Institutional audit: a guide for student representatives pot

Institutional audit:
a guide for student representatives
© The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education 2009
Southgate House, Southgate Street, Gloucester GL1 1UB
ISBN 978 1 84979 052 9
All QAA's publications are available from our website www.qaa.ac.uk
Printed copies of current publications are available from:
Linney Direct, Adamsway, Mansfield NG18 4FN
Tel 01623 450788 Fax 01623 450481 Email
Registered charity numbers 1062746 and SC037786
What is Institutional audit?
Institutional audit is a process used by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)
to check how well higher education institutions in England and Northern Ireland manage and
maintain their academic standards and quality. Students and their learning are a central focus of
this process.
What are 'academic standards'?
Academic standards describe the level of achievement that a student has to reach to
gain an academic award (for example, a degree). It is expected that the threshold for
achievement is the same across the UK for similar awards. So to be awarded a bachelor's
degree in physics from X University should demand the same standard of achievement
as a bachelor's degree in physics from Y University. Standards are agreed nationally and
set out in frameworks for higher education qualifications, published by QAA.
1
What is 'academic quality'?
Academic quality describes how effective the learning opportunities available to students
are in helping them to achieve their award. This includes the quality of teaching,
academic support, and resources such as the library and IT. Expectations for what
constitutes a quality student experience are set out in the Code of practice for the
assurance of academic quality and standards in higher education, published by QAA.
2
Institutional audit aims to report to the public about whether universities and colleges of higher

education have effective means of:
 ensuring that the qualifications they award are of the standards referred to in The framework
for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland
 providing and managing learning opportunities for students to help them achieve their
award through appropriate and effective teaching, support and assessment
 enhancing the quality of educational provision, making appropriate use of information
gained through monitoring, internal and external reviews, and feedback from stakeholders.
1
'Students have a crucial role to play in the Institutional
audit process. Who better to tell you about the quality
of the student experience at an institution than the
students themselves?'
Gary Hughes, Student Engagement Officer,
Manchester Metropolitan University Students' Union 2008-09
1
www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/FHEQ
2
www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeofpractice
Who are the members of the Institutional audit team?
Audit team members are senior people from other higher education institutions. The team will
normally include five or six auditors (including one student) and an audit secretary.
The audit team
Four or five senior academics
One student
One senior higher education administrator (as audit secretary)
They will be supported by a member of QAA staff, usually an Assistant Director, who is available
to give advice to the institution and student representatives on their preparation for audit.
What does an Institutional audit look at?
Institutional audit usually focuses on seven areas:
In all of these areas, the audit is interested in how the institution manages its learning and

teaching activities. Audit wants to find out how the institution knows that it is doing a good
job, how it knows when things go wrong, and how it knows what to do to put them right.
Auditors understand that not everything in an institution might be perfect, and that providing
imaginative and innovative teaching can be challenging. But they will expect an institution to
be aware of this and to be taking effective steps to manage risk.
2
Introduction and background
(to the institution)
Management of
academic standards
Approach to quality
enhancement
Collaborative
arrangements
Published
information
Institutional arrangements
for postgraduate research students
Management of
academic quality
How can you get involved?
There are several ways in which student representatives can get involved in the audit process:
Student written submission (SWS)
QAA invites student representatives to submit a report from the student perspective,
which focuses on the institution's academic quality and standards. QAA advises student
representatives to structure the SWS around four questions:
 How accurate is the information that the institution publishes?
 Do students know what is expected of them?
 What is the student experience as a learner like?
 Do students have a voice in the institution and is it listened to?

Meeting with the audit team
During at least one of its visits to the institution the audit team will want to meet with
key students' union representatives (usually the authors of the SWS). During the briefing
visit they will want to ask questions about the SWS and any further questions they have
about the institution. This is an opportunity for students to highlight any academic
issues that are important to the student body.
The audit team will also want to meet a wider range of students during the audit visit.
The students they meet will depend on the areas they have decided to explore in detail
(for example, postgraduate issues, distance learning, widening participation and
student support.)
Working with the institution
Student representatives are encouraged to work with the institution throughout the
audit process. The institution may well have a large amount of evidence that student
representatives can use when writing the SWS, such as survey results. One of the
advantages of being honest and open with the university from the beginning is that
you can highlight areas for development that need to be addressed. This way, the
university can work with the students' union afterwards to change things for the better
and help spread good practice.
Action planning
The auditors write a report summarising their conclusions about the institution. Once a
draft report has been agreed, this will be sent to the institution for comment. Student
representatives can ask your institution for a copy of this to help them check through
for factual accuracy. Once the report is finalised, the institution is invited to submit a
statement of no more than 500 words which will appear alongside the published report.
This is a good opportunity to work with your institution to communicate with the
student body, and also to start planning how they can tackle any challenges highlighted
and spread good practice.
3
Who is your main contact?
The main point of contact for student representatives at QAA is the Assistant Director (AD) who is

co-ordinating the audit. The AD is a senior member of QAA who has experience in co-ordinating
audits and other review activities. He or she will have worked with a variety of institutions and
their students.
The AD will arrange a day with the institution when they will meet key people to explain the
audit process and how different people will be involved. The AD will want to meet students'
union officers at this meeting, so make sure that you know when it is happening. You can also
arrange to have a separate meeting with the AD on that day. If you don't get a chance to meet
the AD at the preliminary meeting (it may be that this meeting took place before you started as
an officer), your institution will be able to give you their contact details and they will be happy to
talk to you by telephone or email.
Another important contact will be your institutional contact - the person at your institution who
is responsible for co-ordinating the preparations for audit (maybe the Director of Quality,
Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) or Head of Quality and Standards). They are a vital
contact for student representatives because they will be able to tell you what is going on at any
particular point in the process and share the initial and draft conclusions with you.
4
Preparing the student written submission
What is the student written submission?
The student written submission (SWS) is one of a number of key documents that help to give
auditors a better understanding of your institution. It will really help the audit team if it uses
evidence of student opinion and experience to draw auditors' attention to how your institution's
efforts to assure academic quality and standards are impacting on students.
Your institution will also produce a document - the institutional briefing paper (IBP) - which will
describe the mechanisms they use to assure quality and standards. The IBP will try to show
auditors what policies and procedures are in place, why these are the most appropriate systems,
and how their success is measured.
The SWS should help auditors to understand students' experiences of these policies and
procedures. It is an opportunity to provide critical reflection, highlighting strengths and
weaknesses that can guide auditors to reach well-informed conclusions about your institution.
The SWS is independently produced by students at your institution, normally through the

students' union. The only 'rule' about the SWS is that it must only report on academic quality and
standards. It should focus on the policies and procedures related to learning because this is the
only area of your institution's work that QAA is able to investigate.
Example
If you have evidence which shows that students are generally dissatisfied with sports facilities at
your institution, this is probably more useful for internal campaigning than the SWS.
But, if your institution runs courses which rely on these services, such as sports science or
coaching degrees, feedback from these students could help auditors see how your institution
manages facilities that help students to succeed; this could be useful information but you
shouldn't let it distract you from matters that will affect the learning experience of the majority
of students.
The SWS should be as long as you need it to be but as concise as you can make it. Auditors will
find a short report that focuses really well on a few aspects of the learning experience more
useful than a large report that touches all topics, but with little evidence or analysis. As a guide,
the SWS (including references) should be no longer than 12-15 pages of A4.
Each SWS is unique; you decide what to tell the auditors. QAA does not prescribe exactly what
you should include but you might find it helpful to frame your research around suggested key
areas. Examples of approaches to developing the SWS can be found on QAA's website.
3
5
'The student written submission provided an ideal
opportunity to alert my university to key issues that
students had raised.'
Mohammed Surve, Education Officer,
University of Warwick Students' Union 2008-09
3
www.qaa.ac.uk/reviews/institutionalaudit/casestudies
What should be in the student written submission?
Auditors will read anything related to students' experiences of academic quality and standards
that you include in the SWS, however many students' unions have based their SWS around

four questions:
1 Is the information that the institution publishes about itself accurate?
Auditors will want to know whether your institution is well managed and meeting its
commitments to students, or whether it is 'over-promising' and needs to focus on improving
provision. It will be very useful for them to have examples of key documents, accompanied by
student opinion of their usefulness and accuracy.
The large number of key documents produced by your institution means that you will not be able
to research student opinions on all of them! Select the documents you believe are most important
to the learning experience of students and think about any evidence you have that shows what
students think about their accuracy and value, and whether you need or want any more.
Examples
The National Student Survey (NSS) asks questions about whether students are satisfied with
their timetable: timetables are vital documents and if students have particular comments about
disruptions to their teaching or appreciate allowances for evening or part-time study, this will
be useful information for auditors.
You may have a university/student charter that describes a commitment to library and computer
resources: some institutions participate in the Postgraduate Research Experience Surveys, which
will show whether a certain group of students agree that this commitment is met.
You might also consider looking at your institution's prospectus, website or course booklets.
Auditors will welcome evidence of satisfaction with any publication that influences students
'
expectations about what their education will offer or consist of.
2 Do students know what is expected of them in order to do well?
Auditors will be interested to know what induction, training and information your institution
gives students at each stage of their programme. What you say will help the auditors judge
whether the institution is providing adequate guidance and support so that students have a fair
chance to succeed, or whether students are unable to meet standards of performance because of
lack of knowledge about academic expectations and the resources available.
Auditors will be interested in whatever perspective you choose to give them. Whether you focus
on induction, assessment criteria, the prompt return of assessed work with feedback or the

quality of feedback, it will all be useful as long as you can support your comments with evidence.
Examples
Your institution is likely to set students multiple assessment tasks during their course. QAA
expects institutions to tell students the criteria against which their work will be judged in
advance, and there is a question in the NSS that directly addresses this issue. If you can find
out why certain groups of students agree or disagree with this question, perhaps by holding
focus groups, auditors will be interested in this.
Course reps could be a valuable source of information here: you could ask them, as an
interested group of students, for examples of good and bad feedback. If there is a pattern, for
example of students wanting feedback that includes an indication of other sources that could
help them learn, then auditors will be interested to know if this is happening at your institution
and whether it is useful.
6
3 What is the student experience like at the institution, including teaching and learning
opportunities, support received and access to learning facilities?
The SWS will be particularly useful for auditors if it gives them an honest opinion about what it is
actually like to study at your institution: Are lectures a useful format for learning? Are lecturers
good at explaining their subject? Are there enough reading list books in the library? Are the art
studios good enough for all of the students that want to use them? Does the personal tutor
system do everything it promises? These sorts of questions will help aid the auditors'
understanding of whether the way the institution manages teaching and learning is appropriate
and helps students to learn effectively.
It is important to note that this could be a huge topic to cover. The questions above are only
examples of what you could look at, but they could easily be the subject of an SWS on their own.
It is a good idea to select issues that are important to students at your institution and explore
them in some depth. These could come from your students' union officer manifestos or internal
committee minutes, or your institution's NSS or internal satisfaction survey results.
Examples
Almost all students will attend some teaching sessions, whether a lecture or smaller group.
Course reps will be uniquely placed to give an all-round perspective on the condition of the

teaching venues, whether the sessions are linked to the course guidelines, how good the academic
staff are at explaining things, and all other aspects of academic quality. Analysis of their opinions
will be useful to auditors investigating the student learning experience at your institution.
4 Do students have a voice, and how do you know that anyone listens to it?
Auditors will want to know not just about the design of your formal representation systems,
but also your judgement of how effective it is: What impact do students have on the
management of academic standards and quality? Your SWS shouldn't just describe what
committees students sit on, it should also reflect on the changes that have happened as a result.
It will also be useful to discuss the informal relationships that exist between students and the
institution. Sometimes, change for students comes from conversations with teaching staff,
supervisors or senior staff that aren't formally written down. Auditors will want to know how
these sorts of contributions are handled, recorded and good practice shared. They will use this
information to form an opinion on how the institution uses the views of learners to assess the
effectiveness of their management of academic quality and standards.
Examples
Students' union volunteers and officers will almost certainly sit on university committees,
ranging from programme committees or boards of study to boards of governing (or
equivalent). If you are able to use reference to the minutes of these meetings to show that
students are active participants in quality management and their contributions are responded
to or acted upon (or not), auditors will be interested in your views.
If you are able to show that your institution took the evidence of one of your campaigns to
improve the quality of learning, and you can obtain quotes from colleagues or demonstrate
the response (at whatever level), this will also show how the student voice features in your
institution's management processes.
7
Where to find the evidence?
Auditors will expect all statements, conclusions and recommendations in your SWS to be accurate
interpretations from solid evidence.
Some evidence will be external - such as the NSS, the Postgraduate Experience Survey, the newly
qualified teacher survey or the International Student Barometer. These are fine and credible

sources of evidence that auditors will be familiar with. Some evidence will be internal - such
as student satisfaction surveys, course rep information and the minutes of committees.
These sources are also fine, and are likely to cover even more of the areas of the learning
experience at your institution in greater depth.
With the wide range of information already available to you, you might decide that it is not
necessary to do any new research. If there is already evidence of the opinions of students at your
institution, repeating research is unlikely to be the best use of your time. You will most likely find
that exploring a few areas in more depth with the students affected will be more useful.
Whatever sources of evidence you use, it is essential that you're clear and honest about how
reliable they are. In your SWS, probably in the section where you explain your methodology, you
should describe the range, sample and scope of your evidence: What sorts of students were asked
to participate? How many students were asked to participate? Who and how many did? What
were they asked? This will help auditors decide whether they need to ask for more information to
understand your point or whether your evidence is enough.
Does the SWS have to be shared with the institution?
The SWS can be kept confidential from your institution if you want it to be. However, if it has not
been shared with the institution this will mean that it is harder for the audit team to use it during
the audit - they will not be able to quote it in the report and will need to use the evidence you
provide in a more roundabout way. But more importantly, you will probably find that you will be
able to make most impact with your report if you make sure that people with the power to make
changes in the institution are aware of your work.
If you do share your SWS with the institution, you will find that it can form an invaluable base
for campaigning and working with your institution to improve the learning experience for years
to come.
The Head of Quality (or equivalent) in your institution may well be a useful source of support.
While the SWS is entirely independent of the institution, the Head of Quality will be able to
advise you about where evidence can be found and how best to present it. He or she will also be
able to show you the institutional briefing paper (IBP).
It is important to think about including examples of good practice as well as where you think
there are weaknesses and challenges. By identifying good practice, the QAA audit can help to

spread it throughout the institution.
8
After submitting the SWS, what next?
QAA will tell you the deadline for submitting your SWS - this will be the same day as your
institution's deadline for the IBP. From that date, you can expect QAA to follow a clearly set-out
timetable. If you don't know what this is, you should get in touch with your institution or QAA.
After your deadline, there will be five-week period when auditors read and analyse all of the
documentation they have been sent. Based on this information they will start to form some
early hypotheses about how academic quality and standards are managed at your institution.
Student participation in meetings
The first event of the Institutional audit is the briefing visit, which lasts for three days. Auditors
will visit your institution and have three key meetings: one with the Vice-Chancellor or Principal,
one with the senior staff with responsibility for the management of academic standards and
quality (for example, Pro Vice-Chancellors, Deans, Heads of Quality) and one with students' union
officers. Each meeting lasts 90 minutes. As well as asking questions about the content of the
SWS, they will ask about its methodology, analysis and conclusions, so if you have any students'
union staff support it might be useful for them to attend the meeting too. The audit team will
also ask questions about what the institution has said about itself in the IBP, so it's a good idea to
make sure you're familiar with it.
As a general rule the institution is asked not to field more than eight people in each meeting -
this includes the team's meeting with student representatives. The team will explore how you put
together the SWS and focus on some of the issues you have raised. Each member of the team
(with the exception of the AD and the audit secretary) will ask you questions. As time is limited,
they may move along quite quickly when they feel you have provided the information they are
looking for.
9
At the end of the briefing visit the audit team will agree with the AD and the institution what issues
it would like to look into in more depth to help reach its judgements and conclusions.
They will ask to see more documentation (such as committee minutes, policies, strategy papers)
and to have more meetings with staff and students. The institution will be responsible for

co-ordinating this so it's a good idea to offer support to identify appropriate evidence and students.
Five weeks after the briefing visit is the audit visit, which lasts for five days. During this time the
audit team will read through a great deal more evidence and have a series of meetings - the
topics for these will depend on the areas of enquiry. At the end of this week, the audit team is
joined once more by the AD and will reach its judgements; identifying good practice and
recommending areas for improvement and development. During the audit week, it is likely that
the auditors will see at least one group of students drawn from across the institution who can
give a broad picture of the different student experiences at the institution (that is, from the
perspectives of postgraduate taught and postgraduate research students, international students
and those who have completed placements during the course of study).
As during the briefing visit, the institution is asked not to field more than eight people in each
meeting. The audit team will again meet with groups of students during audit week, but it is
unlikely that those students who were seen during the briefing visit will be called upon again.
Although the audit team will be exploring the issue of the student learning experience with these
groups of students, it might also be a good idea to share the SWS with these students so that
they have some knowledge of the formal issues raised within this document as a reference point.
You should be able to find out the names of these students from the institutional contact for
audit at your institution.
10
11
Confidence
Limited
Confidence
No
Confidence
Quality and standards
of postgraduate
research programmes
Accuracy and
completeness of an

institution's published
information
How the institution
ensures a strategic
approach to enhancing
the quality of education
The audit team may
also comment on areas
of good practice
Quality of learning
opportunities available
to students
Standards of
its awards
Institutional audit outcomes
After each Institutional audit, QAA publishes a final report that includes a summary of the
findings of the audit and a main report. The audit team makes judgements based on the
confidence it can place in the institution's management of:
The institution will receive one of three judgements relating to these areas:
The report will highlight recommendations around areas for development that might
be 'essential', 'advisable' or 'desirable'.
The audit team will also comment on:
Beyond the audit visit
It is important to note that no formal oral feedback is given to the institution on the progress or
findings of the briefing or audit visit. This is communicated via the preliminary findings letter as
detailed below.
Two weeks after the audit visit, the auditors will prepare a preliminary letter detailing their
findings and send it to the institution; you can ask your Head of Quality whether you are able to
see it. Eight weeks after this, the auditors will present their draft report to your institution to be
checked for accuracy of factual content. At a later date your institution will also be invited to

submit any comments on the report (no more than 500 words). These can be published
alongside the final version. It is a good idea for students to get involved with the institutional
process for considering and responding to the audit report.
Publication of the final report
The final report will be published on the QAA website five months after the audit visit.
4
It should also be noted that the current format of the Institutional audit report does not contain a
separate section or heading for direct comments on the SWS or student participation in the audit
process. Such comments will be incorporated into the body of the main report.
If your institution receives a judgement of 'limited confidence' or 'no confidence', you should
work with them to develop a plan of action and to help implement changes and spread good
practice. The Institutional audit report is also invaluable in informing the work of your students'
union. You may wish to campaign and lobby your institution on areas for development identified
in the report.
If you have any questions in this five month period, you should contact the QAA Assistant
Director who co-ordinated the audit or the Head of Quality at your institution.
For more information, contact:
Derfel Owen
Development Officer (Student Enhancement), QAA
Email:
Maureen McLaughlin
Assistant Director (Reviews), QAA
Email:
QAA has a dedicated portal for students on its website. For more information on QAA and the
Institutional audit process, visit: www.qaa.ac.uk/students, or email:
QAA would like to acknowledge the contributions of Mohammed Surve and Gary Hughes to
this guide.
12
4
www.qaa.ac.uk/reviews/reports/instindex.asp

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education
Southgate House
Southgate Street
Gloucester
GL1 1UB
Tel 01452 557000
Fax 01452 557070
Email
Web www.qaa.ac.uk
QAA 323 11/09