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

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

3. 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

4. Assessment Criteria Teaching Quality Learning Environment
Student Outcomes & Learning Gain

5. 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

6. Participation and Outcomes
Took part in the subject level pilot TEF Year 3 (academic year )
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)

7. TEF Year 3 Subject Level Pilot (Model A)

8. TEF Year 3 Subject Level Pilot (Model B)

9. TEF Year 4 Subject Level Pilot Model
More information on the current pilot available at

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

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

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

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

16. 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

17. Initial Results
NSS Outcomes

18. 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

19. Any questions? Jenny Craig, Vice Principal Curriculum and Quality
Rebecca Philbrook, Head of Higher Education