Annual Monitoring Guidelines for 2017- 18 · Annual Monitoring Guidelines for 2017-18 ... Defining TIRI and Teaching Excellence 44 6. ... Off campus 2017 programmes1

0

Annual Monitoring Guidelines for 2017-18 Issued by the Standards and Enhancement Office, September 2017

Link to UNiPULSE Link to Annual Monitoring Website

http://reports.bolton.ac.uk/Docs/Pages/Report.aspx?ItemPath=%2fReporting+General%2fPULSE%2fUNIPULSE%2f10+-+Report+Selector&ViewMode=Detail

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/Quality/RM/AnnualMonitoring/Home.aspx

1

2

CONTENTS

Page

A. The purposes of Annual Monitoring

4

B. The stages of Annual Monitoring

5

Stage 1: The Programme Plan 6 Stage 2: The Live Action Partnership Plan 10 Stage 3: The School Quality Enhancement Plan (SQEP/DQEP) 11 Stage 4: The University Quality Enhancement Plan (UQEP) 15

Annexes

Page

1. Summary of the Main Stages of Annual Monitoring 2017-18, for programmes delivered in 2016-17 - includes due dates.

18

2. Programme Plan Template

24

3. School Quality Enhancement Plan (SQEP/DQEP) Template

32

4. University Quality Enhancement Plan (UQEP) Template

38

5. Defining TIRI and Teaching Excellence 44

6. The Curriculum Philosophy and Graduate Attributes Matrix for Employability

52

3

4

A. The purposes of Annual Monitoring Annual monitoring occurs at the level of: programme; subject/partner organisation; School/Division; and University. It is intended to provide an opportunity to:

review trends in relevant data against key performance indicators

evaluate academic practice

identify strengths and share good practice (worthy of dissemination)

identify opportunities

identify areas for improvement including any potential concerns or risks that need to be managed and/or mitigated

action plan for enhancement

A summary of quantitative data is provided for the last three years, through the UNiPULSE Annual Profiles, which are presented as follows:

The quantitative data provided through UNiPULSE Annual Profiles can be accessed through the following link: UNiPULSE. UNiPULSE summaries are presented for each student, course (programme), subject area, School and the University. The same data source is used at every level to ensure the integrity and accuracy of the aggregated data. The process is to evaluate the trends revealed by the data and to review and reflect upon the management of academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities offered to students during the previous academic year. The ethos is one of continuous quality improvement / enhancement of the University’s programmes and the students’ experience. The intended outcomes are to share good practice, identify opportunities and areas for improvement / enhancement and to take relevant action. Such action might be to take advantage of development opportunities or to enhance an aspect of management of the academic provision. An action plan is used to specify:

1. good practice to be shared 2. opportunities for development 3. areas for improvement/enhancement 4. the success indicator(s) (how you will know when completed action has been

achieved successfully)


5

5. the timeframe for the completion of action 6. who takes the action 7. how completed action will be evaluated

The outcomes from annual monitoring over several years are used to inform internal subject review, which normally happens on a five year cycle. Annual monitoring is an integral part of the University’s annual planning process. The chart in ‘Annex 1: Summary of the main stages of annual monitoring,’ indicates the inputs and expected outputs and who is responsible for the various stages and dates when reports are due for completion.

B. The stages of Annual Monitoring The following table summarises the stages of the annual monitoring process at programme, subject/partner, School/Division and University levels.

Stage Organisational unit

Type of report Author Due date for initial version

Due date for

updated version

1

On campus programmes

Programme Plan Programme leader

27 October 2017

15 March 2017 Off campus

programmes1

Programme Plan Link tutor

2 Off campus:

partner organisation

Live Action Partnership Plan

(LAPP)

Academic Partnership

Manager

17 November 2017

6 April 2018

3

On campus: School

School2 / Division3 Quality Enhancement

Plan (SQEP/DQEP)

Head of School or AGC (SELE)

27 November 2017

27 April 2018

Off campus: Division

Division Quality Enhancement Plan (DQEP)

Head of Off

Campus Division or AGC (SELE)

4 Standards and Enhancement

Office

University Quality Enhancement Plan (UQEP)

Academic Registrar or nominee

24 February 2018

11 May 2017

5 Standards and Enhancement

Office

Governor’s Annual

Assurance Statement on

Quality to HEFCE

Assistant Vice Chancellor (Quality)

14 November 2017

N/A

1 A Programme Plan is required for each Off Campus programme and this is written by the Link Tutor from the School that owns the programme. 2 The SQEP includes the Off Campus programmes that are owned by the School. 3 The DQEP includes the Off Camus programmes that are owned by OfCD.

6

7

Stage 1: The Programme Plan Overview The Programme Plan evaluates the current health of a programme, or by agreement (with the AGC-SELE), a cluster of programmes and proposes actions for development based on evidence of significant issues / good practice and situational factors. In the case of a cluster of programmes, the plan’s author is required to work with the cluster Programme Leaders to agree and update the plan. For on-campus programmes, the author of the Programme Plan is normally the Programme Leader. For off-campus programmes, it is normally the Link Tutor (LT) together with the Partner Course Manager who will complete the document. Where the programme is delivered on campus and at off campus locations, the Link Tutor(s) should write a Programme Plan for each occurrence / delivery location. In such cases, the on campus Programme Leader is expected to review the suite of Programme Plans, prior to publishing, to identify common items. The common items should either be addressed within all the Programme Plans or be escalated for attention at subject level through the Subject Annual Self Evaluation Report. The Programme Plan provides:

1. A review of the previous year’s programme management good practice, areas for improvement and planned enhancement activity.

2. A narrative comprising an analysis of UNiPULSE Course Summary data

This includes statistics about a number of parameters over the last three complete academic years. As data follows the student life cycle, respective sets of statistics become available at different points in the academic cycle. The Programme Plan should be refreshed and updated prior to presentation at a subsequent SSLC. The plan is updated by inclusion of additional data/ information as it becomes available. It is expected that the data will be available as per the following schedule: Data Type Expected release date

UPSS Mid July

Recruitment Early – Mid October Profile Early – Mid October Progression Early – Mid October

Attainment Early – Mid October DLHE Early – Mid October NSS Mid October

PTES Mid - Late October MEQ February and July

3. Identification of Significant Action Points in tabular format

Significant Action Points are identified and entered into the Action Plan

Writing the Programme Plan The Programme Leader/ Link Tutor uses the template provided in Annex 2 to write the draft Programme Plan for discussion by staff and students at the Student Staff Liaison Committees (SSLCs). The purpose of the Programme Plan is to evaluate the effectiveness of the operational management of academic standards and quality at programme and module level. The

http://reports.bolton.ac.uk/Docs/Pages/Report.aspx?ItemPath=%2fReporting+General%2fAnalysis+of+Applications%2fAoA+-+Maintenance+-+SITS+staff+roles&ViewMode=Detail

8

Programme Plan comprises a critical analysis of the programme during the preceding period of one to three academic years. Its focus is on how well academic standards have been set and maintained and on how well the quality of the student learning experience has been managed, at programme level. It should identify good practice and opportunities for development at module and programme level. It should identify areas for improvement / enhancement and key priorities with specific timeframes. The Programme Plan should be written by 27 October 2017 and updated by 15 March 2018 (see Annex 1). The draft Programme Plan should be presented to the first Student Staff Liaison Committee meeting of the academic year. Following discussion at SSLC, the plan can be modified / confirmed after each meeting. The Programme Plan should be updated, during the academic year, as relevant management information (e.g. student data) becomes available and/or action points are completed. The updated Programme Plan should be considered at the second SSLC in March/April 2018.

To complete the initial draft Programme Plan, the Programme Leader will require the following information items: 1. The template for the Programme Plan (Annex 2 of this document) 2. The External Examiner’s Report: – available from here for review, response and comment

in the Programme Plan; 3. The formal written reply (letter) to the External Examiner about her/his report, indicating

the nature of any action being taken in response to any recommendations in the report. This should have been authorised within the School/ subject area according to local practice.

4. Students’ views: captured in a variety of ways, such as through Module Evaluation for all modules, focus groups, discussion at SSLC: for review, response and comment in the Programme Plan; In particular, the evidence from the NSS showing programme level results for the survey and the response to the questions about:

a. Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’ b. Learning environment: ‘academic support’

5. The views of students and staff to be included in the narrative of the Programme Plan; 6. Evidence about how well the programme has met the requirement to be Teaching

Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI); 7. Evidence about how well the programme has adopted the Curriculum Philosophy and

Graduate Attributes Matrix for Employability (see Annex 6, below) 8. Evidence about how well the programme uses student-centred pedagogy and meets the

requirements of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy (LTA Strategy). For example in using diverse assessment methods;

9. Evidence about how well the programme enables students to enhance their digital literacy; 10. Evidence about how well the programme provides work based or work related learning

opportunities that enhance employability and enterprise; 11. Evidence about how well the programme accesses an Industry Advisory Panel; 12. Evidence about how well the programme is engaging with the Student Experience

Strategy; 13. Evidence to show examples of Teaching Excellence within the Programme 14. The UNiPULSE Course Summary4. The Course Summary comprises student data for

review, analysis and comment in the Programme Plan. The UNiPULSE Course Summary is available from: UNiPULSE and is presented as follows:

4 The UNiPULSE summaries replace the Data Analysis Report used in previous years.

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/Quality/EEE/ExternalExaminersReports/EEReportsHome.aspx


9

Exception Reporting To streamline the narrative in the Programme Plan, the principle of exception reporting applies to the review of the data provided in the UNiPULSE Course Summary. The data is presented in charts many of which specify benchmarks for the target level and the minimum acceptable level for each data item, as follows:

a green line to show the target level for a given data item (i.e. 30% for conversion)

a red line to show the minimum acceptable level for a given data item (i.e.15% for conversion)

a pale blue line to show the platinum target level for e.g. enrolments (i.e. 40 (n) for enrolments)

10

Where the value for the data item meets the target and/or falls within the acceptable range between the green and red lines, there is no need to comment on the data item. Where the value for the data item does not meet the target level or falls below the minimum acceptable level, please ensure that you provide an exception report and comment on the data item.

So, for example, where the conversion rate (applications to enrolment) is above the green line or below the red line on the chart, please provide an explanation of what is shown by the trends in the data and indicate the action that has been taken/ will be taken in future.

Not all charts contain benchmarks. Where a chart does not contain benchmarks, please provide an explanation of the trends shown by the data and indicate the action that has been taken/ will be taken in future. To support the analysis, it is possible to ‘drill-through’ the data in the UNiPULSE Course Summary charts to reveal greater detail down to the level of an individual student. Benchmarks and Key Performance Indicators The benchmarks for the target level and minimum acceptable level per data item (where shown) are determined by the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) of the University, according to strategic priorities (Strategic Plan 2015-2020). As indicated in the Programme Plan template (Annex 2) the following items should be appended to the completed Programme Plan:

o The UNiPULSE Course Summary used in writing the report (top level only, i.e. the overview of all parameters and not the ‘drill-through’ analyses)

o The Report(s) from the External Examiner(s) for the programme o A copy of the formal written response to each External Examiner indicating the

way(s) in which the programme team is responding to any recommendations in the External Examiner’s report. Where an External Examiner’s report does not contain any recommendations, the formal written response should comprise an acknowledgement letter.

Publication and dissemination of the Programme Plan Once the Programme Plan has been written, it should be published and disseminated, as follows:

1. The Programme Plan should be forwarded to Head of School/Division and the Academic Group Coordinator (SELE);

2. Following consideration at each SSLC the agreed Programme Plan should be uploaded by the author onto the Quality Portal on Moodle 2. For advice about the location and access to the relevant Quality Portal please see the AGC SELE for your School/Division.

3. The Programme Plan should be presented to the Semester One and Semester Two Student, Staff Liaison Committees for discussion/consultation/progress report/approval, as follows.

a. Semester One 2016 meeting in draft b. Semester Two 2017 meeting in updated format

4. The Programme Plan is then received by the Quality Standing Panel for the School

/Division Board.

11

Stage 2: The Live Action Partnership Plan

Overview

The Live Action Partnership Plan (LAPP) is a continuously updated improvement plan

capturing actions normally determined at the Partnership Development Meeting (PDM).

Actions can be added at any time, but the majority of actions will result from the pro-

active review of quality monitoring data at the PDM.

The template for the Live Action Partnership Plan (LAPP) is shown in appendix 3 of the

Partnership Oversight and Development Handbook, 2017-18. The Live Action Partnership Plan (LAPP) is a continuous improvement plan, based on the review of partnership quality data and documentation. Actions must be discussed and agreed by all parties in the partnership and may result in improvement action either at the University or at the Partner Institution. It is the responsibility of the University Academic Partnership Manager (APM) to keep the Live Action Partnership Plan (LAPP) up to date. This is a continuous process, as actions are completed and signed off or new actions generated. It is recognised, however, that the majority of new actions will be discussed and agreed at the three Partnership Development Meetings as well as existing items progressed or signed off. The Live Action Partnership Plan (LAPP) forms an appendix to the Partner Overview Form (POF) and Partner Overview Forms are periodically reviewed at the University’s Partnership Panel.

12

Stage 3: The School Quality Enhancement Plan (SQEP/DQEP)

Overview School Quality Enhancement Plans address objectives, their source(s), intended outcomes, actions, responsibilities and progress which relate to academic standards and quality matters as they affect the School as a whole. The precise nature and format of the SQEP/DQEP will be influenced by the requirements of Annual Local Planning as determined from time to time by the Planning Group. In the case of Off Campus Division, the document is called the Division Quality Enhancement Plan (DQEP). The SQEP/DQEP should represent a synthesis of the major, common and recurring themes, arising from earlier stage of annual monitoring and elsewhere. For example, aspects of the external environment which present opportunities with which whole School or significant parts of the School need to engage. There may be issues that need to be addressed or good practice that needs to be shared across the School and indeed the wider University. The SQEP/DQEP should focus on the issues and developments which affect the School as a whole and should not significantly repeat or summarise each and every issue arising from subject, or programme, level evaluations and plans.

Writing the School/ Division Quality Enhancement Plan The Head of School/Division uses the template provided in Annex 4 to draft the School/ Division Quality Enhancement Plan (SQEP/ DQEP) for discussion by staff and students at the School Board. Where programmes from the School are taught off campus in other delivery locations, the SQEP should cross refer to the relevant Live Action Partnership Plans5 as well as the relevant SASERs. The DQEP should be based on the Live Action Partnership Plans. The SQEP/DQEP should comprise a critical analysis by staff and students of the effectiveness of the operation of the School’s provision at all delivery locations during the preceding period of up to three academic years. Its focus is on how well academic standards have been set and maintained and on how well the quality of the student learning experience has been managed, at School level. It should make explicit reference to University strategic priorities such as TIRI, Teaching Excellence The SQEP/DQEP should be written by 24 November 2017 and updated by 26Apri l 2018 (Annex 1 refers). The draft SQEP/DQEP is presented to the second School/Division Board of the academic year for consideration by staff and students. Following discussion at the School /Division Board, the draft SQEP/DQEP can be modified/ confirmed. During the academic year, the SQEP/DQEP should be updated, as relevant management information (student data) becomes available and / or action points are completed. The updated SQEP/DQEP should be considered at the subsequent School/Division Board in May 2018. The SQEP/DQEP is intended to distil good practice and areas for improvement that affect the School/ Division as a whole. The SQEP/DQEP brings together the quality planning process for the School/Division and informs the local academic plan for the School/ Division.

5 See the ‘Partnership oversight and development handbook 2016-17’, on the SEO webpage for annual monitoring.

13

To complete the initial draft SQEP/DQEP, the Head of School/ Division will require the following sources of information: 1. The template for the School / Division Quality Enhancement Plan (given in Annex 4 of

this document) 2. The SASERs for all subjects within the on campus Schools; or the Live Action

Partnership Plans (LAPPs) for all partners within the Off Campus Division 3. Students’ views: captured in a variety of ways, such as through the National Student

Survey, the University Programme Student Survey, the Postgraduate Taught Experience Survey, focus groups, discussion at School Board: for review, response and comment in the SQEP/DQEP

4. In particular the evidence from the NSS showing the School level results for the survey and in particular the response to the questions about:

a. Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’ b. Learning environment: ‘academic support’;

5. The views of students and staff to be included in the narrative of the SQEP/DQEP; 6. Evidence about how well the School/Division’s provision has met the requirement to be

Teaching Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI); 7. Evidence about how well the School/Division’s provision has adopted the Curriculum

Philosophy and Graduate Attributes Matrix for Employability (see Annex 6, below) 8. Evidence about how well the School/Division uses student-centred pedagogy and meets

the requirements of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy (LTA Strategy). For example in using diverse assessment methods;

9. Evidence about how well the School/Division enables students to enhance their digital literacy;

10. Evidence about how well the School/Division provides work based or work related learning opportunities that enhance employability and enterprise;

11. Evidence about how well the School/Division provides operates an Industry Advisory Panel;

12. Evidence about how well the School/Division is engaging with the Student Experience Strategy;

13. Evidence to show examples of Teaching Excellence within the School or Division; 14. The UNiPULSE School/Division Summary6. The School/Division Summary comprises

student data for review, analysis and comment in the SQEP/DQEP. The School/Division Summary is available from: UNiPULSE and is presented as follows:

6 This replaces the Data Analysis Report used in previous years


14

Exception Reporting To streamline the narrative in the SQEP/DQEP, the principle of exception reporting applies to the review of the data provided in the UNiPULSE School Summary7. The data is presented in charts many of which specify benchmarks for the target level and the minimum acceptable level for each data item, as follows:

a green line to show the target level for a given data item (i.e. 30% for conversion)

a red line to show the minimum acceptable level for a given data item (i.e. 15% for conversion)

a pale blue line to show the platinum target level for e.g. enrolments (i.e. 40 (n) for enrolments)

Where the value for the data item meets the target and/or falls within the acceptable range between the green and red lines, there is no need to comment on the data item.

7 A corresponding but not identical data summary is available for Off Campus Division

15

Where the value for the data item does not meet the target level or falls below the minimum acceptable level, please ensure that you provide an exception report and comment on the data item.

So, for example, where the conversion rate (applications to enrolment) is above the green line or below the red line on the chart, please provide an explanation of what is shown by the trends in the data and indicate the action that has been taken/ will be taken in future.

Not all charts contain benchmarks. Where a chart does not contain benchmarks, please provide an explanation of what is shown by the trends in the data and indicate the action that has been taken/ will be taken in future. To support the analysis, it is possible to ‘drill-through’ the data in the School Summary charts to reveal greater detail down to the level of an individual student. As indicated in the SQEP/DQEP template (Annex 3) the following items should be appended to the completed SQEP/DQEP:

o The UNiPULSE School Summary used in writing the report (top level only, i.e. the overview of all parameters and not the ‘drill-through’ analyses)

o Links to evidence describing the information items 1-12, above

Publication and dissemination of the SQEP/DQEP Once the SQEP/DQEP has been written, it should be published and disseminated, as follows:

1. The confirmed SQEP/DQEP should be uploaded by the author (Head of School/Division)

to the relevant L-drive folder: L:\Academic Departments\Academic Schools\2016-

17\[Name of School]\Quality

2. The SQEP/DQEP should be presented to each School Board for discussion/ consultation/ progress report/approval, as follows.

a. Initial version to be presented to School Board held before 24 November 2017. b. Updated version to be presented to School Board held before May 2018.

2. A final version of the initial SQEP/DQEP should be forwarded to the Academic Registrar

before 8 December 2017.

16

Stage 4: The University Quality Enhancement Plan (UQEP)

Overview The Standards and Enhancement Office produces the University Quality Enhancement Plan (UQEP). The UQEP is intended to distil good practice and areas for improvement that affect the University as a whole. It provides oversight of how well academic standards have been set and maintained and how well the quality of the student experience has been managed across the University. The UQEP is presented to Education Committee and Senate annually and is incorporated into the University planning cycle.

Writing the UQEP The UQEP should be written by 24 February 2018 (Annex 1 refers) and updated by 11 May 2018. The draft UQEP is presented for discussion by staff and students at Education Committee and Senate. Following discussion at Education Committee and Senate, the UQEP can be modified / confirmed. During the academic year, the UQEP can be updated as relevant management and planning information becomes available and/ or as action points are completed.

To complete the initial draft UQEP (using the template in Annex 4), the author will require the following sources of information:

The Template for the UQEP (Annex 5)

The Overview Report on the Reports of External Examiners for 2016-17

The SQEP/DQEPs, for all Schools/ Division incorporating: o Evidence about how well the Schools meet the requirement to be Teaching Intensive

and Research Informed (TIRI); o Evidence about how well the Schools/Division’s provision has adopted the Curriculum

Philosophy and Graduate Attributes Matrix for Employability (see Annex 6, below) o Evidence about how well the Schools use student-centred pedagogy and meets the

requirements of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment strategy (LTA Strategy). For example in using diverse assessment methods;

o Evidence about how well the Schools enable students to enhance their digital literacy; o Evidence about how well the Schools provide work based or work related learning

opportunities that enhance employability and enterprise; o Students’ views: captured in a variety of ways, such as through the National Student

Survey, the University Programme Student Survey, focus groups, for review, response and comment in the UQEP

Evidence from the NSS showing the institutional level results for the survey and in particular the response to the questions about

o Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’ o Learning environment: ‘academic support’

The views of students and staff at institutional level to be included in the narrative of the UQEP;

An action plan which identifies good practice, areas for improvement, opportunities for development, the timeframe for their completion, by whom and how completed action will be evaluated.

The UNiPULSE University Summary8. The University Summary comprises student data for review, analysis and comment in the UQEP. The University Summary is available from UNiPULSE and is presented as follows:

8 This replaces the Data Analysis Report used in previous years


17

Publication and dissemination of the UQEP Once the UQEP has been written, (by 24-Feb-18) it should be published and disseminated, as follows:

1. The initial UQEP (24 Feb 2018) should be uploaded by the author onto the L-drive for SEO.

2. The updated UQEP should be written by 11 May 2018 and uploaded to the L-drive for SEO.

3. The initial UQEP should be presented to be endorsed by the Education Committee (11 April 2018) and for approval to Senate (21 May 2018). In order to monitor progress, the updated UQEP should be re-presented to Education Committee (6 June 2018).

18

19

Annex 1

Summary of the Main Stages of Annual Monitoring 2017-18 for programmes delivered in 2016-17

20

21

Summary of the Main Stages of Annual Monitoring 2017-18 for programmes delivered in 2016-17 Please Note 9

Inputs Outputs Produced by and when

Submitted to and Considered by

Main Feedback / Response / Request for

Action to

Updates

Determined by PQEP items and including analysis of: o Student numbers,

retention data o Module/pathway

assessment data o Student module and

programme feedback

External examiner reports

Operational feedback

External scrutiny and influence

Last year’s outstanding PQEP items

Programme level annual monitoring data from UNiPULSE

Programme Plan (PP)

Programme Leader

by end October (Deadline 27/10/17)

Progress Updated

Mid-March (Deadline 15/03/18)

Student Staff Liaison Committee

(via Chair)

School Board

(via Chair)

Programme Team

(via Programme Leader)

Student Staff Liaison Committee

(via Chair)

Considered at each Student Staff Liaison

Committee and School Boards

All Programme Plans including those for linked Off-Campus programmes

School level annual monitoring data from UNiPULSE

School Board Minutes

School Quality Enhancement Plan

(incorporating an overview of the

School’s collaborative provision – see below)

Academic Co-ordinator (Quality) by end of November (Deadline 24/11/17)

Update End April (Deadline 26/04/18)

School Board

(via Chair)

University Planning Group

(part of School Plan)

Education Committee

School / Division Board of Study

(via Chair)

Head of School/Division

Updates and progress considered at each School Board

when appropriate

School QEP

University Quality Enhancement Plan

and Review of

SEO Officers by end February

2018

Annual Report to Education Committee and Senate on (i) any

specific areas for

Specific Actions for University, Schools as

appropriate

Considered by Education Committee

and Senate.

9 “School” refer also to the Off Campus Division and “Head of School” includes Head of Off Campus

22




Action to

Updates

Annual Monitoring Outcomes

(Deadline 24/02/18)

Update Mid May

(Deadline 11/05/18)

concern, (ii) areas/aspects of good practice (iii) institutional

issues

University Programmes Delivered Collaboratively

PQEPs Encompassing Collaborative Provision

Programme Plans Encompassing Collaborative Provision

Programme level annual monitoring data from UNiPULSE.

Live Action Partnership Plan (incorporating an overview of the

School and Centre’s collaborative provision and including relevant

elements from Programme Plans –

see above)

Academic Co-ordinator (Quality) by 17 November

2017

Updated by 06 April 2018

Off Campus Division / Centre Board of Study

(via Chair)

Partnerships Panel

School team; Student Staff Liaison Committee

Heads of Schools/Head of off campus Division/ Centre Directors ; AC (Quality); Programme

Leader; University Link Tutor (for OfCD programmes)

Considered at each Off Campus

Division/Centre Board of Study

(Quality Committee)

Partnerships Panel

Off Campus Division/Live Action Partnership Plan (incorporating an overview of the School/Centre’s collaborative provision)

University Quality Enhancement Plan

and Review of Annual Monitoring

Outcomes (incorporating an overview of the

University’s collaborative

provision)

SEO Officers by Mid May 2018

(Deadline 11/05/18)

Education Committee

Senate

Off Campus Division Board / Centre Board of

Study

(via Chair)

and

Academic Registrar

Considered by Education Committee

and Senate.

Articulation Arrangements for Partner Programmes

23




Action to

Updates

Annual Monitoring Information from Articulation Partner

Annual Monitoring Report for Articulation

Arrangements

Collaborative Partner via

University Link Tutor

by end of June

School/Centre Board of Study (via minutes)

Student Staff Liaison Committee (via Chair)

University Link Tutor; Articulation Partner

Confirmation of receipt to Education

Committee

24

25

Annex 2

Programme Plan Template

26

27

PROGRAMME PLAN

October 2017/ March 2018 (delete as appropriate)

Insert date and version number of this document

Complete either 1 or 2:

1. On Campus Programmes*

Insert qualification and title(s) of Programme or Programme Cluster

(e.g. BA Hons: Business Management; MA in Leadership and Management)

*indicate where an on-campus programme is

delivered at an off-campus partner and include the delivery location(s)

PSRBs and the Programmes to which they apply

2. Off Campus Programmes*

Insert qualification and title(s) of Programme or Programme Cluster delivered at a partner organisation

and the delivery location

(e.g. BA Hons: Business Management; MA in Leadership and Management)

* a separate Programme Plan is required for

each occurrence of a programme and delivery location

PSRBs and the Programmes to which they apply

Name and role of Author(s): ___________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Considered at (SSLC/s, name/s, and date/s): _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________

28

1 Review of previous year (2016-17)

UNiPULSE Course Summary – data analysis

What important messages are evident from your data reports?

Are there any trends over time that require action and by whom? Provide a short commentary on the trends in the data, remembering to follow the principle of exception reporting where targets have NOT been met:

Exception Report [remember that not all sections will require completion]

Number of Applications:

Conversions 1 (Applications to Enrolment):

Conversions 2 (Offers to Enrolment10):

Enrolments:

Average entry tariff:

Attendance and retention:

Withdrawn in year:

Progression percentage:

Achievement of a good honours degree:

DLHE results (% graduate employment or further study):

Average module mark:

Modules Passed first time:

Outcomes from the Module Evaluation Reports: Insert a list of the modules and comment on the module evaluation outcomes11

2. Overview

Provide an overview here and identify action points, either to promote good practice, opportunities or address areas for improvement. Incorporate the action points into section 3, below. (Fewer actions that are achievable are preferable to a long list of actions that are not achieved).

10 Available by drilling through the data on conversions 1 to reveal additional data 11 Available from http://meqresults.bolton.ac.uk/Home


http://meqresults.bolton.ac.uk/Home

29

Setting and maintaining academic standards. Indicate whether action points from previous Programme Plan have been completed

Strengths and opportunities:

Features of good practice12:

Areas (maximum 3) for improvement/ enhancement (for transfer to the action plan, below):

With reference to the comments of the External Examiner(s) provide a short evaluative overview, of between 150-250 words, about the setting and maintaining of academic standards here…

The quality of the student learning experience. Completion of action points from previous Programme Plan



Areas (maximum 3) for improvement/ enhancement (for transfer to the action plan, below):

Provide a short evaluative overview here, of between 300-500 words, about the quality of the student learning experience, evaluate, in particular, how well the programme:

has met the requirement to be Teaching Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI)14;

12 Items that are worthy of dissemination to others 13 Items that are worthy of dissemination to others 14 See Annex 7

30

uses student-centred pedagogy and meets the requirements of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy (LTA Strategy);

enables students to enhance their digital literacy;

provides work based or work related learning opportunities that enhance employability and enterprise;

accesses the support of the Industry Advisory Board;

meets the requirements of the Student Experience Strategy

In particular, please comment on the evidence from the NSS showing subject level results for the survey and the response to the questions about o Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’ o Learning environment: ‘academic support’ o Overall satisfaction

Please provide examples of Teaching Excellence Write your narrative here:

31

3. Significant Actions Points: Action Plan for the programme(s)

Provide a summary of the significant action points, indicating how success will be evaluated as well as who takes action, where action is reported how the outcomes will be evaluated and indicate the progress to date.

To which element of the HEFCE Baseline Regulatory Requirements15 does this item relate?

Evidence sources

Matters identified Good practice

(GP)

Area for improvement (AFI)

Intended outcomes ...or ‘success indicators’

Action to be taken to achieve intended outcomes

Target Date (2017-18 or 2018-19)

Action by Insert role title

Reported to

Evaluation indicate the process or evidence

Progress report Use Traffic light system: Red, Amber, Green and Blue for

completed16

e.g. Code of Practice for HE Part C Information

or The OIA good practice framework for handling complaints and academic appeals

e.g. Foundation module registers Module statistics (July 2017 Assessment Board) Programme monitoring data (2016-17) SSLC Minutes May 2017

e.g. GP: implementation of Enhanced Personal Tutor role in partnership with …. AFI: Foundation year retention and progression needs to be improved

e.g. Improved attendance, retention and progression of foundation year students.

e.g. Strengthen personal tutor interventions. Evaluate teaching, learning and assessment strategies and support via Foundation Programme Network.

e.g. 2017-18

e.g. Programme Leader, Personal Tutors

e.g. SSLC Nov 2017 XXX [insert name] School Board 2017-18

e.g. Evidence: % attendance and % pass rate increasing

e.g. Amber – Personal tutoring interventions applied (Nov 2017)

Insert more rows as required

15 Please cite the element of the Baseline requirements to which the action point relates. HEFCE Baseline Regulatory Requirements include: The frameworks for higher education qualifications, as set out in the UK Quality Code for Higher Education; The Expectations of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education; The OIA good practice framework for handling complaints and academic appeals; The CUC Guidelines on Governance; The Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA) Guidance; HEFCE’s Statement of Good Practice on higher education course changes and closures. 16 Red = not going to achieve intended outcome within stated timeline/Amber = problems identified and additional action needed to bring back on track/Green = on track to achieve intended outcomes within planned timeframe/Blue = Actions completed and intended outcomes achieved.

http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/HEFCE,2014/Content/Regulation/UKSC%20text%20for%20web%2024%204%2017.pdf



32

4 Overview of future plans for the programme

Looking further to the future than the current academic session, provide an overview of future opportunities that will influence the Programme Plan and help to determine the direction of the programme (up to 300 words). What are the opportunities to be exploited or the threats or risks that need to be mitigated and how does the Programme Team plan to deal with these opportunities and threats? .

5 Details of any resource implications*.

*If any actions require additional resources please ensure that they have been discussed with and agreed by the Head of School/ Division before publication of the plan. To be signed by: Head of School/Division Signature of Support for resource requirements specified in relation to the planned action. ……………………………………………………… Date …………………………………

Comment(s) by Head of School/Division:

To be signed by: Academic Group Coordinator (SELE) ……………………………………………………… Date …………………………………

To be appended to the Programme Plan:

Evidence List: Provide an audit trail to sources of evidence by reference to that evidence at the end of the Programme Plan. Please number the evidence sequentially using a simple numbering system (001, 002, 003…) and providing a list of references.

A copy of the PQEP items from QualTrack which reflect the External Examiner’s recommendations

External Examiner’s Report(s) for the relevant year of delivery

A copy of the formal written response(s) that has/have been sent to the External Examiner(s)

UNiPULSE Course Summary that was used for the data analysis

33

Annex 3

School Quality Enhancement Plan (SQEP/DQEP) Template

The confirmed SQEP/DQEP should be uploaded by the author

(Head of School/Division) to the relevant L-drive folder: L:\Academic Departments\Academic Schools\2016-17\[Name of School]\Quality

34

35

1. Review of previous year, 2016-17

UNiPULSE School Summary – data analysis



Exception Report remember not all sections will require completion


Conversions (Applications to Enrolment):

Enrolments:



Withdrawn in year:






Data provided in the UNiPULSE OfCD Summary may not cover all of the above

2. Overview


Setting and maintaining academic standards. Indicate whether action points from previous SASER have been completed



36


Areas for improvement/ enhancement:


The quality of the student learning experience. Completion of action points from previous SASER




Provide a short evaluative overview here, of between 300-500 words, about the quality of the student learning experience in the School, evaluate, in particular, how well the programmes:

meet the requirement to be Teaching Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI)19;

use student-centred pedagogy and meets the requirements of the Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy (LTA Strategy);

enable students to enhance their digital literacy;

provide work based or work related learning opportunities that enhance employability and enterprise;

access the support of the Industry Advisory Board;

17 Items that are worthy of dissemination to others 18 Items that are worthy of dissemination to others 19 See Annex 7

37

meet the requirements of the Student Experience Strategy

In particular, please comment on the evidence from the NSS showing School level results for the survey and the response to the questions about o Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’ o Learning environment: ‘academic support’


Guidance on completion of the action plan Complete this template to record the action plan that emerges from consideration of the SASERs and Programme Plans within the School and its related off-campus partner organisations. Include action points that cover the following:

1. The setting and maintaining academic standards, referring in particular to the comments of

the External Examiner(s)

2. The quality of the student learning experience, evaluating, in particular how well the School’s provision:

meets the requirement to be Teaching Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI);





meets the requirements of the Student Experience Strategy;

3. In particular, please comment on the evidence from the NSS showing School level results for the survey and the responses to the questions about:

Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’

Learning environment: ‘academic support’;

4. Provide examples of Teaching Excellence; 5. Information provided for staff and students.

38

3. ACTION PLAN 2017-18

TO INFORM ACTIONS FOR 2017/18 (where practicable) and 2018/19


Evidence sources


(GP)




Target Date (2017-18 or 2018-19)


Reported to



completed21

e.g. Code of Practice for HE Part C Information or The OIA good practice framework for handling complaints and academic appeals





e.g. 2017-18






20 Please cite the element of the Baseline requirements to which the action point relates. HEFCE Baseline Regulatory Requirements include: The frameworks for higher

education qualifications, as set out in the UK Quality Code for Higher Education; The Expectations of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education; The OIA good practice framework for handling complaints and academic appeals; The CUC Guidelines on Governance; The Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA) Guidance; HEFCE’s Statement of Good Practice on higher education course changes and closures. 21 Red = not going to achieve intended outcome within stated timeline/Amber = problems identified and additional action needed to bring back on track/Green = on track to achieve intended outcomes within planned timeframe/Blue = Actions completed and intended outcomes achieved.




39

Annex 4

University Quality Enhancement Plan (UQEP) Template

40

41

1. Review of previous year, 2016-17.

UNiPULSE University Summary – data analysis



Exception Report remember not all sections will require completion


Conversions (Applications to Enrolment):

Enrolments:



Withdrawn in year:






2. Overview


Setting and maintaining academic standards. Indicate whether action points from previous SASER have been completed



42




The quality of the student learning experience. Completion of action points from previous SASER




Provide a short evaluative overview here, of between 300-500 words, about the quality of the student learning experience in the University, evaluate, in particular, how well the provision:

meets the requirement to be Teaching Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI)24;





meets the requirements of the Student Experience Strategy

22 Items that are worthy of dissemination to others 23 Items that are worthy of dissemination to others 24 See Annex 7 Defining TIRI and Teaching Excellence

43

In particular, please comment on the evidence from the NSS showing University level results for the survey and the response to the questions about o Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’ o Learning environment: ‘academic support’


Guidance on completion of the action plan Complete this template to record the action plan that emerges from consideration of the SQEPs and DQEPs. Include action points that cover the following:

1. The setting and maintaining academic standards, referring in particular to the comments of the

External Examiner(s) (cf. The Annual Overview of External Examiner Reports)

2. The quality of the student learning experience, evaluating, in particular how well the University’s provision:

meets the requirement to be Teaching Intensive and Research Informed (TIRI);





meets the requirements of the Student Experience Strategy;

3. In particular, please comment on the evidence from the NSS showing University level results for the survey and the responses to the questions about:

Teaching quality: ‘the teaching on my course’ and ‘assessment and feedback’

Learning environment: ‘academic support’;

4. Examples of Teaching Excellence that have been provided by the SQEPs and DQEPs;

5. Information provided for staff and students.

44

3. ACTION PLAN 2017-18

TO INFORM ACTIONS FOR 2017-18 (where practicable) and 2018-19


Evidence sources


(GP)




Target Date (2017-18 or 2018-19)


Reported to



completed26

e.g. Code of Practice for HE Part C Information or The OIA good practice framework for handling complaints and academic appeals





e.g. 2017-18






25 Please cite the element of the Baseline requirements to which the action point relates. HEFCE Baseline Regulatory Requirements include: The frameworks for higher

education qualifications, as set out in the UK Quality Code for Higher Education; The Expectations of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education; The OIA good practice framework for handling complaints and academic appeals; The CUC Guidelines on Governance; The Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA) Guidance; HEFCE’s Statement of Good Practice on higher education course changes and closures. 26 Red = not going to achieve intended outcome within stated timeline/Amber = problems identified and additional action needed to bring back on track/Green = on track to achieve intended outcomes within planned timeframe/Blue = Actions completed and intended outcomes achieved.




45

Annex 5

Defining TIRI and Teaching Excellence

46

47

Guidance on how to achieve and embed the Teaching Intensive Research Informed (TIRI) Curriculum

TEACHING INTENSIVE:

1) Effective support for students’ learning

Examples:

A. Greater amount of timetabled contact time than others in the sector

B. Emphasis on academic tutorials to support effective assessment and feedback

C. Academic skills support – programme specific and central support

D. Use of blended learning (VLE) to engage discussion and wider research

E. Employability opportunities including placements, internships and practical work

F. Other enrichment activities including guest lectures, visits, trade fairs, exchanges etc.

G. Emphasis on a “learning community” which includes peer, proctor and alumni support

Demonstrated in:

PAF2 & Programme Handbook

Programme Specification: KIS data - Learning Activities

Programme Specification: Distinctive Features of the Programme

Programme Specification: Support for Student Learning

Programme and Module Specifications: Learning and Teaching Strategies

Module Specifications: Learning and Teaching Methods (hours of contact)

2) A tailor-made learning experience

A. Skills evaluation on entry

B. Opportunities for students to shape the character of delivery and assessment

C. Opportunities for personal development planning

D. Bespoke careers guidance

Demonstrated in:


Programme Specification: Learning Outcomes i.e. Practical, Professional or

Subject- specific Skills and Transferable, Key or Personal Skills



Module Specifications: Learning and Teaching Strategies and Assessments

RESEARCH INFORMED:

3) Staff scholarly activity and research informing the curriculum, learning

and assessment

Examples:

A. Using research and scholarly activity to ensure module content is relevant,

current and interesting

B. Using applied research to embed employability into the curriculum C. Using scholarly activity and research to develop effective and innovative learning,

teaching strategies

48

D. Using scholarly activity and research to develop innovative and diverse assessment strategies

Demonstrated in:




Module Specification: Assessments

Staff CVs

Staff Development Plan

4) Opportunities for students to engage in active research

Examples:

A. Undertaking independent research projects

B. Publishing/co-publishing opportunities

C. Taking part in research conferences

D. Attending/participating in research seminars/workshops

Demonstrated in:


Programme Specification: Learning Outcomes i.e. Practical, Professional or

Subject- specific Skills and Transferable, Key or Personal Skills



Module Specification: Assessments e.g. seminar papers, poster

presentations, dissertations etc.,

Guidance on what is meant by Teaching Excellence

1) How Teaching Excellence is being measured There are going to be three key Aspects in the assessment, each of which will have Core Metrics along with additional evidence. The core metrics data is captured by Hefce automatically via NSS and HESA but an additional evidence element is written and submitted by the University itself. The additional evidence in each of the three aspects is broken down into three or four Criteria. HEFCE have indicated, in the technical consultation how the assessors and panellists will be guided to assess this evidence. The three aspects are:

Teaching quality

Learning environment

Student outcome and learning gain

These three aspects and their associated metrics are presented in Figure 2 from the HEFCE Technical Consultation Document (see below).

49

Use this grid to identify potential areas of strength:

HEFCE TEF 2 Assessment Criteria

Aspect

Criteria

What the TEF 2 is seeking:

Teaching Quality CORE METRICS FOR THIS ASPECT National Student Survey Q 1-4 – teaching on my course; Q 5-9 – assessment and feedback

Extent to which … Teaching provides effective stimulation and challenge and encourages students to engage

Panel members will be looking for evidence that students report high levels of satisfaction with teaching and are sufficiently challenged and engaged. Evidence might include results of student satisfaction and engagement surveys (beyond the core metrics), collection and use of students’ feedback, and teaching observation schemes. How effectively a provider uses innovative or creative approaches could also be a feature.

Institutional culture recognises and rewards excellent teaching

Panel members will be looking for evidence that the leadership, strategy and ethos promotes and values teaching excellence. Evidence might include initial and continuing professional development for teaching and academic support staff, reward and recognition, promotion and progression opportunities, and the level of experience and contractual status of staff involved in teaching.

Course design, development, standards and assessment are effective in stretching students to develop

Panel members will be looking for evidence that course design and development presents a sufficient degree of challenge and allows for the development of knowledge, skills and attributes at a high level.

50

knowledge, skills and attributes that reflect their full potential

Evidence might include results of student satisfaction surveys (beyond the core metrics), feedback from external examiners and professional accreditation. It may also include evidence of appropriate levels of contact time and independent study, and weighted measures of teaching class size, as well as how the institution is monitoring and, where appropriate, addressing grade inflation.

Assessment and feedback are used effectively in supporting students’ development, progression and attainment

Panel members will be looking for evidence that all students receive feedback on assessed work which is effective in enhancing their learning. Evidence may include the impact and effectiveness of assessment and feedback practices on students’ progression and attainment, which is likely to reflect factors such as timeliness and accessibility.

Learning Environment

CORE METRICS FOR THIS ASPECT National Student Survey Questions10-12 Academic Support Non-continuation data (HESA)

Extent to which … The effectiveness of resources designed to support students’ learning and aid the development of independent study and research skills

Panel members will be looking for evidence that resources (both physical and virtual, and in-curricular and extra-curricular) are effective in supporting students’ learning. Evidence may include use of student feedback to identify initiatives and interventions that have been found to be effective and student feedback on the quality of the facilities (both virtual and physical).

The learning environment is enriched by linkages between teaching and scholarship, research or professional practice

Panel members will be looking for evidence that the provider identifies and makes use of links between teaching and scholarship, research or professional practice (one or more) in a way that impacts positively on students’ academic experiences. Evidence may include course validation and review that reflects the latest developments in one or more of the domains identified, use of external consultants from business, industry or the professions, work placements or work experience, involvement of staff who teach in research, scholarship or professional practice, and involvement of students in real research projects.

Students’ academic experiences are tailored to the individual, maximising rates of retention

Panel members will be looking for evidence that the environment and support provided allows all students to feel that their individual learning needs are recognised, understood and met, reflected in rates of retention. This may be characterised by mutually beneficial interaction between students and teaching or academic support staff. Evidence may include effective use of academic induction, individualised feedback on assessed work, opportunities for student to student interaction, use of learner analytics, and use of personal development planning.

Student Outcomes and Learning Gain

CORE METRICS FOR THIS ASPECT: Employment/ destination (DLHE) Potential highly-skilled jobs metric

Students achieve their educational and professional goals, including progression to further study or

Panel members will be looking for evidence that graduates are equipped with the sorts of knowledge, skills and attributes that allow them to progress successfully to further study or employment (particularly highly skilled employment).

51

employment

Evidence is likely to include employment outcomes and progression to further study.

Students acquire knowledge, skills and attributes that prepare them for their personal and professional lives

Panel members will be looking for evidence of broader educational and professional outcomes. Evidence may include input measures such as employer engagement in the curriculum, course accreditation by professional regulatory or statutory bodies and extracurricular activities designed to enhance employability and transferable skills. Evidence may also include the impact of using methods such as Grade Point Average (GPA) to record students’ achievement.

Positive outcomes are achieved for students from all backgrounds, in particular those from disadvantaged backgrounds or those who are at greater risk of not achieving positive outcomes

Panel members will be looking for evidence that the provider actively monitors and addresses differences between different groups of students in their development, attainment and progression. Evidence may include approaches and interventions that have been shown to be effective at maximising outcomes for all students and tackling evidence of any differential outcomes.

Possible Outcomes of TEF 2

Meets Expectations

Excellent

Outstanding

52

53

Annex 6

The Curriculum Philosophy and Graduate Attributes Matrix for Employability in the Best Practice Guide to Curriculum Design 2017-18

54

55

A Best Practice Guide to Curriculum Design 2017-18 This document supports the use of innovative programme design of taught programmes at all

levels (HE3-HE8). The guide is divided into four main sections:

1. Rationale

2. Key Reference Points

3. The University of Bolton Curriculum Philosophy

4. Practical Guidance for Curriculum Design,

Section 1: Rationale

The aim of the guide is to ensure that University of Bolton programmes are designed using a

unique and highly effective curriculum architecture in order to:

Provide a distinctive, stimulating and attractive learning offer

Allow for the development of a personalised, relevant and challenging student learning

experience

Enhance student satisfaction

Improve student achievement and retention

Improve student employability

Enhance stakeholder involvement

Promote the University of Bolton Graduate Attributes Framework

Teaching Intensive, Research Informed: Accordingly, emphasis is placed on the support and

empowerment of tutors to develop innovative and effective learning, teaching and assessment

strategies, which are underpinned by cutting edge research and scholarly activity.

Section 2: Key Reference Points

The following sector-wide and University documents have been drawn upon to develop the

University of Bolton Curriculum Philosophy (Please see annex 1 for web-links):

External:

QAA Characteristics Statements

QAA Subject Benchmark Statements

QAA Quality Code

HEA Transforming Teaching, Inspiring Learning

Professional Body requirements

Department for Education: Teaching Excellence Framework

Degree Apprenticeship Trailblazer Standards

Internal:

TIRI White Paper 2015 and “What makes a Programme TIRI?” Document 2016

University Strategic Plan 2015-2020

University Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategy 2015-2018

56

University of Bolton Graduate Attributes Framework 2017

Employability and Enterprise Strategy 2014-17

External Examiner Reports

SEO Programme Design and Approval Process 2017-18

Guides to Writing Programme Specifications and Module Specifications 2017-18

The Good Assessment Guide 2017 (Under construction)

University of Bolton Learning Development Framework

Section 3: The University of Bolton Curriculum Philosophy

Programmes at University of Bolton:

Section 4: Practical Guidelines

Curriculum design takes place at programme approval stage. Please refer also the Guidelines

for Preparing Programme Specifications and Guidelines for Preparing Module Specifications.

Component 1: Programmes at the University of Bolton are underpinned by learning and teaching

practices informed by reflection, scholarship and cutting-edge research (TIRI)

Research and scholarly activity should be used to inform curriculum design - to ensure

programme content is relevant, current and interesting.

Allow for flexibility at programme and module level by outlining broad strategies for

learning and teaching. Examples of learning and teaching methods should be presented,

and not a finite list. In this way, academics can adopt delivery methods which are relevant,

stimulating and underpinned by educational scholarship and research.

57

Component 2: Programmes at the University of Bolton offer a stimulating, relevant,

personalised and inclusive experience

When writing programme and module learning outcomes, consider the wording carefully,

recognising the diverse nature of the student body, the dynamic external environment and

international perspectives.

Allow for flexibility at programme and module level by outlining broad strategies for

learning, teaching and assessment (formative and summative).

Where possible/appropriate, describe the methods of assessment on a module

specification in broad terms e.g. written piece*, oral piece**, practical skills assessment,

portfolio of evidence. This will allow students and/or employers to have an input into the

type of assessment set.

Embed formal opportunities for setting and reflecting on goals, as well as professional

development planning at each stage of the programme

*Examples of written assessments include reports, essays, seminar papers, academic journal

articles, blogs, trade journal articles, newspaper articles, press releases, reflective diaries

**Examples of oral assessments include PowerPoint/Prezi presentations, seminar

presentations, poster presentations, role plays, interviews, vivas.

Component 3: Programmes at the University of Bolton develop students as autonomous, self-

directed, critical and reflective learners

At each level make explicit where and how students will develop and reflect on key on

academic*, professional/practical and life skills** within a relevant context. Skills should be

embedded in the curriculum and there should be clear progression from dependent to

independent learning – culminating in an independent research project.

At each level use appropriate verbs for learning outcomes – demonstrating expectations. e.g:

HE3 and HE4: explain, describe, discuss. HE5: Analyse, appraise, compare and contrast. HE6 and HE7: Critically appraise, critically evaluate, synthesise. HE7 also include: Solve

complex problems, develop creative or innovative solutions/ recommendations

* Examples of academic skills: information literacy, academic writing, referencing, presentation

and research skills

** Examples of life skills: rhetoric, logic, analysis, creativity, planning, time-management,

flexibility, communication, negotiation, conflict management, team working, leadership,

enterprise, grit and resilience.

58

Component 4: Programmes at the University of Bolton develop knowledge and skills to ensure

graduates achieve their personal, academic and professional goals

Consider both specialist and interdisciplinary knowledge – informed by Benchmark

Statements, Apprenticeship Trailblazer Standards, PSRBs (if relevant), as well the present

and future needs of industry.

Leading research and scholarly activity should be used to inform curriculum design - to

ensure programme content is relevant, current and interesting.

Embed formal opportunities for setting and reflecting on personal, academic and

professional goals at each stage of the programme.

Consider how enterprise and work-related learning can be integrated effectively into the

teaching learning and assessment of a programme. Work-related learning may include

placements, live project briefs, guest speakers, industry visits etc. Note: Keep details of

projects, speakers and visits general to allow for flexibility and to ensure CMA guidelines

are not breached.

If a programme includes a period of work experience then a Placement Handbook will need

to be provided which includes the roles and responsibilities of the student, academic

supervisor and placement provider. See the Code of Practice for Work Based and

Placement Learning.

You may want to consider including an enterprise (or entrepreneurship/intrapreneurship)

module in your programme in order to develop creativity, innovation, managed risk-taking

and commercial skills.

Component 5: Programmes at the University of Bolton employ effective assessment/ feedback

practices which support knowledge and skills development

Use a diverse range of relevant assessments - both formative and summative.

Avoid of over-assessment (No more than 2 assessments per 20 credit module).

Demonstrate diversity and comparability of assessment load across levels though the

production of an assessment map.

Allow for flexibility at programme and module level by outlining broad rather than specific

strategies for formative and summative assessment.

Component 6: Programmes at the University of Bolton are developed, delivered and evaluated

in partnership with students and other stakeholders

Current/perspective student opinions must be sought when designing a programme.

Group presentations to students are a useful way of outlining discuss key programme

features, as well as gaining feedback.

59

Potential employer feedback can be sought via email and /or via School Industry Advisory

Boards. The draft programme specification together with a brief outline of each module

give employers a useful overview.

Apprenticeship and PSRB standards will also influence curriculum content.

Component 7: Programmes at the University of Bolton use resources and technology effectively

to support learning, teaching and assessment

A list of programme learning resources and specialist resources is required at validation.

It is expected that learning, teaching and assessment is supported by the use of VLE.

Try not to be too specific about technological resources in the programme and module

specifications – in order to future-proof them. Promotional materials can contain details of

specific resources, as these can be updated when required.

Component 8: Programmes at the University of Bolton provide graduates with the opportunity

to develop a unique and effective set of attributes

Consider how graduate attributes can be developed at each level e.g. through explicit skills

development, diverse assessments, independent and group learning opportunities, work-

related learning, opportunities for reflection on outcomes and progress, personal

development planning, knowledge sharing and peer feedback and support.

60

61

Annex 1: Web Links to References

External References:

QAA Frameworks for Higher Education Qualifications of UK Degree-Awarding Bodies

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/subject-

benchmark-statements

QAA Subject Benchmark Statements: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-

quality/the-quality-code/subject-benchmark-statements

QAA Characteristics Statements: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-

quality/the-quality-code/characteristics-statements

HEA Transforming Teaching, Inspiring Learning

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/learning_excellence_summary_v2.pdf

Department for Education: Teaching Excellence Framework

http://www.hefce.ac.uk/lt/tef/tefproviders/

NUS Assessment and Feedback Benchmarking Tool

https://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/assessment-and-feedback-benchmarking-

tool

Internal References:

University of Bolton Strategic Plan 2015-2020:

https://www.bolton.ac.uk/AboutUs/Resources/StrategicPlan.pdf

University of Bolton Programme Design and Approval Process:

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/Quality/PDA/Home.aspx

University of Bolton Learning Development Framework

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/BoltonBusinessSchool/Adam-Student-Experience/Learning-

Development-Framework-2016.pdf

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/subject-benchmark-statements




http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/characteristics-statements

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standards-and-quality/the-quality-code/characteristics-statements

https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/learning_excellence_summary_v2.pdf

http://www.hefce.ac.uk/lt/tef/tefproviders/

https://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/assessment-and-feedback-benchmarking-tool

https://www.nusconnect.org.uk/resources/assessment-and-feedback-benchmarking-tool

https://www.bolton.ac.uk/AboutUs/Resources/StrategicPlan.pdf

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/Quality/PDA/Home.aspx

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/BoltonBusinessSchool/Adam-Student-Experience/Learning-Development-Framework-2016.pdf

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/BoltonBusinessSchool/Adam-Student-Experience/Learning-Development-Framework-2016.pdf

62

ANNUAL MONITORING GUIDELINES FOR 2017-18

Policy ref: tbc

Version number 03 updated 300916; 171017

Version date September 2017

Role of Developer/ Reviewer Academic Registrar

Policy Owner (Group/ Centre/Unit) Standards and Enhancement Office

Person responsible for implementation (post- holder)

Academic Registrar

Approving Committee/ Board Education Committee

Date approved 8 June 2016;

Effective from September 2016

Dissemination method (e.g. website) SEO web pages; staff briefing and sessions; one to one guidance.

Review frequency Annual updating

Reviewing Committee Education Committee

Consultation history (individuals/groups consulted and dates)

Piloted in 2015-16; Further developed in consultation with EDMCI and CI&DIM; AGCs and HoS in August 2016.

Document history (e.g. rationale and dates of previous amendments)

Introduction of metrics based annual monitoring, Sept-16.

Documents

Annual Monitoring Guidelines for 2017- 18 · Annual Monitoring Guidelines for 2017-18 ... Defining TIRI and Teaching Excellence 44 6. ... Off campus 2017 programmes1