1. Partnership arrangements (SCITTs) Partnership arrangements (SCITTs) ONLINE SEMINARS – JULY 2015 Felicity Mitchell – Deputy Adjudicator Hilary Jones – Membership Project Co-ordinator

2. HOUSEKEEPING FOR ONLINE SEMINARS   Using a laptop or desktop? Please click on the ‘audio box’, select ‘telephone’ and then dial-in by telephone also using the number provided to you   Using a tablet? Don’t forget to ‘unmute’ and then click on the ‘audio box’ and select ‘microphone and speakers’   We have prepared a short presentation BUT will pause regularly to invite questions. If you wish to ask a question, please ‘raise your hand’ through the software   We will update the guidance on our website to reflect any key issues coming out of each group of seminars http://www.oiahe.org.uk/providers-joining-the-scheme-on-1- september-2015.aspx http://www.oiahe.org.uk/providers-joining-the-scheme-on-1- september-2015.aspx 2

3. WHO ARE WE? WHAT DO WE DO? Operator of students’ complaint scheme Since 2005 Ombudsman of last resort Free to students Over 10,000 complaints Almost universal compliance Review complaints about acts or omissions of member providers Recommend changes to practice and/or remedies for students Promote good practice in handling complaints and academic appeals 3

4. Common areas of complaint Academic appeals Extenuating circumstances Teaching provision and facilities Disciplinary matters Academic misconduct (including plagiarism) Bullying and harassment Fitness to practise Discrimination What we cannot look at Admissions Academic judgment Matters subject to legal proceedings Student employment OUR REMIT (1) 4

5. OUR REMIT (2)   We will not normally consider complaints that have not been through the internal procedures at the member provider   We will not normally consider complaints about events that happened before the member provider joined the OIA Scheme   We may do so if the events formed part of a course of conduct which continued after the provider became a member   We will not consider complaints where we receive the Complaint Form more than 12 months after the conclusion of the provider’s internal procedures 5

6. OUR REVIEW   We review student complaints to see whether they are Justified, Partly Justified or Not Justified   Focus of our review is the provider’s final decision evidenced in the Completion of Procedures (COP) letter   In deciding whether a complaint is Justified we consider the following three key issues:   Did the provider properly apply regulations and follow procedures?   Were those procedures reasonable?   Was the provider’s decision reasonable in all the circumstances? 6

7. OUR RECOMMENDATIONS (J/PJ DECISION)   To put the student back into the position they were in before whatever they complained about happened.   Types of recommendation include:   Provider to rehear academic appeal or reconsider complaint   Provider to change its internal procedures   Provider to pay financial compensation   Opportunity for parties to comment on practicalities   Compliance by provider   Student does not have to accept offer made pursuant to recommendation 7

8. QUESTIONS ANY QUESTIONS? 8

9. COLLABORATIVE PROVISION   Collaborative provision   Joint delivery of a programme   Validation agreements   Franchise arrangements   Other types of collaborative arrangement   A complaint may relate to several providers   SCITTs with PGCE validating partner 9

10. COMPLAINTS ABOUT:   A Member HE Provider where a student is registered   A Member HE Provider which awards/ validates/franchises a course which a student is studying at another provider   A Member HE Provider which is delivering a validated or franchised course But in each case, only complaints about matters for which the Member HE Provider is responsible 10

11. OUR BASIC PRINCIPLES: more than one provider   Student (ITT trainee) can complain about delivery provider and/or awarding/validating/franchising provider   If complaint issue is the responsibility of the delivery provider the student (ITT trainee) can complain directly to OIA   Awarding provider is likely to have overall responsibility for academic quality and standards   Complaints about academic quality   Final stage of academic appeals procedures 11

12. PRACTICALITIES   Our starting point: What does the partnership agreement say?   Grey areas – only part of complaint relates to academic standards?   We will deal with complaints on a case-by-case basis   If complaint relates to more than one provider, we may treat as separate complaints but link our reviews together   2015/16 will be a transition period – working with providers to develop our understanding and guidance as we receive the first complaints 12

13. SCITT ARRANGEMENTS   From 1 September, ITT trainees will be able to complain to the OIA about:   Acts or omissions of SCITTs   Acts or omissions of PGCE awarding university   What does the partnership agreement say about responsibilities and obligations of the parties?   QTS is responsibility of SCITT?   PGCE is responsibility of university?   What are your arrangements? 13

14. QUESTIONS ANY QUESTIONS? 14