Revalidation processes have been found to have “positive” impacts on student learning on “poor quality” courses when carried out effectively, according to England’s higher education regulator.?
As part of a report exploring the findings from the Office for Students’ (OfS) first round of?government-ordered quality assessments, the watchdog said revalidation processes had been used by universities to “ensure [partners’] courses offered greater flexibility [and] efficiency” as well as a? greater focus on “practices students might expect to find at future employers”.
Across the assessments, investigators noted that in the cases where the teams did not identify concerns about academic leadership and oversight, they often found that there had “recently been an effective revalidation, or reapproval, process – a cyclical internal review of academic courses – informing changes in approach”.?
The OfS said that in successful cases, there was evidence of staff and students being involved throughout the processes, “which is likely to have had a positive impact on the outcomes”.
Student feedback was found to be more effective when institutions could demonstrate how they had considered it, whether they made changes as a result, or justify why they may have not acted on such feedback. Investigators were similarly reassured when students had a clear idea about how their feedback was being considered and responded to, even when their suggestions were not implemented.?
However, it also saw instances of cases where reviews had been carried out, but brought ineffective results, giving no evidence of how issues had been addressed, and a “lack of alignment” between the review outcomes and any subsequent plans to address these.
In these instances, the teams were less likely to be assured of the effectiveness of the review activity. They were also less likely to find that outcomes from the review were having a positive impact on the quality of the courses or the experiences of students.
The “boots on the ground” investigations carried out by the OfS at eight business and computing courses, ordered by the government in 2022 to look at “poor quality courses”,?found “areas of concern”?at the University of Northampton, Buckinghamshire New University, University of Bedfordshire, the University of Wolverhampton and the University of Bolton.?
In particular,?the OfS report into Regent College London?– where students can gain degrees through the University of Bolton and Buckinghamshire New University – raised concerns over the quality of education being provided by franchised provisions.
Jean Arnold, deputy director of quality at the OfS, said at the time that “all institutions offering these types of courses, including those delivered through partnerships, should be sure that their courses are high quality”.
Commenting on further quality assessments, Ms Arnold said: “Future quality assessments will take into account feedback we have received about the process to ensure that our work in this area helps to improve the quality of courses across the sector.”?
