1. The enhancement-led approach to managing quality: evolution, informing values and practices Rowena Pelik, Director QAA Scotland Visit by Deputy Vice- Chancellors from the Republic of South Africa 28 September 2015

2. Outline Context and history Exploring enhancement Looking ahead: prospects and concerns

3. Context and history Scotland Devolved responsibility for education 19 university-sector institutors Historically different Fundamental belief in the value of education Quality Assurance Pre-2003 ‘dual’ system of QA Little evidence of problem Divergence possible within a UK-wide set of reference points

4. Quality Assurance in the UK Autonomous institutions – with responsibility for academic standards Co-regulation (external QA body and HE sector) QA independent of government and of funding Peer review / independent externality Agreed quality framework (UK Quality Code) Public reporting and information External validation and recognition

5. Enhancement-led quality assurance in Scotland  Developed in partnership with the key stakeholders – and delivered in partnership  Introduced in 2003 as a creative and radical response consciously moving the focus  Developed, matured and evolved over three cycles – significant distance travelled  A quality framework – not only a ‘quality assurance’ system

6. The QEF partnership http://www.universities-scotland http://www.qaa.ac.uk/about- us/scotland/development-and-enhancement http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/h ome http://www.sfc.ac.uk/ NUS Scotland

7. The Quality Enhancement Framework ELIR Institution-led quality review Student engagement Public information Enhancement Themes

8. What do we mean by enhancement? Taking deliberate steps to bring about improvement in the effectiveness of the learning experiences of students Aims to enhance the student learning experience and encourages student engagement and participation in learning and in quality processes Emphasis is the quality of the student experience of learning rather than on QA systems and processes themselves

9. What does our enhancement-led approach involve? A way of working – a system living by its own values The commitment to improve – and acceptance that wherever you are you can always improve, or enhance, what you do A planned and strategic approach to enhancement (vision + purpose + process) Being outward looking, open, seeking to learn and willing to share

10. Quality Enhancement involves… Working in partnership Focusing on learning and teaching and supporting students as learners Willingness to be critically self-reflective and to evaluate what you do Change – a restless striving to be always better

11. Quality Enhancement should…. Provide the information that academics and students need to enhance practice at local level as well as institution and sector levels Have in-built feedback loops – as all key players are involved Involve challenge by critical friends and be willing to act ‘without fear or favour’ Encourage risk and innovation in a supportive environment

12. QE v QA Quality Enhancement is the journey… towards student centred learning towards partnership and collaboration towards critical self-evaluation towards future-oriented improvement towards permeating the system towards fundamental cultural change in learning practices towards excellence It involves resisting and moving away from top-down compliance processes away from audit and inspection away surface checking of HE processes and the past away from mechanistic models based on inputs and targets … always maintaining rigor and challenge

13. QE is a fragile beast It is an attitude and a mind-set Balances institutional autonomy and external oversight Contains assurance without being assurance driven Enables an open dialogue alongside public reporting Threatened by marketization, reduction to numbers...

14. Some of the counter forces Market-driven and consumerist models of HE Casting of quality as ‘burden’ or as unnecessary (rather than as a part valuable the endeavour of effective HE providers) Managerial use of QA and PIs within institutions Target chasing Compliance and checking approaches Complaint and compensation cultures

15. Some of the counter forces Rise of metrics and performance measures Past performance not future practice Deregulation The dangling ‘carrot’ of ending cyclical external review Available metrics or what is countable being used as proxies for quality Thinking student learning can be reduced to a number

16. A reminder: enhancement in Scotland We have a mature Quality Enhancement Framework built around values: Societal benefit of education Commitment to improve (‘restless striving’) Critical self-evaluation Collegiate and collaborative working Partnership with students/student engagement Future focused Practice over process

17. With enhancement there is a willingness to re-think, to share, to question and to listen. Any questions?

18. qaa.ac.uk enquiries@qaa.ac.uk +44 (0) 141 5723420 © The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2015 Registered charity numbers 1062746 and SC037786