1 / 15

THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE – WHAT’S THE DEAL ?

THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE – WHAT’S THE DEAL ?. Presentation by Robert Behrens Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education in England and Wales to Higher Education Policy Institute The Royal Society, London 06 May 2009

raja
Download Presentation

THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE – WHAT’S THE DEAL ?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE – WHAT’S THE DEAL ? Presentation by Robert Behrens Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education in England and Wales to Higher Education Policy Institute The Royal Society, London 06 May 2009 “Comrades ! The first principle of the Revolution is effective time-keeping.” Govan Mbeki

  2. THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE AND THE OIA- OVERVIEW • OIA Mandates • Accountabilities • Governance • Mission and disposition • Operational Engagement • Pathway Project 2008-9 • The ‘Wicked’ Issues

  3. OIA MANDATES • Designated under Higher Education Act 2004 as Independent Scheme without charge to complainants • Qualifying Institutions include HEIs in England and Wales • Governing Bodies have a statutory obligation to comply with the Scheme Rules [Section 15(1)] • Qualifying complaints include “an act or omission” by an HEI, brought by student or former student [Section 12], once internal procedures exhausted [Sch 2,3b]. • Tests are whether HEI has abided by own procedures or acted reasonably “in all the circumstances” [Rules 7.4.4] • Must not relate to “matters of academic judgment” [Section 12.2] • Scheme funded by Member subscriptions based on student numbers.

  4. OIA ACCOUNTABILITIES • Duties of designated Operator, to publish Scheme and Annual Report, and supply information to Minister, set out in Act. • Subject to Judicial Review following Siburorema hearing in Court of Appeal in 2007. • Company Limited by Guarantee. Not part of Ministry (as in Austria and Sweden). Not an NDPB with state funding. Not a Charity. • Full (voluntary) adherence to Nolan Rules and 7 Principles of Public Life. Not a ‘Public Authority’ subject to FOI requests.

  5. OIA GOVERNANCE • Board has 14 members. A majority, 8, including the Chair, are Independent, appointed under Nolan Rules. • A minority, 6, nominated by HE representative bodies. Included CUC (Ray Burton), UUK, NUS, HE Wales, Guild HE, and AHUA. • The Independent Adjudicator is appointed (3 year term) by the Board under Nolan Rules and leads a small Management Team and group of Assistant Adjudicators. • The Board plays no part in Adjudication, and has an obligation to preserve the independence of the Scheme and the Independent Adjudicator.

  6. Mission: “Resolving student complaints with independence, impartiality and precision.” Values: Quality, Independence, Integrity, Openness and Service Ethos. Key Operational Principles: A proportionate, evidence-based approach based on risk management, and promoting continuous dialogue to promote good practice Not a Regulator. Where a complaint is Justified we “may recommend” but “may not require” [Sch.2,S13(6)]. HEIs expected to comply with Formal Decisions and Recommendations “in full and in prompt manner” [Rules 7.5] Non-compliance will be reported to the Board and publicised in Annual Report. The Board considers “whether and if so how” referrals are dealt with [Rules 7.7,10.12]. OIA MISSION AND DISPOSITION

  7. Complaints rising year-on-year (537 in 2005, 900 in 2008). Two-thirds of complaints relate to academic related issues (eg handling of mitigating circumstances, hearings and appeals) Business, Medicine-related and Law courses generate most complaints International students outside EU constitute 22 per cent of cases Handling times reduced by 17 per cent in 2008 In 2008, 7 per cent Justified, 16 per cent Partly Justified,71 per cent Not Justified. Unit cost of handling a complaint is 2k 15 Judicial Review Applications. 2 full hearings. None successful. OIA OPERATIONAL ENGAGEMENT

  8. Consultation exercise on the next phase of OIA development Issues and Questions Paper (October 2008) attracted 122 institutional responses. Independent quantitative study of student complainants (conducted by Kings College, London) April and May 2009. Report to be published in Autumn 2009. Early Findings: Broad consensus that 2004 Scheme an improvement on previous arrangements and has promoted better practice by HEIs Strong endorsement of independence of Office and authority of Adjudications. HEIs critical of the time and effort required to conclude decisions. No consensus on alternative funding arrangements THE PATHWAY PROJECT

  9. THE ‘WICKED’ ISSUES Promoting Good Practice Strategic Planning for ‘No Surprises’ The User Perspective – being faithful to the student experience. • Public Trust • Transparency • Time (‘Comrades ! The first principle of the Revolution is effective time-keeping’) • Complaints Resolution

More Related