeting involving the Associate Deans (Academic) and (Students)from which minuted actions will be produced in relation to standards and quality enhancement.
  • It will be subsequently discussed at Faculty Executive from which minuted actions will also be produced, particularly in relation to resource issues. The Faculty approved report will be submitted to University Research Degrees Committee (URDC) and inform the Director of Graduate School’s ASQER Report.
  • Commentary should be provided on the data and should take particular account of trends. Commentaries on data categories should be restricted to a maximum of 500 words.References have been made to QAA UK Quality Code, Chapter B11
  • The Annexes refer to ASQER Data Reports, which will be provided to you and should also be attached to this report.

Academic Year under review

/

20____ /20____

Faculty

See also associated Professional and/or Integrated Doctorate Course Leaders reports:
Specify any named Professional Doctorate Awards owned by Departments/Schools in the Faculty

Specify any Research Degree Collaborative Programme ASQERs and names of Partnerships within the Faculty

/

Department

Standards and Regulations

Using data from relevant sources *please identify issues relating to regulations and standards highlighted in the period under review requiring action and steps taken to address them.

* Sources: External Examiners reports, Periodic Review, Appointment of Independent Chairs, FRDC Minutes (where relevant), Professional Doctorate Course Leaders Reports, Collaborative Academic Contact Reports (where relevant).

Commentary:Consider QAA Quality Code Indicators 1, 2. (Other indicators may also have implications here).
Actions (if any) brought forward from previous report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)
Actions to take forward from previous report / arising from this report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)

Selection, Admission and Induction

Please provide a commentary on PGRS application, selection, enrolment and appropriateness of induction for your Faculty and identify any trends or issues that need further investigation and / or action. Use data from Admissions and Recruitment PIs; Progress and Assessment Q7a (u)PRES; and FRDC Minutes (where relevant).

Commentary: Consider QAA Quality CodeIndicators5, 6, 7, 8
Actions (if any) brought forward from previous report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)
Actions to take forward from previous report / arising from this report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)

Progress, Review and Achievement

Please provide a commentary onPGR progression, achievement and withdrawal statistics for your Faculty and identify any trends or issues that need further investigation and / or action. Use data from Progress and Assessment KPIs;Progress and Assessment (u)PRES; and FRDC Minutes (where relevant).

Commentary: Consider QAA Quality Code Indicators 3, 13, 17, 18, 19
Actions (if any) brought forward from previous report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)
Actions to take forward from previous report / arising from this report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)

Physical and IntellectualResearch Environment

Provide a commentary on the physical resources andaccess to facilities as well as the intellectual development and support (including supervision) available within your Faculty and identifyany trends or issues that need further investigation and / or action. Use data from Supervisor focused KPIs; Supervision (u)PRES; Resources (u)PRES; Research Culture (u)PRES; and FRDC Minutes, including Examiner feedback (where relevant). Any resource implications should be noted on the last page of this report.

Commentary: Consider QAA Quality Code Indicators 4, 9, 10, 11, 12
Actions (if any) brought forward from previous report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)
Actions to take forward from previous report / arising from this report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)

Development of Research and Other Skills.

Please comment on the data and evaluate how PGRsin your Faculty are supported in their Professional Development, including teaching and research skills development where appropriate. Use data from Personal Professional Development and Research Skill KPIs; Research Skills (u)PRES; Professional Development (u)PRES; Opportunities (u)PRES; and FRDC Minutes (where relevant).

Commentary: Consider QAA Quality Code Indicators 14, 15
Actions (if any) brought forward from previous report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)
Actions to take forward from previous report / arising from this report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)

PGR Satisfaction

Provide a commentary on the response of your Faculty to student feedback (including the Postgraduate Research Experience Survey, Student Voice opportunities) and the effectiveness of the Faculty’s responses to any formal Appeals / Complaints where applicable. Use data from Overall Experience (u)PRES; Appeal / Complaint KPIs; and FRDC Minutes (where relevant).

Commentary: Consider QAA Quality Code Indicators 16, 20, 21, 22
Actions (if any) brought forward from previous report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)
Actions to take forward from previous report / arising from this report
Action / Comment on progress / completion
(1)
(2)
(3)

Working with others (where applicable)

Please provide a brief commentary on the adequacy and effectiveness of arrangements to support Collaborative Research Degree Partnerships and Flexible and Distributed Learning (FDL) with a Partner in your Faculty with particular reference to the quality of PGR learning opportunities

Examples of working with others / Commentary
(1)Collaborative activities
(2)Articulation and advanced standing arrangements
(3)Working with others through either MoAs or MoUs

Conclusions

Based on your responses above, summarise up to three changes/enhancements planned for the course(s), including proposed timescale.

Change/enhancement / Timescale
(1)
(2)
(3)
Identify possible resource issues for consideration by Faculty Executive in the coming year
(1)
(2)
(3)

Based on the evidence included in this report, have academic standards been maintained during the year under review?

YesNo

Author / Date
Date considered by FRD Committee
Date considered by AD(A/S)
Date considered by Faculty Executive
Date considered by URD Committee