Union Theological College

Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

October 2012

Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

Key findings about Union Theological College

As a result of its Review for Educational Oversight carried out in October 2012, the QAA review team (the team) considers that there can be confidence in how the Union Theological College manages its stated responsibilities for the standards of the awards it offers on behalf of Presbyterian Theological Faculty, Ireland (PTFI) and Queen's University of Belfast.

The team also considers that there can be confidence in how the provider manages its stated responsibilities for the quality and enhancement of the learning opportunities it offers on behalf of these awarding bodies.

The team considers that reliance can be placed on the accuracy and completeness of the information that the provider is responsible for publishing about itself and the programmes it delivers.

Good practice

The team has identified the following good practice:

the comprehensive academic and personal support provided for students

(paragraph 2.6) ReviewEducational for Oversight: the effectiveness of the College Library Users Forum (paragraph 2.14). Recommendations

The team has also identified a number of recommendations for the enhancement of the higher education provision.

The team considers that it is advisable for the provider to:

use external reference points when reviewing the PTFI Master of Ministry and Doctor of Ministry programmes (paragraph 1.6).

The team considers that it would be desirable for the provider to:

clarify the reporting relationship between the Faculty and the Curriculum Subcommittee of the College Management Committee (paragraph 1.2) formalise systems for identifying and disseminating good practice in learning and teaching (paragraph 1.9) link staff appraisal to peer observation of teaching within a staff development policy (paragraph 2.5) introduce an induction programme for new staff (paragraph 2.12) develop further the intranet to simplify navigation to resources for students (paragraph 3.3).

1 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

About this report

This report presents the findings of the Review for Educational Oversight1 (REO) conducted by QAA at Union Theological College (the provider; the College). The purpose of the review is to provide public information about how the provider discharges its stated responsibilities for the management and delivery of academic standards and the quality of learning opportunities available to students. The review applies to programmes of study that the provider delivers on behalf of Presbyterian Theological Faculty, Ireland (PTFI) and Queen's University of Belfast. The review was carried out by Professor David Eastwood, Ms Ann Kettle and Ms Dorothy McElwee (reviewers), and Mrs Catherine Fairhurst (coordinator).

The review team conducted the review in agreement with the provider and in accordance with the Review for Educational Oversight: Handbook.2 Evidence in support of the review included external examiners' reports, College Handbook, committee meetings' minutes, student evaluations, programme reviews, meetings with staff from the College, representatives of the awarding bodies and students.

The review team also considered the provider's use of the relevant external reference points:

the Academic Infrastructure

Memorandum of Agreement between the College and Queen's University of Belfast. ReviewEducational for Oversight:

Please note that if you are unfamiliar with any of the terms used in this report you can find them in the Glossary.

Union Theological College (the College) was founded in the nineteenth century as the theological college of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland. The Church owns the College and provides the finance, information technology support, human resource and estate management functions. The College is a constituent college of Queen's University of Belfast (the University) Institute of and is situated adjacent to the University campus. It delivers programmes which are validated and assessed by the University. There are six full-time and up to 15 part-time members of academic staff.

The College professors constitute the Presbyterian Theological Faculty, Ireland (PTFI), which has degree awarding powers in theology. These awards are conferred normally only on Presbyterian Church ordinands, who are also expected to enrol concurrently for a Queen's University of Belfast degree. There are currently 264 students enrolled on Queen's University of Belfast-validated programmes, including 63 on programmes leading to PTFI awards.

At the time of the review, the provider offered the following higher education programmes, listed beneath their awarding bodies, with student numbers shown in brackets:

Queen's University of Belfast Bachelor of Arts joint honours Theology with English, History, or Philosophy (48) Bachelor of Theology (78) Bachelor of Divinity (28) Graduate Diploma in Theology (11) (9) Master of Theology (10)

1 www.qaa.ac.uk/InstitutionReports/types-of-review/tier-4. 2 www.qaa.ac.uk/publications/informationandguidance/pages/reo-handbook.aspx.

2 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

Master/Doctor of Philosophy (17)

Presbyterian Theological Faculty, Ireland (PTFI) Bachelor of Divinity (3) Graduate Certificate/Diploma in Youth Ministry (10) Postgraduate Diploma in Ministry (44) Master/Doctor of Ministry (MMin, DMin) (6)

The provider's stated responsibilities

The College's responsibilities vary according to the awarding body. For university-validated awards, it shares with the University responsibilities for academic standards, assessment, learning resources, programme design and development, public information and student support. The College is responsible for staff development and teaching and learning. For the PTFI awards, the College is responsible for academic standards, assessment including external examiners' appointment, learning resources, programme design, development and review, placement arrangements, public information, quality processes, staff development, student support and teaching. The College has no responsibility for student admissions for either awarding body.

Recent developments

ReviewEducational for Oversight: Recent developments of programmes include the graduate awards in youth ministry. Admissions to the degrees of MMin and DMin have been suspended since 2011 in anticipation of a complete review in 2012-13. Student support was strengthened by the introduction of a student mentoring scheme in 2011. A recent building programme has been completed. This includes new common room facilities for students, additional seminar room and office space, and study facilities for postgraduate students.

Students' contribution to the review

Students studying on higher education programmes at the provider were invited to present a submission to the review team. The student submission was coordinated and drafted by the President of the Ministry Students Council and informed by student meetings, a focus group and evaluations from students' review. The College provided guidance, support and access to documentation. The team found the student submission informative and explored its content in meetings with students both at the preparatory meeting and during the visit to gain a clear picture of the student learning experience.

3 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

Detailed findings about Union Theological College

1 Academic standards

How effectively does the provider fulfil its responsibilities for the management of academic standards?

1.1 The College fulfils its responsibilities for the management of academic standards effectively. It delivers programmes as a constituent college of Queen's University of Belfast Institute of Theology, covered by the Memorandum of Agreement, and the responsibilities are clearly understood by the College staff. The professors of the College (the Faculty) constitute the Presbyterian Theological Faculty, Ireland (PTFI), which separately has degree awarding powers and provides ministerial training programmes for ordinands of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland.

1.2 The College Management Committee is appointed by the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland. The Principal has executive responsibility under this committee for the management of all aspects of the College. The Curriculum Subcommittee of the College Management Committee oversees academic standards together with the Faculty. The connection between the Faculty and the Curriculum Subcommittee, and their respective responsibilities with regard to the management of the standards, is not clear. It is desirable for the College to clarify the reporting relationship between the Faculty and the ReviewEducational for Oversight: Curriculum Subcommittee.

1.3 The regulation and quality assurance processes of the PTFI awards are modelled on those of Queen's University of Belfast; for example, following recent changes to pathway regulations of the University's programmes to ensure more explicit progression between levels, similar changes have been made to pathways in the PTFI degree programmes. Students met by the team were aware of intended learning outcomes and progression between levels.

1.4 The College has recently reviewed the management of the academic standards of its PTFI programmes. As a result, the PTFI now meets frequently to consider matters such as regulatory changes, student progress and feedback and the appointment of external examiners. The MMin/DMin programmes will undergo a comprehensive review during 2012-13. Currently, admission to these postgraduate research programmes has been suspended pending the results of this review.

How effectively are external reference points used in the management of academic standards?

1.5 The College's effective use of the Academic Infrastructure is through engagement with the University's quality assurance processes for the University's awards, with appropriate reference to The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education and the theology and subject benchmark statement.

1.6 There is little evidence that external reference points are used as effectively for PTFI awards. Members of the College Management Committee give advice to ensure that the PTFI programmes are appropriately designed to prepare students for professional practice in ministry and the syllabus for the new graduate awards in youth ministry was developed together with the Presbyterian Church of Ireland Board of Youth and Children. The forthcoming review of the MMin/DMin programmes offers the College the opportunity to

4 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College increase further the effectiveness of its internal approval, monitoring and review processes. It is recommended as advisable for the College to use external reference points when reviewing the PTFI MMin and DMin programmes.

How does the provider use external moderation, verification or examining to assure academic standards?

1.7 The College uses external moderation effectively to assure academic standards. In the case of the university-validated programmes, the appointment of external examiners, agreement of module marks, student progression, degree classification and student appeals are the responsibility of the University. Assessment is designed and undertaken through the University's Institute of Theology's subject boards. External examiners report to the subject board and usually do not distinguish between the Institute's constituent colleges. There is at present no formal process, or requirement by the awarding body, for the consideration of external examiners' reports and other quality assurance reports within the College.

1.8 Assessment procedures for the assessment of PTFI awards are similar to those of the University. The College plans to introduce a standardised procedure for the double marking of written assignments in the Postgraduate Diploma in Ministry programme during 2012-13. External examiners are appointed by PTFI and are expected to possess the same level of qualifications and experience as those appointed by the University. PTFI procedures currently provide that, for all modules above level 4, external examiners are consulted about the setting of assignments and examinations and are involved in the moderation of marks; ReviewEducational for Oversight: from 2012-13 it is intended to extend this involvement of external examiners to level 4 modules. The PTFI meets formally as an examination board at the end of each semester. The College has recently sought to develop and improve the feedback offered to students on summative assessment.

1.9 Procedures for the identification and dissemination of good practice in teaching and assessment within the College are relatively informal. Within the College, meetings of the Faculty provide the opportunity to share good practice with one day each semester allocated to formal discussion and dissemination of good teaching practice. In June 2012, the Faculty held a development forum for the discussion and sharing of good practice on teaching and assessment. The University Institute of Theology Board, which includes all full-time and most part-time staff from the College and University staff from other subject areas, facilitates the sharing of good practice across colleges and disciplines. External examiners occasionally

identify an aspect of good practice by a particular college, such as the summary of students' marks, and recommend its dissemination. It is desirable for the College to develop more formal and systematic methods of identifying and disseminating good practice in teaching and assessment.

The review team has confidence in the provider's management of its responsibilities for the standards of the awards it offers on behalf of its awarding bodies.

2 Quality of learning opportunities

How effectively does the provider fulfil its responsibilities for managing and enhancing the quality of learning opportunities?

2.1 The key responsibilities for the quality of learning opportunities are as described in paragraphs 1.1-1.4. The College Management Committee is currently reviewing its procedures relating to the formal management of staff appraisal and staff development.

5 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

How effectively are external reference points used in the management and enhancement of learning opportunities?

2.2 The use of external reference points in the management and enhancement of learning opportunities are as described in paragraphs 1.5-1.6.

How does the provider assure itself that the quality of teaching and learning is being maintained and enhanced?

2.3 The College does not have an independent teaching and learning strategy, but it assures itself that the quality of teaching is being maintained by means of the University's annual review processes and by student feedback. The University's practices and procedures are followed effectively. For example, the University conducts a comprehensive and effective annual review of the College's module and programme.

2.4 Student feedback on the quality of teaching and learning is collected effectively in a number of ways. Module evaluation questionnaires are completed at the end of all modules and a summary for each module is posted on the College noticeboard. Collated student responses also form an essential ingredient of the annual module review and annual programme review processes. End-of-course feedback is collected from PTFI students. The effectiveness of these measures is confirmed by the students.

2.5 The College has no current system of peer review or peer observation of teaching. ReviewEducational for Oversight: The quality of individual staff teaching is analysed by the Principal and heads of department from student module feedback surveys and from informal verbally expressed student concerns. Evaluation of individual teaching quality currently forms no part of either staff appraisal or staff development. The College recognises the need for a more formal appraisal process for teaching staff and for a more structured programme for academic staff development, both of which are under current review. It is desirable to link staff appraisal to peer observation of teaching and a staff development policy in order to enhance the quality of teaching and learning.

How does the provider assure itself that students are supported effectively?

2.6 Student support within the College is both comprehensive and effective.

All undergraduate students are assigned a personal tutor for both academic and pastoral support. The Principal interviews all students at least once a year to review their academic progress and module choices. There is open access for students to receive guidance and advice from any academic staff member, for example with respect to module choices. Students confirm the availability and helpfulness of both the academic and administrative staff. The comprehensive academic and personal support provided for students is good practice.

2.7 Student induction surveys show approval of the College's induction processes. There is a College induction programme for all first year undergraduate students, followed by a module-based tutorial system where transferable academic skills are developed in tandem with subject skills. First year students are also in support groups with second and third year student mentors. For Postgraduate Diploma in Ministry students, a traditional two-day residential pre-term induction programme is currently being extended to a five-day programme. The College is improving its induction provision for postgraduate students and a formalised induction programme, dealing especially with non-academic and social aspects of College life, is currently under review.

6 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

What are the provider's arrangements for staff development to maintain and/or enhance the quality of learning opportunities?

2.10 The College does not have a formal policy by which staff development can be systematically documented and disseminated. Involvement in staff development opportunities depends on the initiative of individuals. There are, however, generous development opportunities, such as sabbaticals, paying for staff to attend conferences, books and other resources.

2.11 All College teaching staff are well qualified academically, almost all to PhD level. Those who teach on University programmes must be formally recognised by the University's Collaborative Provision Group and undergo a rigorous periodic review of this recognition after three to five years; a process that stresses significant evidence of continuous professional development over that period. Staff who are teaching on PTFI programmes are required to be qualified to the same level as those teaching on comparable University programmes. Discussion is scheduled for 2012-13 on a policy to encourage all new lecturing staff to enrol for the Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education Teaching, on which one part-time staff member is currently enrolled.

2.12 The College does not operate a formal induction programme for new staff to promote understanding of the College's policies, procedures and practices. Instead, given the small numbers, new staff members meet informally with the Principal and student feedback is carefully reviewed. Prior to the award of recognised teacher and honorary ReviewEducational for Oversight: lecturer status, the University instigates its own induction and mentoring processes. It is desirable for the College to introduce a more formal and documented induction programme for new staff.

How effectively does the provider ensure that learning resources are accessible to students and sufficient to enable them to achieve the learning outcomes?

2.13 Under the Memorandum of Agreement, the University requires that the learning resources provided by the College must be commensurate with the requirements of students undertaking programmes within the University. The physical resources within the College are good, with well equipped classrooms, modern common room and dining room facilities, library study areas and a computer suite - all contributing to a positive learning environment. There was a £3 million refurbishment in 2003. Staff resources are good, with well qualified teaching staff, all with ongoing research interests.

2.14 The College's library facilities are excellent and, in addition to the main library, also include the Gamble Library, the largest theological library in Ulster, in which specialist theological collections provide an outstanding research resource. The College employs two professionally qualified librarians and a library assistant, and allocates an annual budget for books, journals and other learning resources. College students and staff have access to the University library, which has a significant theology section. The College contributes to the central funding of research journals held in the University Library and to annual subscriptions to online databases. A College Library Users Forum has been established to obtain feedback from students on library facilities. This consists of undergraduate and postgraduate representatives, together with senior academic, management and library staff. Students met during the review visit confirmed the effectiveness of this forum. The College Library Users Forum is good practice.

7 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

The review team has confidence that the provider is fulfilling its responsibilities for managing and enhancing the quality of the intended learning opportunities it provides for students.

3 Public information

How effectively does the provider's public information communicate to students and other stakeholders about the higher education it provides?

3.1 The College effectively uses a range of media to communicate information to its students and other stakeholders. These include a well designed website, a comprehensive College Handbook, promotional leaflets, noticeboards, electronic screens, email and the student intranet (Online Student Resource Centre). The information provided is sufficient and students confirm its usefulness.

3.2 The College website provides prospective students, parents and sponsors with information to enable them to make informed decisions on the provision. The application process, facilities, support services, policies, regulations and summary information on programmes are published on the website. Students report the website to be a useful information source during the application period. There are also links to the library catalogue ReviewEducational for Oversight: and the Online Student Resource Centre to enable external access.

3.3 The Online Student Resource Centre provides module-specific information and resources. This resource is used as a repository for information and the distribution of learning materials. While students consider this resource to be useful for study materials, they report it to be difficult to navigate. It is desirable for the College to further develop this intranet and simplify navigation to resources for students.

How effective are the provider's arrangements for assuring the accuracy and completeness of information it has responsibility for publishing?

3.4 There is no formal policy on public information assurance, although the

arrangements are effective. These arrangements for assuring the accuracy and completeness of public information rest almost exclusively with the Principal and Registrar. Other staff are involved in providing information subject to their area of responsibility. All marketing and advertising materials, including handbooks which refer to the University, are submitted to the Director of the Institute of Theology for approval, prior to publication.

3.5 To assure accuracy, only the Registrar has the editing rights to make changes on the website. Timetables and regulations are updated, and announcements on events and publications are made as appropriate. The Registrar checks links daily to ensure they are active. A further check is made to ensure the Student Online Resource Centre is accessible for students. Out-of-date materials are removed on a semester basis. The Principal undertakes a review of the College Handbook annually and the website biannually, and updates the content.

3.6 Students are positive about the quality of information they receive from the College and report it to be accurate, helpful and comprehensive, even though their views are not sought to enhance the effectiveness of communications.

8 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

The team concludes that reliance can be placed on the accuracy and completeness of the information that the provider is responsible for publishing about itself and the programmes it delivers.

ReviewEducational for Oversight:

9

Action plan3

Union Theological College action plan relating to the Review for Educational Oversight Good practice Action to be taken Target date Action by Success Reported to Evaluation indicators The review team identified the following areas of good practice that are worthy of wider dissemination within the provider: ReviewEducational for Oversight:Union Theological College the comprehensive A process has Process trialled The Students who The Principal Records of academic and already been put in throughout first Administration appear to be at attendance- personal support place to monitor class semester of Team risk will be monitoring provided for attendance more fully 2012-13 and to interviewed by a process; record 10 students in order to help be reviewed in relevant member of interviews in (paragraph 2.6) identify students at January 2013 of staff and individual student risk (in academic with a view to a appropriate advice files; minutes of terms) so as to refined process given Faculty provide appropriate in the second advice and support semester

The Principal will Week six of The Principal A student The Faculty and The results of the interview all second second evaluation survey Management student survey and third year semester (mid- on the Committee and the minutes students towards the March 2013) effectiveness of of Faculty and beginning of 2012 to personal and Management monitor progress, academic support Committee advise on module choices and related academic matters, to

3 The provider has been required to develop this action plan to follow up on good practice and address any recommendations arising from the review. QAA monitors progress

against the action plan, in conjunction with the provider's awarding bodies.

identify those in need of specific support, and to encourage the use of University Careers guidance services

Making available Week three of The staff of the Student evaluation The Principal Records of feedback on the second Biblical Studies of this feedback attendance at summative semester (end department (as process feedback assessment will be of February a pilot scheme) interviews

developed further 2013) ReviewEducational for Oversight:Union Theological College after the first Records of semester student examinations evaluation of the process the effectiveness of The Forum will meet Week six of The Principal The minutes will Curriculum Minutes of Forum 11 the College Library at least once per each semester show that matters Subcommittee of and of Curriculum Users Forum semester and the raised at the the Management Subcommittee (paragraph 2.14). minutes will be posted Forum are tracked Committee on the noticeboard and followed and in the Student through until Online Resource completed or Centre closed Advisable Action to be taken Target date Action by Success Reported to Evaluation indicators The team considers that it is advisable for the provider to: use external Initial review phase of May 2013 A subgroup A report on The Presbyterian The minutes of reference points these programmes, in appointed by progress Theological the Presbyterian when reviewing the particular noting what the presented to the Faculty, Ireland Theological PTFI Master of changes to the Presbyterian Presbyterian Faculty Faculty, Ireland Ministry and Doctor programmes might be Theological Theological of Ministry necessary in light of Faculty, Ireland Faculty, Ireland

programmes relevant external Faculty (paragraph 1.6). reference points (convened by Principal) Desirable Action to be taken Target date Action by Success Reported to Evaluation indicators The team considers that it is desirable for the provider to: clarify the reporting A draft paper April 2013 The Convener An agreed The Convener of The minutes of relationship clarifying this of the statement on this the Management the relevant between the reporting relationship Curriculum reporting Committee bodies and of the

Faculty and the to be drawn up by the Subcommittee relationship that is Management ReviewEducational for Oversight:Union Theological College Curriculum Convener of the clear and Committee Subcommittee of Curriculum understood by all the College Subcommittee for parties Management discussion and Committee eventual agreement 12 (paragraph 1.2) by both bodies and by the Management Committee formalise systems At least once a January 2013 The Secretary Implementation of The Principal The minutes of for identifying and semester there and every six of Faculty action points the meetings, disseminating good should be a formal months arising from showing how practice in learning meeting of members thereafter meetings action points and teaching of Faculty for this have been (paragraph 1.9) purpose, which tracked and should consider, followed through among other matters, to completion relevant comments from student evaluations and from external examiners' comments

These meetings

should be minuted, with action points tracked until completion

At the end of each September The member of Implementation of The Principal The minutes of academic year, there 2103 and Faculty action points the meetings, should be a meeting every year responsible for arising from showing how of part-time staff for thereafter undergraduate meetings action points sharing and teaching and have been dissemination of good learning tracked and

practice followed through ReviewEducational for Oversight:Union Theological College to completion These meetings should be minuted, with action points tracked until 13 completion link staff appraisal Peer observation pilot Week eight of Principal Peer observation Convener of the Records of peer to peer observation scheme to be put in second sessions for key Curriculum observation of teaching place in second semester (end staff completed Subcommittee sessions within a staff semester of 2012-13 of March 2013) and recorded development policy (paragraph 2.5) A development policy Draft policy by Principal and Draft policy Convener of Minutes of for academic staff to end of Convener of presented to Management Management be drafted and academic year Curriculum Management Committee Committee implemented (June 2013) Subcommittee Committee

Implementation The Principal A plan in place and The Convener of Minutes of the from implemented for the Curriculum Curriculum September each full-time Subcommittee Subcommittee 2013 with member of review in June academic staff and 2014 module coordinators

introduce an Draft an induction Drafted by May Convener of Programme Convener of the Programme induction programme for all 2013 the Finance finalised and Management documents and programme for new College staff (with and Personnel available for Committee minutes of staff guidance from parent- Committee implementation Management (paragraph 2.12) church body's Human Committee Resources department)

Implement Implementation Principal and Programme Convener of the Evaluations of programme once for all new staff Administrator provided for new Finance and those for whom finalised by September staff (if any) Personnel the programme is

2013 (or as Committee provided (if any) ReviewEducational for Oversight:Union Theological College soon as programme finalised) develop further the Liaise with November Administrator Newly designed Principal Record of student intranet to simplify Information 2012 (already and Information Student Online meetings where 14 navigation to Technology completed) Technology Resource Centre feedback is resources for department to Manager available to sought and the students develop the intranet students follow-through of (paragraph 3.3). as recommended comments and suggestions Seek feedback from February 2013 Administrator Feedback Principal student committees comments noted and actioned where appropriate

Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

Review for educational oversight About QAA

QAA is the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. QAA's mission is to safeguard standards and improve the quality of UK higher education.

QAA's aims are to:

meet students' needs and be valued by them safeguard standards in an increasingly diverse UK and international context drive improvements in UK higher education improve public understanding of higher education standards and quality.

QAA conducts reviews of higher education institutions and publishes reports on the findings. QAA also publishes a range of guidance documents to help safeguard standards and improve quality.

More information about the work of QAA is available at: www.qaa.ac.uk.

More detail about Review for Educational Oversight can be found at: www.qaa.ac.uk/institutionreports/types-of-review/tier-4.

15 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

Review for educational oversight Glossary

This glossary explains terms used in this report. You can find a fuller glossary at: www.qaa.ac.uk/aboutus/glossary. Formal definitions of key terms can be found in the Review for Educational Oversight: Handbook4

Academic Infrastructure Guidance developed and agreed by the higher education community and published by QAA, which is used by institutions to ensure that their courses meet national expectations for academic standards and that students have access to a suitable environment for learning (academic quality). It consists of four groups of reference points: the frameworks for higher education qualifications, the subject benchmark statements, the programme specifications and the Code of practice. Work is underway (2011-12) to revise the Academic Infrastructure as the UK Quality Code for Higher Education. academic quality A comprehensive term referring to how, and how well, institutions manage teaching and learning opportunities to help students progress and succeed. academic standards The standards set and maintained by institutions for their courses and expected for their awards. See also threshold academic standard. awarding body A body with the authority to award academic qualifications located on the framework for higher education qualifications, such as diplomas or degrees. awarding organisation An organisation with the authority to award academic qualifications located on the Qualifications and Credit Framework for England and Northern Ireland (these qualifications are at levels 1 to 8, with levels 4 and above being classed as 'higher education').

Code of practice The Code of practice for the assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education, published by QAA: a set of interrelated documents giving guidance for higher education institutions. designated body An organisation that has been formally appointed to perform a particular function. differentiated judgements In a Review for Educational Oversight, separate judgements respectively for the provision validated by separate awarding bodies. enhancement Taking deliberate steps at institutional level to improve the quality of learning opportunities. It is used as a technical term in QAA's audit and review processes. feature of good practice A positive aspect of the way a higher education institution manages quality and standards, which may be seen as exemplary to others. framework A published formal structure. See also framework for higher education qualifications. framework for higher education qualifications A published formal structure that identifies a hierarchy of national qualification levels and describes the general achievement expected of holders of the main qualification types at each level, thus assisting higher education providers in maintaining academic standards. QAA publishes the following frameworks:

4 www.qaa.ac.uk/publications/informationandguidance/pages/reo-handbook.aspx.

16 Review for Educational Oversight: Union Theological College

Review for educational oversight

The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (FHEQ) and The framework for qualifications of higher education institutions in Scotland. highly trusted sponsor An education provider that the UK government trusts to admit migrant students from overseas, according to Tier 4 of the UK Border Agency's points-based immigration system. Higher education providers wishing to obtain this status must undergo a successful review by QAA. learning opportunities The provision made for students' learning, including planned programmes of study, teaching, assessment, academic and personal support, resources (such as libraries and information systems, laboratories or studios) and staff development.

learning outcome What a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to demonstrate after completing a process of learning. operational definition A formal definition of a term, which establishes exactly what QAA means when using it in reports. programme (of study) An approved course of study which provides a coherent learning experience and normally leads to a qualification. programme specifications Published statements about the intended learning outcomes of programmes of study, containing information about teaching and learning methods, support and assessment methods, and how individual units relate to levels of achievement. provider An institution that offers courses of higher education, typically on behalf of a separate awarding body or organisation. In the context of REO, the term means an independent college. public information Information that is freely available to the public (sometimes referred to as being 'in the public domain'). reference points Statements and other publications that establish criteria against which performance can be measured. Internal reference points may be used by providers for purposes of self-regulation; external ones are used and accepted throughout the higher education community for the checking of standards and quality. quality See academic quality. subject benchmark statement A published statement that sets out what knowledge, understanding, abilities and skills are expected of those graduating in each of the main subject areas (mostly applying to bachelor's degrees), and explains what gives that particular discipline its coherence and identity. threshold academic standard The minimum standard that a student should reach in order to gain a particular qualification or award, as set out in the subject benchmark statements and national qualifications frameworks. Threshold standards are distinct from the standards of performance that students need to achieve in order to gain any particular class of award, for example a first-class bachelor's degree. See also academic standard. widening participation Increasing the involvement in higher education of people from a wider range of backgrounds.

17

Review for educationaleduca oversight

tionaloversight

RG 1092 01/13

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

Southgate House Southgate Street Gloucester GL1 1UB

Tel 01452 557000 Fax 01452 557070 Email [email protected] Web www.qaa.ac.uk

© The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2013

ISBN 978 1 84979 773 3

All QAA's publications are available on our website www.qaa.ac.uk

Registered charity numbers 1062746 and SC037786