Update on Higher Education Review (HER) Academic Registrar Council 7 June 2013 Stephen Jackson

Progress to date

What you said.... Concern about: the language of risk The link between the size of provision and the intensity of review The limitations of the initial appraisal of information The judgment on academic standards The use of international reviewers The open invitation to students to provide additional information Insufficient evidence of deregulation

What we’ve done.... Replaced initial appraisal with desk-based analysis by review teams Decoupled size of provision from the duration of the review Duration of review will be linked to outcomes of desk-based analysis. (1-5 days) Size of team may reflect scale and complexity of provision (2-6 reviewers) Limited role for international reviewers

What we’ve done... Revised wording for the judgment on standards.. ‘..the setting and maintenance of threshold academic standards’ provision of ‘requires improvement to meet UK expectations’ outcome Protocols for the submission of information by students Comment template Evidence requirement Features of good practice Inclusion of professional support staff as reviewers

What next.. Review Schedule for 2013-14 Reviewer training and conversion Briefing sessions for facilitators and student representatives

So what’s different? Longer intervals between reviews Single integrated review visit Collaborative provision – less partner link visits Shorter visits for most providers No mid-cycle activity Revised arrangements for TNE – no UK-end visits

Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education www.qaa.ac.uk 8