Moving (positively) towards subject level TEF ACP Conference 18th January 2019 Jenny Craig, Vice Principal Curriculum and Quality Rebecca Philbrook, Head of Higher Education

Workshop Format Overview of TEF and the Subject Level Pilots Abingdon and Witney College approach to participation Practical Advice

TEF Purpose Better inform students’ choices about what and where to study To recognise and inform excellent teaching To better meet the needs of employers, business, industry and the professions To raise esteem for teaching

Assessment Criteria Teaching Quality Learning Environment Student Outcomes & Learning Gain

Provider AND Subject Level TEF Phased Approach Year 1 (15-16) Provider Level Year 2 (16-17) Year 3 (17-18) Subject Level Pilot Year 4 (18-19) Year 5 Onwards (19-20 – 20-21) Provider AND Subject Level

Participation and Outcomes Took part in the subject level pilot TEF Year 3 (academic year 2017- 2018) Government response issued and included: Plans to expand the student engagement criterion and including two new core metrics from the National Student Survey (NSS) about the ‘student voice’ and ‘learning resources’. Recognition from OfS and Government that this model will lead to a higher burden on providers and a greater cost to run the exercise. 2nd year of pilots now taking place (TEF Year 4)

TEF Year 3 Subject Level Pilot (Model A)

TEF Year 3 Subject Level Pilot (Model B)

TEF Year 4 Subject Level Pilot Model More information on the current pilot available at https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/teaching/subject-level-pilot-2018-19/guidance-for-participants/

Our Approach Positive opportunity to establish a quality framework that could be translated into practical actions and solutions Buy-In from HE Steering Group and Senior Staff Members 4 out of 7 subject areas, 5 of 35 subjects; Natural Sciences Engineering and Technology Social Sciences Business and Law Curriculum Managers, Programme Leads and Course Leaders responsible for producing their own submission Support from Head of HE in interpreting metrics; training sessions, workshop support Acknowledgement from Senior Staff of additional burden on those taking part; time allowances Small offer. All subject areas bar one and only one subject area therefore the question of n (where n is the number of subjects) +4 pages meant that most staff members were restricted to 5 pages per subject area

Practical Findings Page count allowance was not enough (even for our small number of subject areas) “Convincing” submissions included relevant and recognised data + the impact of that data Staff had a tendency to explain in greater detail negative aspects of the TEF metrics rather than focusing on the positives Staff needed a point of contact; a TEF lead within the College Excellent support from the team at HEFCE

Practical Outcomes Use your TEF metrics as data is objective; ease in targeting low performing courses Data is (for the real thing) published; positive driver for staff to improve quality within their own areas The HE teams were engaged and eager to be recognised for their work with students; increased the profile of HE within the College Where metrics were negative, staff were keen to talk to us about how they were going to improve them for the future The creation of “Team TEF” 1st point; metrics are available even if you aren’t participating

HE Staff Intranet Over arching information all in one place Team TEF Action plans

HE Student Intranet Consistent over arching information to all students HelpMeHE email address to capture issues before they turn into complaints

The Hub Course specific information Also has links to key student information; again ensuring consistency of information to students

Monitoring Quality All aspects linked to College strategy, TEF and UK Professional Standards Framework (UKPSF) Quality Leads Termly KPI Meetings Faculty specific action plans Overall HE SAR and QUIP HE Steering Group; strategy Quality leads within each faculty responsible for monitoring and driving quality. HE Specific Observations and/or learning walks KPI meetings; attendance, retention, teaching observation data, student feedback Action plans combine all forms of feedback; module feedback, TEF outcomes, Induction feedback, rep meeting feedback, into action plans Key themes running through faculties and overall HE statistics drawn into HE SAR and HE QUIP Key themes impacting the strategy of HE reviewed and discussed during HE Steering Group meetings

Initial Results NSS Outcomes

Over to you… Spend some time considering the following within your own organisation: Do you have a dedicated TEF lead? Is there “buy-in” from senior staff/Heads of Faculties/Course Leaders/HE Lecturers? How could you improve buy-in? How many subjects do you have (therefore how many submissions and submission pages do you need to write)? Who is going to write each submission? Course leaders? Heads of Faculty? Will there be time allowances for staff involved in TEF? Have you downloaded your most recent (TEF4) metrics? Where is it? Do people understand what the metrics are telling them? Do HE teams already incorporate this data into their APRs/KPIs/SARs and other quality measures? NSS Outcomes

Any questions? Jenny Craig, Vice Principal Curriculum and Quality Jenny.craig@Abingdon-witney.ac.uk Rebecca Philbrook, Head of Higher Education Rebecca.Philbrook@abingdon-witney.ac.uk