ISR EVALUATION MEETING
12 JULY 2011
Present: Simon Pallett (Dean of UG Studies, HaSS), Chris Phillips (Dean of UG Studies, SAgE), John Appleby, Debbie Bevitt, Dave Passmore, Simon Meacher (QuILT), Gilly Weddell (QuILT), Lauraine Pye (QuILT), Lynn Oakes (FMS Quality Team), Wendy Love (QuILT), Karen Samples (HaSS Quality Team), Deborah Marshall (QuILT), Phil Ansell, Robert Carey (student team member), Lydia Wysocki (QuILT), Ethan Hack, Malcolm Farrow
1 General and Format of ISR
Revised process had been positively received. Overall impression was that a single-day review visit was a good format.
Could be helpful to allow flexible approach to length of visit for more complex programmes
Need to explore the potential for team members to meet with external and subject staff the day before the visit; team briefing is critically important (particularly input of the external) for context-setting
Review team needs to cover lot of ground in a single day – secretary and chair need to decide on optimum schedule of meetings with the subject group. Tour of learning resources does not need to be compulsory, team could meet students day before, feedback meeting could take place morning after review day. Each of these scenarios would release more time for discussion with staff on the day.
Team dinner recognised as important in acknowledging people’s contributions.
Action: ‘Value for Money’ aspect of ISR was due to be discussed by a cross-institutional group headed by the Registrar on 13 July…
2 Pre-ISR QA Check
Original intention was for Faculty Quality staff to participate in the exercise with QuILT until such time staff from QuILT were fully familiar with Faculty QM processes.
Need to find the right balance between having Faculty involvement, taking care not to ask the same question more than once, and an exercise that is suitably independent.
Could adopt a theme-based approach looking at patterns over time or apply a sampling trail model (e.g. the review team selects one of three areas to trail, all of which the subject group would have prepared in advance)
Current requirement to see a worked example of a staff workload model is felt to be inappropriate as the document reveals little to the uninitiated. The review team could, however, legitimately ask how staff are given time to manage their workload allocation e.g. DPD duties
Action: SM and Quality Liaison Group to discuss ways of fine-tuning this element of the process.
3 Recruiting review team members
QuILT reported difficulties in obtaining staff and student team members. The shortage of staff members willing to participate could relate to ‘engagement fatigue’, but it may also be that the size of the pool of staff nominated to serve on ISRs could be enlarged by asking larger academic units to have a higher number of representatives (as opposed to the current 2/3 per academic unit).
Academic units are perhaps selecting those staff who are most familiar with quality processes and paperwork, and this naturally makes for a small field of suitably qualified staff.
Action: SM to write to academic units to request that list of potential ISR reps be refreshed
It had been a struggle to recruit student reviewers but ultimately 4 out of 6 reviews in 2010/11 had student team members. Need to find a mechanism for recruiting students to each review team year on year. Student Union could be asked to include item on ISRs in its e-mail newsletter; target SSCs and/or use School reps; target school careers sessions with a purpose-made briefing document. Should we consider a fee / other form of reward?
4 Training information
Providing the ISR training materials on a Blackboard community/module would help to make them more accessible and possibly result in more staff being aware, developing their knowledge.
Action: SM to work with QuILT colleagues to establish a Bb community for ISR.
5 Role of the Faculty Quality Manager
Viewpoints differ, but ISR provides FQMs with opportunity to work closely with schools and is seen as valuable chance to discuss L&T, take time to reflect and assist both the team and the school. ISRs are sometimes scheduled during the busiest time of the year for Faculties so workload does occasionally prevent FQMs taking part.