Responsibility for admissions decisions

advertisement
University Code of Practice
Devolution of Admissions Decisions to Partner Institutions
Offering Collaborative Programmes
Document Reference:
Identifier:
Version:
Devolution of admissions decisions
(validated programmes)
QH: J1
1 04
Date: December 2014
Date coming into force:
Immediate
Approved By:
University Learning, Teaching and
Assessment Committee (ULTAC)
Learning Enhancement and Academic
Practice
Originator:
Responsibilities:
Partner Institutions
Head of the Admissions Service
ULTAC
Application to Collaborative Provision:
Mandatory
Contacts:
LEAP 01482 466703
Applications for exemptions to:
Report Exemptions to:
ULTAC
ULTAC
Further Guidance:
UK Quality Code for Higher Education,
Chapter B2: Recruitment, selection and
admission to higher education (Oct 13),
Chapter B10: Managing higher education
provision with others (Dec 2012).
Summary/ Description:
This code sets out the process through which the University will delegate authority to make
admissions decisions to partner institutions, and the responsibilities and duties which must be
adhered to by the partner institution in the event of such devolution.
Version 1 04 incorporates the following amendments:
 Update to paragraph 47 to require partners who have been granted devolved admissions
to prepare their report for ULTAC in the PQER template (section 3b).
Version 1 03 incorporates the following amendments:
 Updates the code with reference to the new committee structure
 Several amendments for clarity
Version 1 02 incorporates the following amendments:
 Provides greater detail regarding the reports which are to be provided to the University by
those partners with devolved admissions authority and provides a template for use when
preparing the reports. This template is published as annexe 2.
 Clarifies the relative roles of CPC and QSC.
 Clarifies the definition of “special cases”
Devolution of admissions decisions (validated programmes)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:1
Version 1 01 incorporates the following amendments
 In line with legislation related to age discrimination the requirement for applicants over 21
be handled as ‘special cases’ has been removed.
 Paragraph 38 of the Code has been revised to provide an exemption for PI staff applying
for teacher training programmes.
 References to AAC have been removed and replaced as appropriate.
This university Code has been written in accordance with the approach approved by QSC to enhance clarity
(Quality Handbook section A:2) involving the following terminology:
must = mandatory
should = advisable
may = desirable.
Where these terms are used they are emphasised in bold.
This document is available in alternative formats from
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:2
Contents
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 4
Partner institution responsibilities ...................................................................................................... 4
Part I - Devolution Approval Process ................................................................................................ 5
Applications for devolution ............................................................................................................. 5
Decision making process ............................................................................................................... 5
Criteria for granting devolution ....................................................................................................... 5
Decision of the panel ..................................................................................................................... 6
Changes to entry requirements ..................................................................................................... 7
Entry requirements at ‘Clearing’ .................................................................................................... 7
Part Il - Determining Admissions Applications .................................................................................. 8
Admissions tutors........................................................................................................................... 8
Requirement for a written application as a precondition for an offer ............................................. 8
Programme approval ..................................................................................................................... 8
Admissions decisions .................................................................................................................... 8
Part lll – Monitoring of Compliance .................................................................................................. 11
Partner institution reports ............................................................................................................. 11
Withdrawal of authority to make admissions decisions ............................................................... 11
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:3
Devolution of Admissions Decisions to Partner Institutions
Offering Programmes
Validated by the University of Hull
INTRODUCTION
1.
The purpose of this code of practice is to define:




The procedure through which a partner institution may apply for such authority
and through which the University will determine whether to grant such authority
The conditions under which the University will devolve to a partner institution
(PI) the authority to make decisions on the admission of students to
programmes validated by the University
The University’s expectations governing the way in which admissions decisions
will be made, recorded and reported, and
The responsibilities for monitoring compliance with the Code.
2.
The University will grant authority to make decisions only in respect of applications
which meet published and approved entry requirements for each programme.
Applications must be made by partner institutions in respect of the entirety of that
partner’s HE provision validated by the University.
3.
The Code is the result of consultation with relevant University services (including
the Head of the Admissions Service) and faculties, and the University’s
Collaborative Provision Committee. It seeks to ensure that admissions processes
are carried out in a fair, equitable and transparent manner. The Code reflects the
expectations of section 2 (revised September 2004) and section 10 of the QAA
Code of Practice as well as reflecting the University’s framework for the assurance
of quality and maintenance of academic standards as applied to programmes
validated by the University.
4.
The University, through LEAP and other appropriate offices and faculties,
undertakes to work with partner institutions who wish to apply for devolution to
assist each institution to confirm or develop the procedures necessary to satisfy the
requirements of this code of practice.
PARTNER INSTITUTION RESPONSIBILITIES
Responsibility for compliance with the code of practice
5.
Before submitting an application for devolution the partner institution must identify a
senior member of staff (office holder) who will be responsible for ensuring that the
partner institution’s responsibilities as set out in this code of practice are properly
and professionally discharged.
Responsibility for admissions decisions
6.
The partner institution must also identify a senior member of staff – who must not
be the same person identified in accordance with paragraph 5 – who will be
responsible for the admissions process, including specifically, having the authority
to make written offers to applicants.
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:4
PART I - DEVOLUTION APPROVAL PROCESS
Applications for devolution
7.
Where a partner institution wishes to apply for approval from the University for
authority to make admissions decisions, it must submit an application using the
form set out in annexe 1 of this code of practice, and submit the supporting
documentation identified in the annexe. Prior to submission to the University the
application must be endorsed by the Principal of the partner institution or such
person nominated by him/her.
Decision making process
8.
University Learning, Teaching and Assessment Committee (ULTAC) must
establish a panel with delegated authority to determine an application in
accordance with this code of practice.
9.
The membership of the panel shall be approved by the Chair of ULTAC but must
consist of the following:




A member of ULTAC to act as chair, nominated by the Chair of ULTAC
The Head of the Admissions Service
A member, nominated by the Dean, of each University faculty involved in
overseeing validated provision at the HE partner concerned
A member of LEAP, nominated by the Head of Quality, to serve as secretary.
10.
The Chair of ULTAC may approve the nomination of such additional members of
the panel as s/he deems appropriate.
11.
A meeting of the panel should be held no later than one month after receipt of the
application for devolution. The panel must meet with relevant staff of the partner
institution, such staff to include at least the persons designated as responsible in
accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6 of this code of practice and a representative
group of admissions tutors.
Criteria for granting devolution
General criteria
12. Devolution of the authority to make admissions decisions must not be granted
unless the panel is satisfied that the partner institution has nominated appropriate
persons in accordance with paragraphs 5 and 6 of this code, and that the partner
institution has in place policies and procedures which appropriately reflect the
expectations of the QAA Code of Practice, and govern effectively the following:














accredited prior learning (APL) – certificated (APCL) and experiential (APEL)
English language proficiency requirements
parity between part and full-time study applicants
equal opportunities monitoring
applicants with disabilities
applicants with criminal convictions (which should be in accordance with the
University Code of Practice on the Consideration of Applicants who Declare a
Prior Criminal Conviction, QH: J6)
informing students of programme details and requirements
the making of applications and offers
assessment of fee status
eligibility for ‘overseas’ students to study part time
inducting new students
staff development for those making admissions decisions
monitoring admissions decisions
retaining admissions data
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:5


13.
complaints by applicants regarding admissions decisions and process
Admission of non-EEA national students in relation to immigration status and
Tier 4 visa sponsorship. The panel will expect processes to be similar to those
operated by the University. University policies are available on request.
Entry requirements
The application for devolution must include, and approval of the application by the
panel must include approval of, the existing entry requirements for each
programme of study currently offered by the partner institution and validated by the
University. The approved entry requirements will be attached to the formal record.
14.
In approving the entry requirements the panel may seek advice from such persons
internal or external to the University as it deems appropriate.
15.
Entry requirements should normally be the same as for any comparable
programme(s) offered by the University. The University acknowledges that there
may be very good reasons why, in particular instances, different entry requirements
may be justified. For example, a PI may have a very strong widening participation
agenda and may have devoted considerable additional resources to support
students from different backgrounds.
16.
Entry requirements must detail any specific category of applicant where admission
to the programme might be refused, for example as the result of a criminal
conviction. They must also be consistent with the University’s minimum
requirements for English language proficiency.
17.
18.
19.
Application forms
The application for devolution must include confirmation of the programmes which
will recruit through the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) or an
equivalent national admissions service. For programmes which will not recruit
through such a service, the partner institution must submit for approval the
application form (or forms) which will be made available to prospective students to
apply for places on specific programmes of study. The approved form(s) will be
attached to the formal record.
Offer letter
The application for devolution must include for approval the wording and stationery
which the partner institution will use to make offers to those applicants the
institution wishes to admit to a programme of study to which this code applies. The
approved document will be attached to the formal record.
University faculty procedures
Before granting approval the panel must be satisfied that each applicable faculty of
the University has in place, or is able to put in place, appropriate procedures to fulfil
its responsibilities under this code of practice as defined in paragraphs 36, 40 and
43. Each faculty should submit a report specifying members of staff responsible for
functions under this code, and the procedures which will operate. Faculties must
ensure that staff are aware of the University’s admissions criteria and associated
policies.
Decision of the panel
20. The panel must reach one of the following decisions:



Approve the application, with or without conditions or recommendations
Defer the application pending further information
Reject the application.
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:6
21.
The panel must notify the partner institution of its decision in writing within five
working days of the panel meeting. Such notification must where applicable include
the details of any conditions, recommendations or further information required. In
the event of a decision to reject, the notification must state the reasons for
rejection. Within two weeks, a full written report must be produced. The notification
and the full report together will constitute the formal record of the delegation of
authority to the partner institution and will be submitted to the next meeting of
ULTAC for information.
22.
Conditions should be set where the panel is satisfied that an action or actions
must be taken by the partner institution to achieve compliance with this code of
practice. Such conditions must specify the deadline by which the action or actions
must be taken and the means through which the panel will satisfy itself that the
conditions have been met.
23.
Recommendations should be set where the panel is satisfied that an action or
actions should be taken by the partner institution as means of enhancing the
institution’s policies and procedures. Such recommendations should specify the
deadline by which the action or actions must be taken and the means through
which the panel will satisfy itself that the conditions have been met.
Changes to entry requirements
24. Programme Approvals Committee (PAC) must not approve a proposed
programme of study from a partner institution to which this Code applies unless
appropriate entry requirements for the programme have been specified in the
proposal with appropriate supporting justification.
25.
Entry requirements should be reviewed annually as part of the annual monitoring
of programmes. Amendments to entry requirements for programmes to which this
code applies must be submitted for approval by the relevant Joint Board of Studies
via faculty and be approved by PAC.
Entry requirements at ‘Clearing’
26. Where the partner institution considers that it is appropriate to lower entry
requirements during the UCAS Clearing period, it must apply in writing to the
faculty for approval to lower the entry requirements for this purpose only. Such
applications must be made in writing no less than six weeks before the start of
Clearing, specifying the changes requested and the rationale for them. Entry
requirements during the Clearing period must not fall below the minimum
matriculation standards of the University.
27.
Following completion of the Clearing period the partner institution must inform the
faculty of any offers made which are at the lower level approved under the above
paragraph.
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:7
PART II - DETERMINING ADMISSIONS APPLICATIONS
28.
This part of the code of practice sets out the framework within which the partner
institution must operate when making admissions decisions having been granted
authority under Part I.
Admissions tutors
29. The partner institution, through the person nominated in accordance with paragraph
6, must identify staff of the institution to serve as Admissions Tutors for each of the
programmes offered by the institution and validated by the University. Tutors may
be responsible for more than one programme however there should be no more
than one named Admissions Tutor per programme. The person nominated must
inform LEAP in writing of the names and responsibilities of each Admissions Tutor,
including informing him/her of changes as they occur.
30.
On receipt of the above information, LEAP must copy relevant parts of the
information to each faculty administrator and to the Secretary of ULTAC for the
official record.
31.
Admissions tutors must engage in such staff development activities as are
reasonably prescribed by the faculty.
Requirement for a written application as a precondition for an offer
32. A candidate must not be admitted to, or be registered for, a programme of study
without having submitted a written application using the form approved for the
purpose, and without having been made an offer in writing which accords with this
code of practice.
Programme approval
33. A programme must not be advertised before the programme has been granted
planning permission approval by the faculty. Where planning permission approval
has been granted any advertising must explicitly indicate that the programme is
‘subject to approval’ until such time as full approval is granted.
34.
An offer must not be made to any applicant before the partner institution has been
informed in writing that the programme has been approved by the University PAC.
The senior member of staff identified in accordance with paragraph 5 is responsible
for ensuring compliance with this limitation.
Admissions decisions
Applications which meet the entry requirements
35. The partner institution has full authority to make an offer where the applicant
satisfies or exceeds the entry requirements approved by a Full Approval Panel and
published for the programme concerned.
36.
‘Special cases’
Where an applicant does not meet the approved entry requirements and the partner
institution wishes to make an offer, the application must be deemed a ‘special
case’ and be submitted to the University for decision. In this instance sufficient
supporting evidence must be submitted which should be in the form of an
Interview Report, detailing discussions with the applicant and indicating the PI’s
reasons for recommending admission notwithstanding the entry requirements.
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:8
37.
Where there are approved entry requirements that are different from the admission
regulations (i.e. lower) then those programme requirements take precedence and
whether a case needs to be considered is measured against those standards.
38.
In determining whether an overseas qualification is lower than the normal standard
the university uses Hull International Qualification Admissions Standards (HIQAS)
information and if that is not sufficient then the National Academic Recognition
Information Centre (NARIC) is used.
39.
Each application must be considered on its merits by a person nominated by the
Dean, who should be the ‘Academic Contact’ (or equivalent) for the partnership.
The partner institution should be informed in writing of the decision within 7
working days of receipt by the University of the application.
40.
Applications by members of staff of the partner institution with the exception
of applications to teacher training programmes
Where an application is made by a member of staff of the partner institution, the
application must be submitted to the University for decision whether or not that
person contributes to the University’s validated programmes. In this instance the
application must be supported by a detailed report from a senior member of the
partner institution (such as the HE Manager). The report must include:



A description of the nature of the applicant’s work at the partner institution
An explanation of the potential and actual access which the applicant has, or
would have, to personal information about students on the programme of study
– including assessed work and assessment results – and confidential material
relating to the programme (such as examination papers)
Confirmation that the applicant will not gain an advantage over other students
on the programme as a result of his/her professional role within the institution.
Where an application is made by a member of staff of the partner institution to a
teacher training programme the following arrangements will apply:

The partner institution should propose its own procedure for managing such
applications

The partner institution should confirm that this procedure will ensure that
applicants will not gain an advantage over other students on the programme as
a result of his/her professional role within the institutions

The proposed procedure should be approved by the Dean of the Faculty of
Education

Any procedure and subsequent amendments should be agreed at a Joint
Board of Studies, approved by the Dean of the Faculty of Education and
reported to ULTAC.
41.
42.
Applications by international students
Where an applicant has non-UK qualifications the partner institution must make
appropriate use of the guidance available from the United Kingdom National
Academic Recognition Information Centre (UK NARIC) and / or UCAS.
Applications for ‘advanced standing’
Subject to the preceding paragraphs, all applications for ‘advanced standing’ – that
is to a stage higher than the first stage of the programme – must be determined in
accordance with the Code of Practice on Accreditation of Prior Certificated and
Experiential Learning (QH: J7).
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:9
43.
44.
Applications after the commencement of the programme
An application submitted on or after the first day of the commencement of the
programme in any given year, must be submitted to the University for
determination by the person nominated by the Dean to deal with special cases
(under paragraph 39). Such cases should be assessed on an individual basis to
determine the effects that late arrival may have on the student, both in terms of
academic and pastoral matters in accordance with the University’s requirements for
induction. Applications submitted later than 14 days after commencement of the
programme must not be considered.
Conditional offers
Where an offer is made subject to conditions the person nominated by the partner
institution under paragraph 6 must ensure, by receipt of appropriate
documentation, that the conditions have been satisfied before allowing the
applicant to attend lectures and to be registered on the programme of study.
Record-keeping
45. The partner institution must retain sufficient records of each admissions decision to
provide an audit trail, including any advice (such as NARIC assessments) on which
the decision was based. Records must at least be kept until the applicant has
successfully completed the programme on to which s/he was admitted or until s/he
has formally withdrawn or been failed by the appropriate Board of Examiners. It is
the responsibility of the partner institution to complete all statutory returns required
for higher education students, including the Higher Education Students Early
Statistics Survey (HESES) and the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA).
46.
The partner institution must take reasonable steps to ensure the authenticity of the
supporting documentation and that copies are certified by a reputable body.
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:10
PART III – MONITORING OF COMPLIANCE
Partner institution reports
47. ULTAC is responsible for overseeing compliance with this code of practice.
Between six months and one year after devolution the partner institution must
prepare a report for consideration by ULTAC:








analysing the effectiveness of the procedures it has operated during that year
identifying any strengths, examples of good practice worthy of wider
dissemination
listing any areas for development
detailing the effectiveness of procedures to deal with applicants with criminal
convictions
detailing the effectiveness of procedures for identifying special cases
providing details and copies of any relevant updated policies and procedures
providing details of any significant changes in roles and responsibilities
detailing the impact of any changes in relevant legislation.
ULTAC must invite the faculties to comment on each relevant report and may
consult other University services if appropriate.
Section 3b of the Partner Quality Enhancement Report template must be used to
provide the report.
48.
Following consideration of the report ULTAC may determine any actions which it
considers must or should be taken by the partner institution to enhance
compliance with this code of practice or otherwise enhance its admissions
processes.
49.
ULTAC may direct such further reports as it deems appropriate. Normally further
comment on the operation of the process and details of any changes in policy or
staff should be included in the Partner Quality Enhancement Report.
Withdrawal of authority to make admissions decisions
50. ULTAC is empowered to suspend or withdraw the authority to make admissions
decisions where it is satisfied that there has been substantial non compliance with
this code of practice. The decision must not be made until the partner institution
has been provided with reasonable opportunity to make written representations to
the Committee. This power should not be exercised unless it has been established
that the non compliance cannot be remedied satisfactorily.
Devolution of admissions decisions (collaborative provision)
Learning Enhancement and Academic Practice
1 04 – December 14
QH:J1:11
Download
Related flashcards
Management

42 Cards

Management

61 Cards

Create flashcards