1. Quality Assurance in English Higher Education Cross Border Issues and Transferability Bev Thomas Deputy Director for HE Access and Quality Department for Business Innovation and Skills (BIS)

2. 2 Context in England Universities and HE Institutions are independent and autonomous bodies They are responsible for the academic standards of the awards they make Their academic freedom is protected in law: –The subjects and curricula they teach –The students they admit and on what basis Quality assurance delivered via an independent body Gaining a place in HE is competitive and each year not every applicant will gain a place

3. 3 Public funding HE places are funded through a combination of public and private funds –Teaching grant allocated by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) –Individual contribution to fees, supported by a public funding regime of fee loans and maintenance grants and loans HEFCE is responsible in law for the quality assurance arrangements of the provision that it funds Government controls the number of student places available due to the need to control public spending

4. 4 Quality Context in England (1) Universities responsible for academic standards –Qualification descriptors –Subject benchmark statements –Programme specifications –Approval and review processes –Externality including external examiners: peer review HEFCE quality assurance duty for funded places Both are supported and delivered by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) through the Quality Code, institutional review and wider quality framework including QAA Concerns scheme Quality regime promotes enhancement, improvement and good practice, rather than the meeting of minimum levels

5. 5 Quality Context in England (2) Students engaged in all aspects of the quality regime Increasing focus on producing public information –High quality and accessible –Comparable information on learning experience and outcomes eg employment rates, salaries –Transparency about roles and responsibilities eg Student Charters –Annual National Student Survey (NSS) Student complaints – Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) –HE institutions required by law to subscribe to the OIA The role of the Professional, Statutory and Regulatory bodies (PSRBs)

6. 6 Introducing a risk-based approach to quality assurance (1) Higher Education White Paper Students at the Heart of the system, June 2011 Commissioned HEFCE to consult on and introduce a risk- based approach to quality assurance –Focus QAA effort where it will have most impact –Builds on the existing culture of enhancement –Give students the power to hold universities to account and engages them throughout –Make better use of data in assessing risk –Considers both the frequency and intensity of institutional review –Ensures adequate and responsive triggers in the event of concerns

7. 7 Introducing a risk-based approach to quality assurance (2) Rebalances resource to focus more on providers who do not have an extensive track record in successful quality assurance or who meet other objective criteria (established by HEFCE) Lighter touch in respect of HEFCE quality assurance arrangements for providers who do have an extensive track record in successful quality assurance More robust – balances risk, responsive triggers and takes account of broader context Reduces regulatory burden – but only where confidence is earned and quality well established

8. 8 Cross-border Higher Education (1) Significant benefits to be gained by governments and quality assurance agencies sharing, talking and learning Principles underpinning the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area positively reinforce some key themes, including autonomy, diversity and transparency QAA are actively engaged through ENQA

9. 9 Cross-border Higher Education (2) Quality assurance arrangements that are robust and effective presuppose certain conditions Cannot translate a quality assurance regime from one context to another, where other elements, regulation, structures and safeguards do not exist The risks to the maintenance of quality and standards would be too high Building on a firm foundation of a mature national quality context Enables evolution of established quality assurance arrangements – differentiation based on a robust assessment of risk

10. Thank you