UK QUALITY CODE CHAPTER B3: LEARNING AND TEACHING: RESPONSE TO
QAA CONSULTATION BY UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON (UCL)
Chapter B3: Learning and teaching: - Overview
5. Does the content of this Chapter adequately reflect its title?
UCL welcomes the opportunity to comment on the draft and we have considered the text
of the Chapter in some detail. However, we would like to note that the views expressed
in this response are subject to the publication of other, as yet unwritten, Chapters which
will make up the new Quality Code; particularly those with clear links to this Chapter,
such as Chapter B4: Student support, learning resources and careers education,
information, advice and guidance. We may wish to revisit our response in light of the
publication of these subsequent Chapters. We would also add that, as originally noted in
our response to the QAA consultation on changes to the Academic Infrastructure (AI) in
December 2010, the introduction of minimum expectations in the area of learning
resources extends the scope of the Code of Practice beyond that of the AI. It should also
be remembered that the provision of learning resources in some programmes of study
are driven by the relevant Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies and could
come into conflict with any minimum expectations as set out in the Code of Practice.
In terms of general observations, Chapter B3 appears to be drafted in a reasonably
accessible structure, with concise indicators, some elaboration and hyperlinked referral
to source and exemplar documentation. We are also content with the way that the draft
code promotes an evidence-based and student-centred approach to learning and
teaching. As set out in the ‘General Principle’ on Page 3 of the Chapter, the articulation
of learning and teaching is a helpful unpacking of important aspects the processes and
the relationship between them. It would be good to carry this forward into the main
document, to suggest for example distinctive approaches to the teaching and
assessment of knowledge, behaviours, skills and values respectively.
What follows is our more detailed response to the text in the draft, section by section.
6. Is this Chapter sensitive to the diversity of higher education providers, higher
education students, and modes of learning?
Yes.
7. This Chapter will replace the Code of practice for the assurance of academic
quality and standards in higher education (the Code of practice) Section 2:
Collaborative provision and flexible and distributed learning (including e-learning)
(2010), Part B: Aspects specific to flexible and distributed learning, and the Code
of practice, Section 9: Work-based and placement learning (2007). Does it
adequately capture the content of these two documents?
Yes, although, as noted above, we may wish to revisit our response in light of the
publication of Chapter B10: Collaborative provision, scheduled for December 2012.
Chapter B3: Learning and teaching - Expectation (Page 4)
The Quality Code sets out the following Expectation about learning and teaching,
which higher education providers are required to meet:
Higher education providers, working in partnership with their students, create and
systematically review and enhance learning environments and teaching practices to
provide opportunities for every student to become an active and independent learner.
8. Do you agree with the wording of the Expectation for this Chapter?
We endorse the expression of learning as a partnership, but the second sentence needs
some rephrasing to reflect the asymmetry of roles, responsibilities and relationships
between HEI provider, staff and student. It would be unreasonable to expect students to
be involved in inspirational teaching in as direct a way as staff or the provider.
Indicators of sound practice: Effective learning and teaching (Pages 5 - 10)
The Chapter sets out the following Indicators about Effective learning and teaching.
Indicator 1: Higher education providers articulate, implement and monitor a strategic
approach to learning and teaching, and promote a shared understanding of that
approach among all their staff and students. Indicator 2: The design of learning and
teaching activities provides every student with an equal opportunity to monitor their
progress towards and achieve the intended learning outcomes. Indicator 3: An
understanding of the learning process informs learning and teaching practices, which
use evidence-informed approaches derived from the outcomes of research, scholarship
and the evaluation of professional practices. Indicator 4: Information is collected,
analysed and used to assure and enhance learning and teaching activities and the
learning and teaching environment. The questions below relate to these four Indicators.
9. Do you agree with the wording of these Indicators?
There is an emphasis on student input in the narrative which is missing from the
Indicator text. I wonder if 'articulate, implement and monitor' are needed? Perhaps this
could be phrased:
“Higher education providers work with students to implement a strategic approach to
learning and teaching, and promote a shared understanding of that approach among all
their staff and students”.
In relation to Indicator 3, we would suggest: “Learning and teaching practices will be
based on established educational scholarship, research, good practice and evaluation”.
10. We would like to expand the explanatory text accompanying these
Indicators. This could include adding signposts to further information (see
Indicator text boxes for examples).
Do you have any suggestions for additional explanatory text or signposts to
further information it may be helpful to include?
In relation to Indicator 2, the paragraph beginning "Once determined…" (Page 6) offers
an important point that deserves greater emphasis. However, it should also be tempered
with the recognition that some of the value of learning arising from engagement with an
institutional course and community of practice defies codification into discrete learning
outcomes.
On Page 7, the list of trans-disciplinary themes identifies aspirations that are core to
many of UCL’s institutional values and deserve greater prominence than being
effectively a footnote in this section on equal opportunity to monitor progress. As
articulated and placed here, the statement offers nothing that might be reflected in
curriculum design or teaching practice. It might be better located under Indicator 1.
In relation to Indicator 3 (Page 8), there is too great an emphasis on teaching staff
having subject knowledge, and an apparent downplaying of pedagogical expertise. A
"sound understanding and up-to-date knowledge of their subject" is necessary but not
sufficient for effective teaching. What follows does not make up for this imbalance.
Indicators: Enabling effective and independent learners (Pages 10 - 14)
The Chapter sets out the following Indicators about Enabling effective and independent
learners. Indicator 5: Students are supported to understand their responsibility to
engage with the learning opportunities provided. Indicator 6: Every student has
opportunities to engage with feedback to further their development as an active and
independent learner. Indicator 7: Students receive clear information that specifies the
opportunities for learning available to them; this information is monitored, reviewed and
evaluated by students and staff working in partnership.
The questions below relate to these three Indicators.
11. Do you agree with the wording of these Indicators?
In relation to Indicator 5 (Page 10) this needs to be more clearly articulated. Students will
need more than “support” and staff will need to know how to foster the transitions of
mindset required to realise this aspiration. We suggest altering the text to something like
"Students are systematically supported and enabled in their approaches to, and
responsibility for, learning."
In relation to Indicator 6 (Page 11) - as written, this sounds rather passive and optional
on the part of students (“has opportunities to…”). The giving and receiving of feedback
as a systematic process needs to be incorporated into the culture and practices of the
higher education institution. Students need to learn to both give and receive constructive
feedback for developmental learning. We suggest amending to something more like
"Every student learns to engage with the giving and receiving of feedback to further
their development as an active and independent learner in a community of practice."
12. We would like to expand the explanatory text accompanying these Indicators.
This could include adding signposts to further information (see Indicator text
boxes for examples). Do you have any suggestions for additional explanatory text
or signposts to further information it may be helpful to include?
In the second paragraph below Indicator 6, (Page 11) we suggest amending the
explanatory text to "The purpose of summative assessment is to evaluate student
attainment for the allocation of marks toward final results, whereas the purpose of
formative assessment is development and to promote further improvement in student
attainment. Summative assessment tasks can also be formative, as they are a
valuable source of feedback to students."
Further down, in the explanatory text on Page 12, the use of the phrase "yet includes" in
the following sentence seems odd in the context. By rights, all feedback should include
both acknowledgement of the accomplishments apparent in the work and indication of
avenues for improvement or further exploration.
In the subsequent sentence (also on Page 12) beginning "Effective feedback…" we
would change "is the result of" to "is based on".
In relation to Indicator 7 (Page 13) the Indicator itself seems reasonable, but the
explanatory text is somewhat loose regarding the expectation of teaching staff having an
appropriate qualification for teaching in their subject. As written, the first point in the list
could be interpreted to mean that subject expertise is sufficient to ensure effective
teaching. We suggest rephrasing e.g. "have appropriate educational qualifications to
support the teaching they are delivering"
Indicators: Facilitating and supporting effective learning and teaching (Pages 14 18)
The Chapter sets out the following Indicators about The basis for Facilitating and
supporting effective learning and teaching. Indicator 8: Staff involved in teaching and
supporting student learning are qualified, supported, and adequately resourced.
Indicator 9: Higher education providers assure themselves that for every student both
the physical and virtual environments they provide are safe, accessible, reliable and
usable and that their use is characterised by dignity, courtesy and respect. Indicator 10:
Accessible, adequate and appropriate resources are provided to support the learning of
every student. The questions below relate to these three Indicators.
13. Do you agree with the wording of these Indicators?
In relation to Indicator 10, this section seems to focus too much on the provision of
learning resources without enough emphasis on the importance of learning activities and
engagement. We would suggest revising it with this in mind. The Indicator text might
read: “Accessible, adequate and effective learning resources and activities are
provided to support the learning of every student.”
14. We would like to expand the explanatory text accompanying these Indicators.
This could include adding signposts to further information (see Indicator text
boxes for examples). Do you have any suggestions for additional explanatory text
or signposts to further information it may be helpful to include?
Further comments
In relation to Indicator 8, the explanatory text (Page 13) says - “Student learning is
facilitated by interactions with staff who teach and support learning”, we feel that this is
rather stating the obvious and not really telling us anything. We would suggest:
“Effective student learning is facilitated by interactions with appropriately trained and
qualified teaching and support staff [who teach and support learning]. Consequently,
higher education providers have a responsibility to ensure that those who teach...”
In relation to Indicator 9, the explanatory text (Page 15) should contain some examples
in paragraph 2.
In relation to Indicator 10, the explanatory text (Page 17, Paragraph 1, bullet 5) should,
we would suggest, read “Technology enables and supports effective learning
without dictating a particular learning approach”
15. Do the Indicators of sound practice in this Chapter adequately set out what a
provider might do to meet the Chapter Expectation? Are any aspects missing?
See comments above.
16. Do you agree with the order in which the Indicators have been arranged?
Yes.
17. Please use this space for any further comments on the Chapter. There is NO
word limit for this question.
We have no further comments.