Faculty Quality Assurance Teams 1994/95 University of Bristol
Department :
Faculty :
1. General Questions
1.1 What is the average number of timetabled hours for students registered for single or joint honours degrees in your department?
1.2 What is the average number of contact hours for teaching staff in your department?
1.3 Do you monitor teaching and learning provision for students registered in your department when they are taking units offered by other departments?
1.3.1 If YES, how?
1.4 Are you familiar with the University’s Statement of Policy for Good Practice in Teaching and Learning (ref: TL/92/3, revised October 1993) and the University’s Criteria for Excellence in Teaching and Learning (ref: UGS/TL/93/7)?
2. Procedures for Establishing New Programmes and Units
[see Detailed Checklist 1A to 1E]
2.1 How do you decide to introduce a new programme or unit? Please outline the process briefly, describing internal and external contributions (see 1.A of Detailed Checklist, ref: SN/93/61 Annex A to UGS/93/33, attached to Guidelines for Quality Assurance Teams).
2.2 What information is collected in the process of introducing new programme/unit proposals at undergraduate and postgraduate levels [e.g. aims and objectives, see 1.B of Detailed Checklist] :
· for Departmental use (staff and students)?
· for Faculty use?
· for University use?
2.3 Whom do you consult for independent advice on new programme/unit proposals? (Please give examples of any recent consultations.)
2.4 What are the mechanisms for approval of new programmes/units at departmental, faculty and University level?
2.5 In planning new programmes/units, do you take into account changes in student intake, such as non-traditional entrants (students without high A-level grades; mature students), and changes in the national curriculum? Please give details:
3. Review of Existing Programmes and Units
[see Detailed Checklist 1F]
3.1 In the programme and unit information you give to students, are aims and objectives clearly stated?
3.2 How do you review your existing programmes and units :
· on a regular or ad hoc basis?
· do you have an agreed procedure? If so, is this at Departmental or Faculty level?
· does it take into account resource issues, both departmental and external (such as library and computing services)?
3.3 What is the procedure for taking action as a result of programme and/or unit review?
3.4 Is there a member of staff with overall responsibility for the curriculum who initiates and oversees such reviews, including monitoring follow-up action?
3.5 What are the University’s procedures for programme review?
4. Assessment and Student Progress
[see Detailed Checklist 2E to 2H]
4.1 How do you ensure assessment methods are appropriate for the teaching and learning methods followed by your students? For example, do you agree common criteria for assessment with departments with whom you jointly teach single or joint honours programmes? How do you ensure assessment methods are appropriate for a range of students of mixed abilities?
4.2 Do you discuss the suitability of a range of assessment methods when introducing new programmes and units? If so, how do you decide upon the most appropriate? Do you consult your external examiner(s)?
4.3 What are the procedures for monitoring students progress:
· in the Department?
· in the Faculty?
4.4 If a student is not making satisfactory progress what support and additional help is offered?
4.5 How is the University’s personal tutor system used in your department?
4.6 Do you monitor drop out/completion rates of your students?
If so, how; can you give an example of a recent occasion where follow-up action was taken as a result of the monitoring process?
4.7 What procedures do you have for informing students of their progress at different stages in the programme/unit?
4.7.1 How do you monitor these procedures?
4.8 In the programme and unit information you give to students, do you state what the assessment methods are for each unit and how marks contribute to the overall degree classification, or to the final result in the case of graduate taught students?
4.9 What complaints/appeals procedures are open to students? Are these laid down by the Department, Faculty or University? Please give brief details:
4.10 Please outline, with references to section 2.G of the Detailed Checklist, your arrangements for postgraduate research training, advice and support.
4.11 Do you follow the University’s Guidelines for the appointment of examiners (ref: circ 94/3)?
4.12 What are the roles and functions of your Department’s external examiner(s)?
5. Feedback Mechanisms
[see Detailed Checklist 2I to 2K]
5.1 What use do you make of:
· external examiners reports?
· staff/student committees?
· student questionnaires?
If you use student questionnaires, please outline the procedures you use, for example :
· how they are administered
· how you provide feedback to students on the outcomes
· how they are used to identify staff training needs, etc.
· Other mechanisms?
5.2 What attempts do you make to obtain the views of your graduates after they have completed their studies? What use have you made of the feedback collected by the Careers Service and circulated to departments at the end of the 1993/94 session?
5.3 Do you seek the views of employers of your graduates, both on the quality of graduates and their skills, and the content of the curriculum? Please give details:
5.4 Do you have a process of accreditation by a professional organisation? If so, what impact does it have on the department and on students? How does this process interact with other quality assurance mechanisms (internal and external)?
6. Staff Matters
[see Detailed Checklist 3A to 3C]
6.1 In respect of new staff and existing staff, what attention is given to :
· training?
· enhancing teaching quality and assessment?
· the use of effective new teaching methods?
· dissemination of good practice?
6.2 Do you have a policy of providing regular study leave for staff? If so, how is it arranged?
6.3 How are research and teaching activities integrated? (please give examples)
6.4 Do you have a system of peer review in the Department, for example, do staff observe one another’s classes?
Overview - for completion by faculty quality assurance teams
i. Elements of good practice identified
ii. Areas where recommendations have been made and where progress needs to be followed up in subsequent years