Programme Review Statement
Programme review is implemented in two main processes at the University of Liverpool. There is an annual process, Annual Subject Action Plan (ASAP), and a six-yearly process, Internal Periodic Review (IPR).
Annual Subject Action Plan:
Metrics are used in the following ways for ASAPs:
Evaluation of data
- For National Student Survey data (NSS) departments are asked to evaluate the data and identify any actions that need to be taken.
- Departments are asked to identify any significant achievement gaps in their data, for example, this could be relation to the key characteristics, KPIs and TEF metrics. This allows us to benchmark internally and externally. Departments look at data in relation to continuation, completion and progression;
- As part of the evaluation, action plans need to link any relevant actions to these gaps in the data to show that they have been considered and there is a strategy to address;
- Where there are factors outside the departments control which are affecting performance indicators, they are asked to consider what support could be identified for these?
- Departments are asked to consider, do the data show that academic standards are being met? This would also be supported by a confirmation from the External Examiner;
- Departments are asked to consider, do the data provide evidence of compliance with the University’s Diversity & Equality of Opportunity Policy and Equality Framework?
Within the action plans, departments will identify any issues that require actions and an appropriate timescale for actions to be completed, this will then be reported on in the next year’s report. If actions are not identified appropriately, reports will be returned to the department after scrutiny at Faculty level for further consideration.
Faculty Academic Quality and Standards Committees, or equivalent, consider all reports and data submitted by departments and draft a summary report which is received at institutional level.
Institutional oversight is maintained by Academic Quality and Standards Committee (AQSC), who receive summary reports of actions and good practice from across the University’s programmes. Any matters for institutional consideration will also then be discussed.
Internal Period Review:
Departments/Schools enhance the quality of learning opportunities by systematically building upon information, data and feedback that may come from:
- external examiners;
- external bodies, such as professional, statutory or regulatory bodies;
- students and graduates;
- the annual subject action planning process;
- the University’s Strategic Plan;
- University policies.
Trend data is analysed and evaluated from ASAP reports as part of the consideration of metrics at the IPR, with any other trend data arising from the information noted above.
Periodic Review activity takes place over 2-3 days and involves external and student input via Panel membership and specific meetings with students. These are managed at Faculty level and the Associate Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education) chairs the events in their Faculty. A Review Report and Action plan is produced after each review. All action points and the appropriate level of oversight for these, are identified. E.g. Department/School/Faculty/University. Reports and action plans are received within 6 weeks of the review at Faculty and Institutional level and a 6-monthly update on actions is also received. Faculty Academic Quality and Standards Committees, or equivalent, manage the receipt of the report and initial discussion and feedback happens at Faculty level. The report and action plan is then considered at institutional level. This allows the University to maintain oversight of any issues.
If appropriate actions are not progressed. AQSC will ask for further information from the Department/School/Faculty/University as appropriate.
Academic Quality and Standards Committee, chaired by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Education), has delegated authority from Senate to manage matters in relation to quality and standards, including the oversight of the processes of Annual Subject Action Plans and Internal Periodic Review. AQSC reports directly to Senate. Any actions that may need further institutional consideration can be referred to Senate as appropriate and action pertaining to the whole university can be discussed and agreed upon.
As part of carrying out its delegated duties, AQSC also reports annually to Senate. This report confirms actions that have been taken by AQSC and that monitoring and review activity is undertaken appropriately.
Faculty Academic Quality and Standards Committees, or equivalent, manage activity at Faculty level and report appropriately into AQSC.