1. Academic excellence for business and the professions CASE The accreditation event: roles and expectations Gill Harrison 1st September 2014

2. The Accreditor’s Role in CASE Accreditations Learning outcomes: Critically reflect on the role of the accreditors in the review process Evaluate ways to review the documentation Evaluate how to determine a fair and robust assessment process Consider the highs and lows of being an accreditor

3. What is the role of a CASE accreditor? Work on behalf of CASE Lead accreditor & co-accreditor(s) Ensuring high standard in ultrasound training –Academic rigour –Clinical competency –Currency of course Work with the academic institute Encourage best practice Share ideas Students Clinical CASE Institution Accreditors

4. Roles Lead accreditor Coordinate Advise Support programme team in development if required Timely feedback Smooth running event Ensure CASE agenda met Complete lead accreditor report Co-accreditor Work with lead throughout Participate at all stages Joint decision making process Shadow accreditor Participate throughout Active role in review of documents

5. Preparation before the event Submit accreditation proforma 12/12 Event date confirmed 4/12 Documentation written and sent to CASE 2/12 Programme team Appoint lead & co-accreditor +/- shadow Support lead accreditor CASE Communicate with programme team and co-accreditor Support programme team Agree agenda Lead accreditor

6. Documentation you may receive Reflective review Programme specification Module specifications Clinical information External examiner reports Regulations / handbook Feedback Meeting minutes Staff CVsCASE reports Progression stats Changes proposed & rationale

7. Approx. 2 months prior to event - documentation Read carefully Discuss between CASE team Documents arrive All there? More needed? Request anything else Information Written report of key issues to team Feedback to programme team

8. Documentation Review - Tips Terminology and processes differ between Universities Give yourself enough time to review the documentation Stay objective when reviewing documents –Don’t expect the course to match one you are familiar with Are your comments related to personal opinion or CASE requirements?

9. Documentation – things to consider Programme routes on offer If new course, does it meet service user & CASE requirements Re-accreditation - developments Currency of course Link to national standards i.e. Skills for Health, QAA, NSC Service user involvement in developments Programme structure – transparent and clear? Award titles – clear & appropriate Timeframes for each route – are they realistic? Aims & learning outcomes

10. Documentation Recruitment / admissions Entry requirements Student numbers – quality of learning experience Progression statistics Resources and staff Ultrasound team? - number, experience, ongoing clinical experience External guest/visiting lecturers / expert knowledge? Review CVs Support staff Clinical skills Library & e-learning resources

11. Documentation Module options within each route Are they appropriate? Do they meet the overall programme outcomes? Flexibility / range / delivery options Co-requisites Overlap? Core topics missing? Module credits Equity of credits for workload? Will all students have similar workload for similar credits? Learning, teaching and assessment strategies Teaching & Learning methods used Innovations – do they meet learning outcomes

12. Documentation Quality assurance: Student feedback mechanisms and responses Monitor academic and clinical progress Assess clinical placements University support mechanisms and quality monitoring Annual CASE monitoring reports Support: Student support mechanisms Supervisor /assessor training and support

13. Module Assessment Method (s) Meets Learning outcomes Demonstrate academic knowledge Demonstrate M- level skills Quality standards Moderation External examiner Meet different learning needs of students Assessment burden / parity across modules Do the assessments meet all requirements?

14. Documentation – Clinical competency Clinical competency assessment – CASE requirement (section 6.3 CASE validation & accreditation handbook) Clear documentation How When Who

15. The event CASE Council University Programme Lead Programme Team Students Clinical staff -supervisors -assessors Senior management team Lead AccreditorCo-Accreditor

16. Validation event Panel Senior management team Validity programme Strategic direction Staffing Finance Students & alumni Positive feedback Issues How programme team deal with issues Clinical staff Support from programme team Clinical assessment scheme Programme meeting requirements of clinical practice? Programme team Changes made & rationale Clarification of documentation Pick up on issues raised in other discussions Initial meeting Plan

17. Facilities What is available for students? How is it used? When is it used? How often is it used? Student’s opinions?

18. Methods used by Universities Innovation should not be stifled - does the programme meet CASE requirements?

19. Feedback to programme team Positive -commendations -good practice Suggestions Conditions (dates) Recommendations Support available Report to CASE Review amended documentation CASE Council decision

20. Review any amendments during the accreditation period Advice and support to meet recommendations, following successful accreditation Oh no it isn’t

21. Potential issues

22. Skills needed to be an accreditor? Communication EnquiringPatient Organised Concentration / listening skills CalmConfident Encouraging & supportive Approachable Fair& confidential Tactful Open minded

23. Questions about the accreditation process or documentation? You are not alone in the process CASE office Lead accreditor CASE Chair Other member of CASE council

24. Why be an accreditor for CASE?

25. Did I meet the learning outcomes for this presentation? Learning outcomes: Critically reflect on the role of the accreditor in the review process Evaluate ways to review the documentation Evaluate how to determine a fair and robust assessment process Consider the highs and lows of being an accreditor Which method could assess these learning outcomes? i.e. 1.5 hour practical test/experiment with short written synopsis (500 words) 2 hour unseen examination Written assignment (2000 words) –i.e. evaluate the role of CASE accreditor in the assessment of ultrasound programmes Oral Presentation (20 minutes) Group presentation Poster presentation Objective structured examination (cases with related questions) Patchwork learning – small pieces of work “sewn together” at the end Case study (2000 words) Reflective essay (2000 words) Portfolio of evidence