 |
Programme Management System INTRODUCTION
This revised process – the ‘programme management system’ has been piloted in three Faculties, UUHealth and the Division of Access and Distributed Learning and, with effect from 2010/11, replaces Annual Subject Monitoring in all Faculties.
The previous process of Annual Subject Monitoring (ASM) focused on reviews of course-level information at subject/school and Faculty level. The programme management system methodology relocates the responsibility for the ongoing review of programmes and enhancement of the student learning experience in the hands of the academic staff delivering the programme: the course team. Rather than operating as an annual process with a review of all indicators together in a multilayered approach, Course Committees/Subject Committees consider all quality indicators (the evidence base for ASM) as and when they are available.
Existing Committee structures within the Faculty and University permit the flow of issues and good practice to be fed by Course/Subject Committees up to the relevant decision-making point. The process is consequently a reversal of the previous ‘top-down’ approach to quality monitoring.
Consequently, the following are not included within the revised process:
Annual monitoring activity is therefore embedded within Course Committee activity and the minutes of Course Committee meetings across the year provide Faculty management and the University with information on the operation of course monitoring.
Implementation of the revised process does not remove responsibility from the Faculty and University for the oversight of quality monitoring. However, the focus of this activity is shifted to a focus on ensuring the operation and effectiveness of Course/Subject Committee activity and the effectiveness of debate and communication through the Committee structures. The University is also responsible for considering practice across Faculties.
THE PROCESS
Objectives
To enable course/subject teams to review the performance of courses/subjects with a view to:
(a) Course Level responsibilities
Course Committees are responsible for ongoing review of the performance of programmes in the light of evidence available to them at course and module level. The evidence base is the same as that which informed course-level reporting in the completion of annual reports under the previous ASM process. Provision of statistics to inform review by course/subject teams would continue to be provided centrally. Consideration of all available information including statistical data, external examiner reports, PSRB and employer engagement, student feedback and NSS results, should be completed as part of an ongoing cycle through Course Committee meetings rather than through preparation of an annual report.
A checklist detailing the topics which must be considered by Course Committees through the course of the year is detailed below. This checklist also provides guidance notes on areas which might be considered under these topics as and when appropriate. Course Committee minutes need to reflect clearly the evidence considered, conclusions reached and actions identified. The checklist together with sample agendas and minute templates for both undergraduate and postgraduate courses are available for download below.
(b) Faculty-level Oversight and Responsibilities
Faculties are responsible for ensuring the effective operation of Course/Subject Committees and the supporting structures for them. This includes: mechanisms for administrative support; effective monitoring of activity; effective communication of issues through the Faculty committee structure; and mechanisms for the allocation and monitoring of resource allocation. Faculties should give consideration to the scheduling of Committee meetings to facilitate effective communication.
(c) University-level Oversight and Responsibilities
In order to maintain assurance that the quality of the student learning experience is being appropriately maintained, the ADEC sub-group which previously considered ASM reports has been replaced by a formal Sub-Committee of ADEC which will meet regularly throughout the year. As with the previous sub-group, it will continue to identify programmes/themes for detailed review on an annual basis. Courses for review are identified on the basis of the quality indicators available centrally, ie External Examiner reports, PSRB reports, Student Complaints, National Student Survey outcomes and student progression and award data. In addition, the University exercises oversight through the operation of a programme of themed audits, agreed by ADEC, which evaluate the effectiveness of key quality management processes at course and Faculty level. These may be audits of themes or tracking of sample issues. As with all themed audits, existing documentation is reviewed and there is no requirement for additional documentation to be written.
Information for Faculties: Interim Evaluation of the Programme Management System Pilot First year evaluation of the Programme Management System Pilot Course/Subject Committee checklist of agenda items to be considered over year Sample UG Course/Subject Committee agendas with guidance Sample UG Course/Subject Committee minute templates Sample PG Course Committee agendas with guidance Sample PG Course Committee minute templates
Information for ADEC Annual Monitoring Sub-Committee members: Terms of Reference and membership of ADEC Annual Monitoring Sub-Committee |
