Periodic Developmental Reviews (PDR) Siân Conner Quality Office University of Leicester September 2014

What is a PDR? PDRs are an important means by which the University satisfies itself that departments, schools and collaborative partners are fulfilling the requirements for the maintenance of academic standards and teaching quality. Reviews happen on a cyclical basis (normally every 6 years) In line with QAA Quality Code, Chapter B8: Programme Monitoring and Review University’s Code of Practice – currently under review PDRs are a dialogue between the Departments and the wider university. They are a way in which the University assures itself that the Departments are meeting key expectations, as set out in the QAA’s Quality Code, particularly the quality of learning opportunities and up-to-date public information. PDRs fall under chapter B8: Programme Monitoring and Review of the Quality Code. The University’s CoP is currently being updated to reflect some enhancements to the process made over the summer.

What is a PDR (cont.)? PDRs are normally day-long events (can be longer for schools/departments with large or complex provision) During the day, a Panel will conduct interviews with the Head of School/Department and a range of staff and students from the School/Department A report follows the review, with key findings. These are often in the form of commendations, recommendations and requirements for action A number of activities happen prior to the review day, for example selected panel members are invited to observe a teaching session (normally the Panel member with the Learning and Teaching remit) and the Secretary will attend an SSC (to which the Students’ Union are welcome to attend). The day is split up into sections, so that the interviews with students can inform the interviews with staff members [SAMPLE AGENDA] Following the day, the Secretary drafts a report that is circulated to all panel members for comment prior to approval and disclosure to the School. There can be both recommendation and requirements for the School AND the University, as the Panel deem fit [SAMPLE REPORT]. The report goes to APC and the School follows up with actions.

The Panel All PDRs are conducted by a panel made up of: A Pro-Vice Chancellor (Chair) An External Assessor(s) Academic Director Member of Academic Policy Committee Lay member of Council Member of the SU Sabbatical Team Member of Quality Office (Secretary) The Panel acts on behalf of APC Note – Panel members are always from different colleges to the ones being reviewed. External assessors – may have additional externals based on provision (if there is an accrediting body, for example)

Timescales: 6 months 2 months 6 weeks Memo from Quality Office to HoD Meeting with HoD and relevant Department figures List of documents and PDR Guide sent to Department 2 months SSC Meeting to be observed by Secretary Teaching session to be observed by Panel Member Schedule and date of the event to be confirmed Questionnaires sent out to DL students 6 weeks Deadline for documentation Nominate staff and students for interview 6 months to go: Confirm date with HoD Meeting to discuss PDR process and expectations with Secretary/Member of Quality Office Nominations for External Advisers to be sent to Quality Office 2 months: List of student names sent to Secretary

Timescales (cont.): 5 weeks 4 weeks 2 weeks Quality Office reviews documentation Additional documentation requests to Department 4 weeks Panel Members sent hard copy folder of documentation Panel Members given access to Blackboard site 2 weeks Secretary briefs the Chair Students’ Union brief the student representatives

After the Event: Conclusions sent to Department 1 week Conclusions sent to Department 3 weeks Report sent to Department TBA Response to CAC and APC

What to expect… The School/Department, working with the Quality Office, creates a dossier of key monitoring information, including: Self-evaluation document (SED) Student FTE profile Recent NSS results Minutes from various departmental committees Recent External Examiner reports Recent Annual Developmental Reports You will receive a folder of key information in hard copy [SAMPLE FOLDER] You will also have access to a Blackboard site including further information that will inform your questioning (for example, a good place to start is the SSC minutes – what are the students raising? Have these queries been addressed satisfactorily? Does it highlight any underlying issues that that the School or University needs to address?)

Documentation: Department’s responsibility to create Blackboard site ‘Department X PDR’ Design of Bb site – up to Department Give access to Secretary Department needs to give access to the Panel members Secretary will indicate the information that is to be uploaded by Department and Quality Office in pre- meeting

Self-Evaluation Document (SED) Purpose: Reflect upon provision Helps set the agenda for the event Forms the basis of a dialogue Not a detailed description of what you do – background information is useful but SED needs to be reflective and evaluative (e.g. how effective/successful is the Department?) It also needs to identify key areas for development and improvement

Self-Evaluation Document (SED) cont. No formal requirement of length Six sections: Strategic and Department Overview Curriculum and Award Standards Teaching, Learning and Assessment Student Support, Development and Employability Research Issues for discussion Ownership of document is Departmental, therefore it isn’t down to one individual to draft. Should go through departmental learning and teaching committees for departmental approval.

SED 1: Strategic and Departmental Overview Overview of provision and organisational structure Quality Enhancement and Assurance Strategies Overview of approach to curriculum development and eLearning Overview of Collaborative Provision Management of Learning Resources Aims and Context Sections should include: Strategic summary Overview of the provision Departmental Organisational structure Maintenance of Standards and Enhancement of Quality External examiner reports PSRB reports NSS Data Departmental Committee Minutes ADR process within the Department Strategies (L&T, Admissions, etc) Overview of approaches to curriculum development and eLearning Overview of collaborative provision Management of learning resources Aims and Context Strategic aim of the department within the context of the Uni Strategy National/International requirements Widening Participation, etc

SED 2: Curriculum and Award Standards Reflect on structure and content of programmes Progression and completion rates Employability and graduate destination statistics Curriculum Awards and Standards Reflect on structure and content of programmes, designed and developed appropriately, referring to: Opportunities to achieve ILOs Academic and intellectual progression Good practice Feedback from EE Subject Benchmark Statements Progression and completion rates Employability and graduate destination statistics

SED 3: Teaching, Learning and Assessment Learning and Teaching Range of teaching methods Opportunities for innovation Assessment Effectiveness in promoting student learning Feedback Mechanisms in place Student representation Teaching, Learning and Assessment Learning and teaching Range and appropriateness of teaching methods Variety in ways in which student participation is encouraged and achieved Opportunities for innovation Effectiveness of team teaching Assessment Effectiveness in promoting student learning Range and variety of assessment methods used (and their effectiveness) Feedback Feedback mechanisms in place Student representation Student engagement with curriculum planning

SED 4: Student Support, Development and Employability Recruitment and Induction Student Support Student Experience Learning Resources Learning and Study Skills Employability Work Placements International Study (Year Abroad, etc) Student Support, Development and Employability Recruitment and induction of students Student support How do you know whether support for students is effective? Identification of Learning Needs Written Guidance Academic advising Tutorial Support Feedback to students on their progress Overall academic guidance and supervision Student experience Sense of belonging Do students understand their responsibilities Learning Resources Availability of equipment Learning and teaching accommodation Accessibility of library resources Effectiveness of technical and administrative support Learning and Study Skills Articulate how learning and study skills are identified Development of study skills working with the University central services Opportunities for further development. Employability Identification of employability skills How employability is developed through curriculum How does Department assess the effectiveness of employability Work Placements International Study

SED 5: Research Recruitment Studentships and awards Supervision and special arrangements Research training course Resources Student progress Submission and completion rates Graduate assistants Research Recruitment Studentships and Awards Supervision arrangements Special arrangements Research Training Courses Resources Student progress Submission and completion rates Graduate assistants

SED 6: Issues for discussion The Panel or the PDR process cannot always answer every question raised, however the process is designed to be a dialogue and should therefore be reflected as such. Issues for discussion Can’t always provide answers to questions but should provide an opportunity for discussion.

After the Event Conclusions sent to the Department within one week Report published within 3 weeks of the event Initial response to the report to be sent to APC, normally within 2 months of the report publication Full response to be sent to APC within one year of the report publication

Useful documents: QAA Quality Code, Chapter B8: Programme Monitoring and Review Code of Practice for Annual and Periodic Developmental Review [currently under review]

Any Questions