Integrated Quality Enhancement Review City College Manchester

1. Integrated Quality Enhancement ReviewCity College Manchester Presentation to Liverpool John Moores University Partnership Forum Wednesday 30th January 2008 Feedback from Pilot Study IQER Maldwyn Buckland Higher Education Development Manager City College Manchester mbuckland@ccm.ac.uk - IQER Feedback 08

2. Institutional Context Large Mixed Economy College 800 plus FTE HE students (FT & PT), set to increase by 50% by 2011 Funding - mainly directly from HEFCE Small amount of diminishing Edexcel provision Diminishing Franchise but developing Consortia profile through GMSA - LLN Multiple Awarding Body Partnerships within GMSA LLN …Recognises the the specific needs & circumstances of colleges & the environment in which they operate 2

3. Developmental Engagement – AssessmentThe Process Institutional Nominees…Selection & training Choose experienced staff with knowledge of HE – clear diary to ensure full engagement with both college & reviewer role Training intensive requiring substantial preparation DE Team member – valuable in guiding external reviewer & ensuring timely access to appropriate information, but very much… Poacher turned Gamekeeper! Cycle Planning Meeting… Lines of Enquiry Confirms roles & responsibilities including cross – college managers & awarding bodies Helpful in projecting impact on staff – both financial & time. Lines of enquiry key to planning 3

4. Developmental Engagement – AssessmentThe Process Self Evaluation… Evidence – based portfolio Little time to prepare data sets Guidance needs to be clearer on SE production One comprehensive SE covering DE & SR or separate? Student Written Submission …Daunting! Brief students – support & guide to facilitate engagement Preparatory Meeting… Formal event Feedback on SE & clear guidance on process from Chair with emphasis on engagement with Academic Infrastructure Reviewers assigned ownership of Core Questions Initial feedback on SE – involves Institutional Nominees INs dual role kicks in! 4

5. Developmental Engagement – AssessmentThe Process Developmental Engagement visit Confirm roles & responsibilities Ensure “house keeping” is in place Evening Meeting for Review Team Useful insight into external reviewer’s early perceptions early probing questions on institutional context Confirm early direction of thinking - Questions formulated DE meetings aligned to 3 Core Questions Scope of meetings caused logistical issues in co-ordinating large groups – additional student/employer meetings Review team seek evidence and formulate early draft reports Challenging timescales for INs – dual role impacts on ability to keep focused on reviewer role and production of draft report for verbal feedback 5

6. Developmental Engagement – AssessmentThe Process Verbal Report from Chair Valuable – extremely thorough and informative clearly outlining good practice and recommendations. College clear about responsibilities in responding to subsequent DE Action Plan Confirmed preparation for Summative Review Draft Report &Action Plan Response Ability to challenge statements and plan responses Review of Self Evaluation for SR Build on Action Plan steer – refine SE as appropriate Data sets facilitate evaluative commentary on performance Prepare staff and students 6

7. Summative ReviewThe Process SR Preparatory Meeting Clarification of Facilitator role and external review team Confirmation of potential lines of Lines of Enquiry Agree advanced documentation – Excessive !! Addition of new reviewers for SE created repetitious demands Review Team structure Weighted towards University bias – 1 reviewer from FEC Early difficulty in grasping HE in FE dynamic Facilitator role – non – influential Core Question Meeting Probing, persistent & drawn out, but key issues identified Again – required large groups of staff due to scope of questions Clear benefit in having awarding body staff present Recover!! 7

8. Summative ReviewSome Thoughts Prepare FECs for Lines of Enquiry Advise DE Self Evaluation relates exclusively to Lines of Enquiry & prepare separate SE for Summative Review Lines of Enquiry should facilitate evaluative commentary Students Written Submission vital in empowering sense of ownership amongst student community Rationalise requests for advanced documentation – impact on IN Review scope of personnel required at Core Question meetings Multiple partners and cross college management staff 8