A new report from the Higher Education Policy Institute, Why
it is time for university governors to do more on academic
quality (HEPI Policy Note 36), notes the growing
responsibility that boards of higher education institutions have
on issues of academic quality.
The report, which focuses mainly on England, calls on governors
to reflect on their understanding of academic life to ensure
effective oversight of teaching and learning.
Dr Alex Bols, the author of the report and the Deputy
Chief Executive of GuildHE, said:
‘Teaching and learning is the main activity of most higher
education institutions. Yet many of their governing bodies are
seen as far removed from issues of academic quality, relying too
much on assurances from academic boards.
‘During the pandemic, governing bodies became more fluent in
issues such as emergency regulations, the proportion of Firsts
and 2:1s handed out, assessment burdens and the pedagogical
differences of online learning. The English regulator, the Office
for Students, has imposed clear expectations on governing bodies
in relation to maintaining standards. So issues of quality and
standards are fast rising up institutional risk registers.
‘We must expand and deepen the understanding of higher education
governing bodies on academic issues. This should include giving
them clearer and better information to help them fulfil their
functions, as well as ensuring a better balance between the
university governing body and the academic board or Senate.’
Key points
- Issues of academic quality and standards are rarely far from
the headlines. In particular, there have been concerns expressed
by ministers at Westminster about student workload, grade
inflation and so-called ‘low-quality’ (or ‘Mickey Mouse’)
courses.
- Tackling these issues is seen as complex and difficult to
explain, which can result in knee-jerk political responses. This
is especially true when education ministers look at schools and
see their power to intervene and direct. However, higher
education can be harder to understand, with highly autonomous
providers who can design, deliver and assess their own courses
while at the same time maintaining their own academic standards.
- As a sector, we need to get better at articulating the
benefits of a diverse, innovative and responsive higher education
sector – able to develop new courses based on student demand and
the needs of local and national economies while remaining
committed to robust academic standards protected by strong
governance.
- If we do not succeed, we will continue the recent shift from
self-regulation to co-regulation to just regulation – with the
regulator setting the parameters for what ‘good’ looks like. In
particular, this means getting to grips with issues such as grade
inflation and demonstrating that we as a sector are robustly
safeguarding our own academic standards.
- The Office for Students is taking ever-more interest in this
whole are, with its proposed B3 metrics on continuation,
completion and progression as well as the data for the new
Teaching Excellence Framework. But this information also provides
a useful framework for governing bodies to be able to consider
these issues in more depth.
- Increasingly, university governing bodies have direct
responsibility for academic quality issues through the assurances
they make, adherence to the Office for Students’ Public Interest
Governance Principles and meeting their ongoing conditions of
registration.
- Governing bodies should reflect on their own expertise and
understanding of academic life to facilitate effective governor
oversight of teaching and learning. They should, in particular,
receive regular information on academic issues, including Degree
Outcomes Statements, an annual quality report drawing out key
performance indicators, a regular review of the Office for
Students’s ongoing conditions and, where there are concerns,
action plans or even internal audit reports.
