RAPPORT
Mapping official proposals Our input-process-output model ( figure 1 ) can be used to try to locate the metrics of teaching excellence currently proposed by the government while indicating what additional measures or indicators could most effectively be incorporated to provide a more comprehensive picture that includes the learner experience . As can be seen in figure 2 , we added another dimension which refers to whether an indicator is standardised or idiosyncratic . Standardised indicators are typically measured using the same procedure in every institution . This has obvious advantages as these are easy to collect ( in the case of surveys ) and interpret . Results are quantitative and this allows comparisons across the sector . Idiosyncratic indicators are obtained by means that are designed for a particular institution and even when they follow procedures that are generic they produce textual material instead of numerical scores . Let ’ s start with input variables that are already available . For instance , student demographics are routinely collected by institutions and ‘ organisation and management ’ and ‘ learning resources ’ are measured by the NSS . However , while these are conditions for good teaching and learning , they are not strictly , teaching excellence . In terms of processes , the Key Information Set ( KIS7 ) provides information about ‘ contact time ’ which is a poor ‘ proxi ’ measure , because although students and tutors must have regular contact , a large amount of time spent in classrooms is not necessarily indicative that high quality learning is taking place . More relevant is the information collected by the National Student Survey ( NSS 8 ) about ‘ teaching ’,
7
In the UK , all universities are required to submit information about their courses which should help applicants make decisions regarding what university and course are best for them . Such information include includes results from the National Student Survey , the proportion of time spent in various learning activities , the proportion of summative assessment by method , professional , statutory and regulatory bodies that recognise the course , institution owned / sponsored accommodation , financial support available from the institution , average fees , the destinations of graduates six months after completing their course , the proportion in managerial / professional jobs six months after graduation , and salary data for those in full-time employment . These data are available on a website called UNISTATS ( https :// unistats . direct . gov . uk / findout-more / key-information-set )
8
All students registered in the final year of a course in a higher education institution in the UK are invited to complete the National Student Survey ( NSS ). This online
WWW . RECORDINGACHIEVEMENT . AC . UK Issue 1 ( 2017 )
‘ assessment ’ and ‘ support ’, but as with most questions in the NSS , there is room for speculation regarding what exactly students mean when they say they are ‘ satisfied ‘ or ‘ highly satisfied ’ with an aspect of a course . However , the government papers on the TEF do not contain references to means of measuring teaching excellence directly ( i . e . the practices that promote high quality learning as described by the notion of realistic leaning explained above ). Finally , there are already metrics related to outcomes of the learning process and therefore can be considered as indirect measures of TE ( again , called ‘ proxis ’ by the government ), for example , progression and retention data ( HESA ), employment ( DELHE ) and ‘ personal development ’ ( NSS ). As was pointed out , there is an absence of direct measures of teaching excellence at the level of institutions that capture in more detail what actually happens in terms of practices that enable realistic learning . We would like to suggest that in-depth evaluations like the subject / institutional periodic review ( QAA9 ) or internal validation processes may contain such level of detail . However , we are well aware that external and internal audits are highly staged managed exercises that can misrepresent what actually happens in terms of teaching and learning . These three measures are idiosyncratic and qualitative ; they provide , of course , information about input , process and outcome variables . We have included the External Examiners ’ reports10 which are routinely produced at the end of each academic year , but these are normally focused on assessment and seldom refer to the overall quality of teaching . Perhaps , the closest evaluations of teaching excellence may be the peer reviews of teaching that include actual observations of teaching and learning in real time , and refer to the intended learning outcomes .
questionnaire is composed of 23 questions asking students to rate their satisfaction with different aspects of their courses , including teaching , assessment , academic support , organisation and management , learning resources , overall satisfaction with the course and the student union . The survey is administered by IPSON-MORI which is a totally independent agency ( see http :// www . thestudentsurvey . com / about . php for more information ).
9
All institutions of higher education in the UK undergo periodic reviews by the Quality Assurance Agency .
10
All courses have appointed External Examiners , are peers form other institutions , who monitor the assessment processes and the awards conferred by the examination boards .
13