Barriers to Quality/Assignment

2

Barriers to Quality/AssignmentObjectives• Investigate the potential barriers to

establishing and maintaining quality systems in Higher Education;

• Consider the broader perspectives of cost in relation to quality;

• Examine the implications for your own context at King Saud University.

3

Developing Quality Systems in Higher Education

What are the barriers to quality?

4

Barriers to Quality• Systems and procedures• Culture: attitudes, values• Organisational design• Management perspectives

Beckford (2002)

5

Barriers to Quality/AssignmentGROUP TASK• Examine the barriers to quality using

Beckford’s model and taking the given category, apply it to King Saud University systems;– Where are the barriers within the category you

have been given?– How could the barriers identified be

addressed/minimised?

6

Barriers Systems and Procedures

• here

7

Barriers: Culture, Attitudes, Values• here

8

Barriers: Organisational Design• here

9

Barriers: Management Perspectives• here

10

Quality: the Implications

What are the implications of quality deficits in Higher

Education provision?

11

Quality Costs• Staff time• Quality systems• Inspection• Correction

and/or Modification

• Rectification• Loss reputation

• Direct• Indirect

12

Barriers to Quality• Time• Hard work

‘… hard work and time are two of the most formidable blocking mechanisms to quality

improvement.’

Sallis (2002, page 30)

13

Gap ModelGaps between:

1) ‘Customer’ expectations and the perceptions of management

2) Management perceptions and quality specifications

3) Quality specifications and delivery4) Delivery and communication to customers5) Perceived service and expected service

Kelemen (2003)

14

Plugging the Gap• Staff development• Pro-active monitoring of:

– Resourcing– Delivery– Assessment decisions

• Clarity for:– Communication channels– Lines of responsibility

• Maintain control of quality systemsMcGhee (2003)

15

Barriers to Quality

‘Managers have to be able to let their staff take decisions

and be willing to see them make honest mistakes.’


16

17

Total Quality Management

What is Total Quality Management ?

18


‘Total Quality Management is both a philosophy and

a methodology.’


19

Principles of TQM1. Agreed requirements2. Requirements met first and every time3. Q improvement reduce waste/total cost4. Prevention rather than fire-fighting5. Planned management action6. Every job must add value7. Involve everybody8. Establish culture of continuous improvement9. Emphasis on measurement10. Emphasis on creativity

Flood, 1993

20


Four Quality Imperatives• Moral imperative• Professional imperative• Competitive imperative• Accountability imperative

Sallis (2002)

21

Recap: Hierarchy of Quality Concepts

Inspection

Quality Control

Quality Assurance


Prevention

Detection

Continuous improvement

22

Total Quality Management• Is about improving …

– effectiveness– competitiveness– flexibility

• Removing wasted effort• Prevention rather than detection

23

TQM Interfaces

Customer

SystemsProcesses

People

CommunicationCulture

Commitment

dti; from quality to excellence

24

Total Quality Management4 Pillars of TQM• Synergistic Relationships• Continuous improvement and self

evaluation• System of ongoing process• Leadership

25

Leadership• Top/senior management responsibility• Engineers of culture• Define role/purpose• Create staff development opportunities• Use research/practice-based information

to form policy and practice• Design initiatives

26


‘… rejects any outcome other than excellence’


27

The role of the external examiner

• What is the role of an external examiner and what are his/her duties?

Regulations: The EssentialsCredits, marks, attempts

• “modular” scheme, based on 20- (or 30-)credit building blocks• undergraduate: 120 credits per year; 360 for BA (Hons), BSc (Hons), …• normally: level 2 contributes 30%; level 3 contributes 70%• MA, MSc: extra 60 credits in a third trimester (180 total)• module “pass mark” is 40%• undergraduate is permitted up to three attempts per module (p/g: 2)• resits are capped at 40%, unless there are mitigating circumstances• many awards have additional PSRB regulations

Decisions

• the examining board has discretion (note 10.11 and 10.12)

• pass and progress; pass and award• compensate (within a module, across the profile)• re-assessment – at next available opportunity• re-take: a module, several modules, the year• trail a module (“conditional progression” to the next

level)• defer decision, followed by a chair’s action• fail: required to withdraw

Classification Boundaries

• usual undergraduate: 70%, 60%, 50%, 40%• usual Edexcel on modules: 70% Distinction, 55% Merit, 40%

Pass• taught postgraduate:

• special provisions if within 1% or 2% of a boundary

classification overall mark Part I Part II

Distinction 70% and above 65% and above 70% and above

Merit 60% and above 55% and above 60% and above

Pass 40% and above 40% and above 40% and above

Borderlines

• if the overall average is “near“ a borderline, then further discretion is available– within 1%, the board may award the higher classification– within 2%, and if the student has 60 or more credits at

level 3 in the higher classification, then that classification may be awarded

• in both cases, the overall performance of the student needs to be considered

• credit preponderance, performance in the final-year project or dissertation, “exit velocity”, performance in a “difficult” module, …

• Academic Handbook, section 6A, section 10.2, para (iii)

Compensation

• compensate within a module– overall average mark is >=40%– element failed (but has been attempted)– have the module learning outcomes been met?– are all PSRB requirements fulfilled?

• compensate across the profile– up to one-third of the credits for undergraduate– up to one Masters module (20 or 30 credits)

• Academic Handbook, Section 6A, paras 13.1 and 13.2 (and Section 7D para 17 for taught Masters)

SUMMARY : WHERE DO EXAMINERS FIT IN?

1 Rationale : Why are you here?

2 Processes for identifying and implementing actions recommended in External Examiners’ Reports

QAA CODE OF PRACTICE

‘External examiners are appointed by an institution, and their reports are an important component of both an institution’s internal and any external quality assurance processes. Institutions should consider carefully their requirements with regard to such reports, and advise external examiners explicitly’

Quality Enhancement Strategy

• 2 Key aims To provide and utilise robust information for

the maintenance and improvement of standards of learning and teaching

To promote an ethos of self-evaluation and the continuous improvement of learning and teaching throughout the university

UWIC ACADEMIC HANDBOOK

External examiners are a key element in UWIC’s pursuance of quality enhancement and the maintenance of academic standards

They provide an objective view of the operation of the programmes they are associated with, and they enable comparisons with the standards offered in other institutions of which they have knowledge

‘External Examiners shall prepare their reports on courses for which they are responsible on at least an annual basis. Such reports are not normally subject to confidentiality, and should not therefore refer to students by name’

(Academic Handbook)

‘…Reports of External Examiners shall indicate shortcomings and/or recommend improvements as appropriate, for quality enhancement purposes’

(Academic Handbook)

QAA PRECEPTS [exploiting reports]Code of Practice Section 4 External Examiners

14…Institutions should ensure that the reports are considered within the institution at a senior level

15 Full consideration should be given by the institution to comments and recommendations contained within the reports of external examiners, and the outcomes of the consideration, including actions taken, should be formally recorded

16 Institutions should ensure that external examiners are, within a reasonable time, provided with a response to their comments and recommendations, including information on any actions taken by the institution

Where does your report go?[University Level]

All reports are received, read and summarised by the Dean of Quality and Standards

Analysis of the reports results in an overview of actions necessary at university level (eg staff development, working groups, specific guidance, dissemination of best practice)

[University Level, continued…]

Dean of Quality and Standards holds individual meetings with each School Director of Learning and Teaching

to congratulate/confirm report comments To discuss specific concerns If serious concerns, Dean of Quality and

Standards contacts Examiner directly

Where does your report go?[School Level]

After discussion a proforma (analysis grid) is completed to indicate Strengths, Issues and Action taken

All programmes’ external examiner reports are discussed at School level

The School Director of Learning and Teaching compiles an analysis for discussion at the Learning and Teaching Board

The Programme Director informs the Examiner of actions taken as a result of the report.

Annual Programme Reports Requirements

To include reports from external examiners To present issues arising from reports To detail action as a result of issues raised, and

to provide a timescale for such action

OVERVIEWINDIVIDUAL SCHOOL

Discussion at Programme Level

Programme Director prepares analysis

Discussed at School Level

Director of L and T compiles overview for presentation to Learning and Teaching

Board

Programme Director responds to External

Examiner

DEAN OF QUALITY AND STANDARDS[Dr Pam Harris]

Reads ALL Reports

Contact Dean of School or(Where Serious Concerns)

External Examiner

Provides overview of reports for the University

KEY POINTS

Your reports are recognised as a cornerstone for quality assurance and enhancement

Timeliness of reporting and responding is essential (please!)

Any concerns you may have are thoroughly and seriously considered

Highlighting course strengths is also critical for improvement activity

47

Documents

Barriers to Quality/Assignment