Higher Education policy – the times they are a-changin’

2015-2016 is shaping up to be a big year in the world of higher education policy, with several major consultation processes taking place, it’s clear that big changes are on the horizon.

Firstly we had HEFCE’s review of the quality assurance system, then a review of the National Student Survey and most recently the government’s Green Paper. TSEP has been busy participating in these reviews and making the case for student engagement.

Our full responses to these consultations are available in our resource hub, but I’ll provide a digest here of our response to the HE Green Paper. (For a reminder of the key points from the Green Paper – here they are at a glance).

The Green Paper is wide ranging, so in TSEP’s response we have stuck to answering those questions where we feel our experience and expertise in the field of student engagement through partnership can add real value to the debate.

Firstly the government asked whether Access Agreements should be a pre-requisite for entering the TEF process. As with all our answers, we demonstrated that student engagement is a core dimension of what constitutes excellent teaching; furthermore, that a strategic and inclusive approach to student engagement (as shown in the What Works report) aids retention and success, which are key parts of the widening access agenda.

The main focus of our consultation response was concerned with the concept of ‘teaching excellence’ and the way in which the government proposes to measure and judge it. Firstly the good news – we’re pleased that they are looking at using more than just surveys and are also considering using wider contextual information in the form of an institutional submission and that a judging panel (which includes a student member) will take all the different sources of information into account. We called however for the institutional submission to include (much along the lines of the QAA Higher Educational Review), a student written submission and that the student voice must be embedded in the process of considering wider contextual information; in particular we feel some sort of ‘visit’ by the judgement panel (either actual or virtual) would present such an opportunity.

The surveys and other sources of data that will feed in to the TEF process are of some concern and many of the sector agencies and representative bodies raised the same concerns about their validity as proxies of teaching excellence (NUS put the case here), and we hit home the point that the NSS is currently under review and that changes to the survey to incorporate questions on student engagement become essential if the survey is to be used in the context of judging teaching excellence; further that the proposed changes to NSS will need to be further developed with respect to student engagement especially as the current proposals were drawn up before NSS was proposed to be used within the context of TEF.

On question twenty which was about the accountability of students’ unions, we gave examples of SUs working in partnership with universities and colleges to enhance teaching as a case in point that not only are students and their collective representative bodies key partners in enhancing teaching for excellence but that it is through that kind of work that accountability lies.

On the face of it, the TEF presents an opportunity not to be missed for the government to truly deliver on its promise of ‘students at the heart of the system’ by demonstrating the values of student engagement through the TEF architecture itself and by ensuring that student engagement is embedded within the principles of what constitutes ‘teaching excellence’. Following the publishing of the government’s response to the consultation comes a further ‘technical’ consultation which we encourage all parties of who have a stake in the future of higher education to engage with and help shape for the future.


Picture5

Tobin Webb, Student Engagement & Partnership Consultant

TSEP