Monitoring and review

Our approach to quality management is clearly set out in our quality assurance codes of practice.

They are underpinned by:

  • sound academic principles
  • the informed student voice
  • peer review
  • a multi-stranded approach to enhancement
  • major enhancement initiatives driven at institutional level
  • a commitment to the alignment of quality assurance and quality enhancement
  • a commitment to quality management processes that are efficient as well as effective.

Many of our policies, process and enhancement activities are cyclical in nature with inputs/outputs that directly feed into/out of other activities.

For example, annual review and enhancement in November each year will identify priorities for Schools that will be taken forward into periodic review (every five years) and/or programme approval/collaborative provision where new programmes are identified and taken forward.

We monitor and review programmes and the educational experience of students in a number of ways:

A tactical and annual process of analysis, reflection, and transparent decision-making about actions taken and required to enhance every aspect of the student (undergraduate, postgraduate taught and postgraduate research) experience.

The process unites Schools, Colleges, and the Professional Services in a drive to continuously enhance the quality of programmes and the educational experience.

A strategic process undertaken by each School once every five years as part of a rolling programme that looks at the quality, validity and viability of all academic provision (across undergraduate, postgraduate taught and postgraduate research programmes) and every aspect of the educational experience supported by the University.

This is key to our approach to research and, as a research-intensive institution; peer review also underpins our learning and teaching.

We use peer review in a number of ways, e.g. in external examining, external input into annual review and enhancement and periodic review and through professional accreditation.

These mechanisms allow us to examine what is working well and what needs to be improved, assigning due weight and value to the input of students, external examiners and professional bodies.

All processes have been designed to meet the requirements of the UK Quality Code for Higher Education.