Quality assurance system

Current processes

From 2011-12 the system includes:

• Institutions own internal quality assurance systems and processes

• The UK Quality Code for HE

• Institutional review
  All institutions take part in this review carried out by the QAA approximately once every six years. The review follows a process of peer review and aims to safeguard quality and standards, help improve the student experience and address any public concerns about the issue of quality in HE. Please see the QAA web-site for further information.

• Collaborative provision review
  This review is designed to assess large and complex collaborative forms of teaching. This is also carried out by the QAA. The review covers examples of provision shared between UK institutions or with overseas providers. Please see QAA web-site for further information.

• Publication of information about higher education
  This covers a wide range of information, such as the Unistats web-site, which includes the National Student Survey (NSS) and the Destinations of Leavers from Higher Education survey.

• Integrated quality enhancement review (IQER)
  The IQER is a quality-assurance review method designed specifically for further education colleges (FECs). It looks at how FECs manage their portfolio of HE, whether directly or indirectly funded, through an evidence-based process of peer review. With the QAA we are now finalising the review method to be used for HE in FECs after 2011-12.

• External examining 

• QAA procedure for investigating concerns about standards and quality

• HEFCE policy on unsatisfactory quality 

UK Quality Code for HE

The UK Quality Code for Higher Education (the Quality Code) sets out the expectations all providers of UK higher education are required to meet.

It gives all higher education providers a shared starting point for setting, describing and assuring the academic standards of their higher education awards and programmes and the quality of the learning opportunities they provide. Individual education providers use the Quality Code to design their policies for maintaining academic standards and quality.

The QAA are currently working closely with the UK higher education sector to develop the Quality Code. It will replace the set of national reference points known as the Academic Infrastructure from the 2012-13 academic year. 

The Quality Code has three parts:

• Part A on setting and maintaining threshold academic standards
• Part B on quality and enhancing academic quality
• Part C on provision of information about higher education.

New chapters will cover learning and teaching, student support and student engagement.

Detailed expectations for each chapter of the Quality Code will be developed by the individual expert advisory groups and be subject to consultation over 2011-13.

Addressing unsatisfactory quality

In 2009 we published a policy outlining how we engage with institutions that demonstrate unsatisfactory quality in learning and teaching (as established by the QAA's audit or review processes).

The policy was updated at the end of 2011 to take account of the new method of institutional review introduced by the QAA – in particular its grading system.

The principles and relevant procedures of the 2009 policy paper remain broadly in place, and the 2011 updates only apply to HEIs. The policy sets out steps that will be taken where an HEI or FEC has failed to address issues of unsatisfactory quality under the existing processes.

• Policy for addressing unsatisfactory quality in institutions (HEFCE 2011/36)

The policy will need to be further amended to take account of the introduction of a more risk-based approach to quality assurance in HE, from 2013-14. 

Previous process: institutional audit

Before 2011-12, the QAA carried out a system or review on HEFCE's behalf known as institutional audit. Audits started in 2002-03 with a three-year 'transitional' cycle, which was then followed by a six-year cycle up to the end of 2010-11.

After the transitional cycle was completed, a group of sector representatives, chaired by Dame Sandra Burslem, reviewed the quality assurance framework to ensure that it was fit for purpose.

Reports from the three phases of the review are available:

• Phase one (institutional audit)
• Phase two (teaching quality information)
• Phase three (collaborative provision audit)