Manchester Metropolitan University
CONTENTS:
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Page Number
List of Abbreviations
List of Appendices and Associated Documents
List of Diagrams
List of URLs
Preface
2
3
4
5
9
1. Introduction: Institutional Profile
Identity, character and history
Students – some statistics
The University’s special features
Some faculty achievements
Collaborative provision
Governance, management and committee structure
Vision, mission, strategic goals, core strategies and policies
Developments since the previous QAA Quality Audit
11
11
12
15
16
18
19
24
26
2. Institutional processes for the assurance of academic quality and standards
Framework for managing quality and standards
Strengths & limitations of current arrangements
Intentions for the enhancement of quality & standards
External participation in internal review processes for taught provision
External examiners and their reports
External reference points
Programme-level review and accreditation by external agencies
Student representation at operational and institutional level
Feedback from students, graduates and employers
The monitoring of student progression and completion
Assurance of quality of teaching staff: appointment, appraisal & reward
Assurance of quality of teaching staff: support and development
Links between teaching and research
Assurance of quality of teaching delivered through distributed and distance methods
Learning support resources
Academic guidance, support and supervision
Personal support and guidance
Discipline or cross-institutional themes
37
37
49
51
58
59
61
62
64
65
67
70
71
74
76
77
82
84
93
3. Published information
The accuracy, completeness and reliability of published information
TQI preparations
95
95
99
Appendices Volume
AP 1 Institutional Follow-up Response to Quality Audit
AP 2 Learning and Teaching Strategy (Revised July 2002)
AP 3 Managing Research in the University Post-2003
AP 4 Outcomes of MMU Subject Reviews
AP 5 Outcomes of RAE
AP 6 Response to Overseas Quality Audit: Lucerne (Draft)
AP 7 Subject Review Reports – Common Themes
AP 8 Widening Participation Strategy
AP 9 Written Submission by Students’ Union
Page 1 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
List of Abbreviations
AD
AME
ASC
ASU
CSE
DEA
EAI
ELO
FASC
FCHM
FRDC
HEMIS
HLSS
HR
IASC
ICP
IO
ISU
LSM
LSU
LTU
MI
MIDAS
MIRIAD
MMUBS
MMUC
MSH
ODL
PAF
PARM
PASC
PDR
PS/1
PSB
QAM
QAP
QIP
RDC
RDevC
RDU
RMS
SE
SLATF
SLS
SMDP
TARDIS
TIPS
UAEC
UNIWIDE
VLE
VITAEL
Art and Design (Faculty)
Annual Monitoring Exercise
Academic Standards Committee
Academic Standards Unit
Community Studies and Education (Faculty)
Discipline External Adviser
Enterprise Applications Integration
Education Liaison Office
Faculty Academic Standards Committee
Food, Clothing and Hospitality Management (Faculty)
Faculty Research Degrees Committee
Higher Education Management Information System
Humanities, Law and Social Science (Faculty)
Human Resources
Institute of Education Academic Standards Committee
Institutional Code of Practice
International Office
Information Systems Unit
Library Services Manager
Learning Support Unit
Learning and Teaching Unit
Management Information
Management Information Distributed Academic Systems
Manchester Institute for Research and Innovation in Art and Design
Manchester Metropolitan University Business School
Manchester Metropolitan University Cheshire (Faculty)
Manchester Student Homes
Online and Distance Learning
Programme Approval Form
Programme Approval, Review and Modification
Programme Approval Sub-Committee
Professional Development and Review
Programme Specification Form
Professional and Statutory Body
Quality Assurance Manual
Quality Action Plan
Quality Improvement Plan
Research Degrees Committee
Research Development Committee
Research Development Unit
Research Management System
Science and Engineering (Faculty)
Senior Learning and Teaching Fellow
Service Level Statements
Senior Management Development Programme
The Academic Records Distributed Information System
Transition, Induction and Progression Strategies
University Academic Ethics Committee
The University-wide Languages Provision
Virtual Learning Environment
Vice-Chancellor’s Initiative in Teaching and e-Learning Task Group
Page 2 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Appendices
AP1
AP2
AP3
AP4
AP5
AP6
AP7
AP8
AP9
Institutional Follow-up Response to Quality Audit
Learning And Teaching Strategy (Revised July 2002)
Managing Research in the University Post-2003
Outcomes of MMU Subject Reviews
Outcomes of RAE
Response To Overseas Quality Audit: Lucerne (Draft)
Subject Review Reports – Common Themes
Widening Participation Strategy
Student Written Submission
Associated Documents to accompany SED
AD1
AD2
AD3
AD4
AD5
AD6
AD7
AD8
AD9
AD10
AD11
AD12
AD13
AD14
AD15
AD16
AD17
AD18
AD19
AD20
AD21
AD22
AD23
AD24
Annual Report and Accounts 2001-2002
Annual Review 2001-2002
Constitutional Provisions
Corporate Planning Statement 2002/2003 and 2003/2004
DDA Part IV Framework For Implementation
Equal Opportunities Policy & Action Plan
Estate Strategy 2001-2010 (Draft)
First Destinations 2002
MMYou
New Student Survey
Postgraduate, Professional And Post-Experience Prospectus 2004/5
Quality Assurance Manual 2003/04
Race Equality Policy & Action Plan
Regulations For Postgraduate Programmes Of Study (Principles)
Regulations For Research Degrees Of The University
Regulations For The Academic Awards Of The University
Regulations For Undergraduate Programmes Of Study 2003-2004
Services Division Development Plan 2003-2006 (Draft)
Staff Development Policy
Staff Development Programme September 2003-March 2004
Strategic Plan 2003-2010
Student Statistics 2002/2003
Study Guide Booklet
Undergraduate Prospectus 2004
Page 3 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
List of Diagrams
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Page Number
Academic Board Committee Structure
20
Management Structure
21
Faculty Structure
22
Programme Approval Procedures
42
Programme Review Procedures
43
Annual Monitoring Procedures 2003/04
46
Page 4 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
List of URLs referenced in the Self Evaluation Document
URL 1
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/learning/perfind/2003/
HEFCE 2003/59: Performance indicators in higher education
2000-01 and 2001-02
URL 2
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/hefce/2003/03_35.htm
HEFCE 2003/35: Strategic Plan 2003-08
URL 3
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/revreps/instrev/manchester_metropolitan/manchester_metropolitan_textonly.htm
QAA Audit Report: Manchester Metropolitan University (January 2001)
URL 4
http://www.ltu.mmu.ac.uk/atmmu/faculty/index.htm
Faculty Learning and Teaching Strategies
URL 5
http://www.ltu.mmu.ac.uk
Learning and Teaching Unit homepage
URL 6
http://www.rdu.mmu.ac.uk/rdegrees/codeofpracticeQAA.doc
Institutional Code of Practice for Postgraduate Research Programmes
URL 7
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/public/inst_audit_hbook/collaborative.htm
QAA Proposed Operational Description for collaborative provision audit (England and
Northern Ireland) January 2004
URL 8
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/public/foundation/overview/foundation_overview.htm
QAA Overview report on Foundation degree reviews
URL 9
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/revreps/inst_audit/evalreport.htm
QAA Key features and findings of the first audits
URL 10
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/revreps/oseas/mmu_switzerland/mmu_switzerland_textonly.htm
QAA Overseas Quality Audit Report : Manchester Metropolitan University and the
International Hotel Management Institute and the International Tourism Institute,
Lucerne, Switzerland (November 2002)
URL 11
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/asu/qam/
Quality Assurance Manual
URL 12
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/externalrelations/reports/
Reports from Director of External Relations to Academic Board
URL 13
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/rdreports/2003/rd09_03/
Report of the Student Feedback Project Steering Group
URL 14
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/policy/policy.php?id=1
Web Development Requirements and Guidelines
URL 15
http://www.isu.mmu.ac.uk/general/information-strategy.shtml
Information Strategy
URL 16
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/public/inst_audit_hbook/audit_handbook_textonly.htm
QAA Handbook for institutional audit: England
Page 5 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
URL 17
http://iet.open.ac.uk/nss/index.cfm
National Student Survey website with link to Interim report on the 2003 pilot survey and
outline of issues for future implementation
URL 18
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/businessgateway/
MMU Business Gateway
URL 19
http://www.mid.mmu.ac.uk/
Management Information (MIDAS) homepage
URL 20
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/humanresources/
Human Resources Division homepage (with link to HR Strategy May 2002)
URL 21
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/humanresources/policy/general.php
HR policies for all staff (with link to Recruitment and Selection Code of Practice)
URL 22
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/humanresources/policy/academic.php
HR Academic Staff policies with link to Research and Scholarly Activity and Guidance on
the Determination of Lecturers’ Duties and Workload and Initial Training of Teaching
Staff and Policy Statement on Principal Lecturers
URL 23
http://www.ltu.mmu.ac.uk/atmmu/scholars/index.htm
Learning and Teaching Unit Visiting Scholars programme
URL 24
http://www.rdu.mmu.ac.uk
Research Development Unit homepage
URL 25
http://www.vitael.mmu.ac.uk/
Vice-Chancellor’s Initiative in Teaching and eLearning (VITAeL) Task Group homepage
URL 26
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/services/library/info/servicelevels.html
University Library Service Level Statement
URL 27
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/services/library/
University Library homepage
URL 28
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/services/library/info/research.html
University Library Information for Researcher
URL 29
http://www.isu.mmu.ac.uk/general/services/services.shtml
Information Systems Unit Services
URL 30
http://www.mediaservices.mmu.ac.uk
Media Services website
URL 31
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/services/estates/
Estates Planning Services website
URL 32
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/services/estates/news.php
Estates Planning Services News (with link to Annual Reports)
URL 33
http://www.customerservices.mmu.ac.uk/index.php
Customer Services website
Page 6 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
URL 34
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/TIPS/Index.html
Transition Induction and Progression Strategies homepage
URL 35
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/learningsupport/
Learning Support website
URL 36
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/hefce/2003/03_23.htm
HEFCE 2003/23: Improving standards in postgraduate research degree programmes
URL 37
http://www.foundationyear.mmu.ac.uk/index.php
Foundation Year website
URL 38
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/studyatmmu/
Study at MMU
URL 39
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/externalrelations/educationliaison.php
Educational Liaison Office website
URL 40
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/learningsupport/disability/statement.html
Learning Support Unit Disability Statement
URL 41
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/studentlife/
Student Life
URL 42
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/studentfinance/
Student Financial Support
URL 43
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/index.html
Student Services website
URL 44
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/slf.html
Student Services Service level Framework
URL 45
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/counselling/
Counselling Service homepage
URL 46
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/careers/
Careers Service website
URL 47
http://www.gvp.org.uk/
Graduate Vacancy Partnership website
URL 48
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/sport/
Sport and Recreation Unit homepage
URL 49
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/studserv/chaplaincy/
Chaplaincy homepage
URL 50
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/accommodation/
Accommodation homepage
URL 51
http://www.msh.man.ac.uk
Manchester Student Homes website
Page 7 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
URL 52
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/international/
International Students homepage
URL 53
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/externalrelations/reports/plan.php
External Relations Divisional Plan (internal access only)
URL 54
http://www.mmu.ac.uk/courses/
Online prospectus
URL 55
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/hefce/2002/02_15.htm
HEFCE 2002/15: Information on quality and standards in higher education: Final report
of the Task Group
URL 56
http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/hefce/2003/03_51/
HEFCE 2003/51: Information on quality and standards in higher education - Final
guidance
Page 8 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Preface
1.
This Self Evaluation Document has been prepared for the Institutional Audit of
Manchester Metropolitan University by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher
Education in June 2004. It is in three parts: section one introduces the University
and establishes its institutional profile; section two discusses and evaluates our
institutional processes for the assurance of academic quality and standards and
outlines plans for future development; and section three describes the quality
management of published information and preparations for compliance with TQI.
2.
The University welcomes the opportunity to demonstrate the effectiveness of its
internal quality assurance procedures. It places the highest priority on fostering an
institutional culture that seeks to:



3.
The Document provides evidence to verify the confidence the University has in:








4.
encourage critical reflection amongst its staff and students
promote an awareness that enhancement is the responsibility of, and in the
interests of, the whole University community
instil appreciation of the view that quality assurance procedures are the
opportunity to reflect upon and improve the experience of all members of the
University, students and staff alike, rather than ends in themselves.
the academic standards of its awards;
the quality of its programmes;
the learning experiences of its students;
the procedures by which each of these is regularly internally reviewed;
the procedures for response to external review;
its employment of appropriate external frames of reference in evaluating its
quality performance;
the accuracy, completeness and frankness of the information it generates, by
which judgements may be safely made;
its plans for the management of change.
Preparation for Institutional Audit as an opportunity for quality enhancement:
Preparation of SED
An Institutional Audit working party was initially established by the Academic
Director/Deputy Vice Chancellor in October 2002, to initiate and co-ordinate the
University’s approach to preparing for the QAA Institutional Audit, and to report to the
Academic Standards Committee on progress. In early 2003 the membership was
revised to comprise a Pro-Vice-Chancellor (as chair) and representatives from the
Academic Division, each faculty and the Students' Union. It was resolved that the
group should commence monthly meetings and at the May 2003 meeting an outline
draft of a proposed SED structure, based on the report template recommended in
The QAA handbook: Institutional Audit: England, was discussed and approved as a
framework for the Institutional Audit submission.
Page 9 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Involvement of staff
It was agreed at the start of the process that both the SED and the University's
preparation for Institutional Audit should be a collaborative exercise, providing an
opportunity for widespread reflection on current procedures combined with an
opportunity for positive consideration of future developments, and involving, within
practical limitations, as wide a range of staff as possible from across the institution.
Accordingly, in addition to weekly meetings with a key Directorate group,
engagement with other staff has taken the form of regular meetings of the working
party, visits by members of the working party to each faculty and central division, and
circulation of SED drafts. A final draft was approved by ASC.
Involvement of students
For similar reasons, not least to affirm the University's conviction, as reflected in its
mission, that the student learning experience is central to its activities and purpose,
representatives of the Students' Union are full members of the working party and
contributed to the preparation of the SED. The Students' Union also worked in
partnership with the University in the preparation of its own written submission,
building on the successful model used for the two QAA Developmental Engagements
in Law and History, held in early 2003. The Student Written Submission forms
Appendix 9 (AP 9) of this SED.
5.
The final version of the SED, once submitted to QAA, will be available on the
University website.
6.
It has been agreed with QAA that the Faculty of Community Studies and Education
will not be selected for DAT as much of that provision is reviewed by OFSTED or will
be reviewed in the QAA Major Review of Health Care Programmes. The School of
Law and the Department of History will not be selected for DAT as they received
Developmental Engagements in 2003, both teams expressing confidence in the
academic standards and academic quality of provision in each case. The
University’s collaborative provision will be subject to separate QAA audit at a later
date.
7.
The last few years have seen considerable change for the HE sector in general and
of managed evolution in the University’s own development. As the institution has
moved forward we have striven to maintain, and whenever possible extend, good
practice as we adapted to new challenges and opportunities. The University is a
successful, mature institution willing to use, and capable of using, opportunities such
as the Institutional Audit for major reflection and valuable engagement with peers.
Page 10 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
1
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
INTRODUCTION: INSTITUTIONAL PROFILE
Identity, character and history
8.
Manchester Metropolitan University is dedicated to the success of all with the ability
and motivation to benefit, meeting the needs of the professional and wider
communities it serves through the excellence of its teaching, learning, research &
scholarship.1
9.
It is one of the country’s largest providers of higher education in subject areas such
as art and design, teacher training, management and business, law, tourism and
hospitality management.
10.
The University is characterised by its breadth and range of study: some 600
programmes provide a network of qualifications in over 70 different subject areas in
art and design, humanities and the social sciences, management and business,
community studies, law, education, sport science, science and engineering, food,
clothing and hospitality management.
11.
Many programmes reflect a primary orientation towards some form of practical
education with strong vocational links with business, industry and the professions.
More than 3,000 students undertake work placements and dozens of programmes
include live project work in collaboration with client firms or organisations.
12.
Manchester Metropolitan University evolved from Manchester Polytechnic, which was
established in 1970 and gained University status, with the power to grant its own
degrees, including research degrees and other awards, as a result of the Further and
Higher Education Act 1992. The history of the colleges from which it was formed
dates back to the 1830s, representing a proud record of educational service in and to
the City of Manchester.
13.
The quality and nature of the Polytechnic’s courses had their foundations in the
substantial achievements of its original constituent colleges: the College of Art and
Design, Manchester College of Commerce and the John Dalton College of
Technology. An enlarged institution was formed in 1977 when Didsbury College of
Education and Hollings College were merged with the Polytechnic, forming a new
School of Education and the Hollings Faculty respectively. In April 1983, the City of
Manchester College of Higher Education, itself the result of a merger of three
colleges, was amalgamated with the Polytechnic. A final merger in 1992 with the
Crewe + Alsager College of Higher Education gave the institution a significant
presence in south Cheshire.
14.
Many of the colleges in these mergers had their origins in still earlier institutions,
established for the regional public good and to address the growing local needs of
industry and commerce in the nineteenth century. In seeking to create one institution
out of many, the challenge has been to produce the strong, coherent academic
community which the University comprises today, effective in meeting the
contemporary demands of higher education whilst preserving where appropriate the
traditions and ethos of the predecessor colleges.
1
AD 21, p6.
Page 11 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
15.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Most recently, the School of Physiotherapy joined the University’s Faculty of
Community Studies and Education in September 2003, as the Department of
Physiotherapy, a centre of excellence for both undergraduate and postgraduate
studies.
Students - some statistics2
Manchester Metropolitan University in 2002-03
Number of applications through UCAS during Autumn
2002 entry cycle
38628
ALL YEARS
FIRST YEARS
Total number of students
32955
Mode of
Full time
20052
61%
10399
64%
attendance
Sandwich
3691
11%
1265
8%
Part time
9212
28%
4552
28%
724
2%
171
1%
6117
19%
3832
24%
First degree
21366
65%
9084
56%
Sub-degree
1808
5%
1049
6%
Professional & other
2940
9%
2080
13%
Male
13495
41%
6722
41%
Female
19460
59%
9494
59%
Under 21
16266
49%
7017
43%
21 to 24
5858
18%
3474
21%
25 and over
10831
33%
5725
35%
White
24100
73%
11687
72%
Black
867
3%
458
3%
4288
13%
2181
13%
Mixed
402
1%
287
2%
Other
289
1%
111
1%
2088
6%
838
5%
921
3%
654
4%
Level of
Postgraduate research
study
Postgraduate taught
Sex
Age on entry
Ethnic origin
Asian/Chinese
Refused to answer
Unknown
2
16216
AD 22
Page 12 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Domicile
Greater Manchester
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
12042
37%
6144
38%
North West
7327
22%
3575
22%
Midlands/East Anglia
4579
14%
2122
13%
Yorkshire/Humberside
2149
7%
971
6%
London/South East
1749
5%
851
5%
South/South West
867
3%
422
3%
North
585
2%
273
2%
Wales/Scotland/N Ireland
1355
4%
649
4%
EC
1055
3%
567
3%
Overseas
1247
4%
642
4%
Subject of
Subjects allied to medicine
1093
3%
668
4%
study
Sciences
6595
20%
2924
18%
Engineering & technology
2305
7%
951
6%
Social studies & law
4953
15%
2735
17%
Business & administration
6437
20%
3042
19%
Languages & related subjects
1751
5%
1044
6%
977
3%
448
3%
Creative arts & design
2675
8%
1208
7%
Education
6169
19%
3196
20%
Number of students who have declared a disability
1402
4%
652
4%
Number of withdrawals
1970
6%
1433
9%
Examined
Passed
%
Passed/
Referred/ Referred/
Deferred Deferred
First degree
5420
4989
347
98%
Postgraduate & Masters
2884
2482
353
98%
Sub-degree
755
582
131
94%
Professional & other
577
545
18
98%
9636
8598
849
98%
371
7%
Upper second
2030
41%
Lower second
2004
40%
Third
372
7%
Unclassified
212
4%
Historical & philosophical studies
Exam results
All
First degree classifications
First
Page 13 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
16.
In terms of student numbers, the University is one of the largest in the UK, with
nearly 33,000 students enrolled and over 38,000 degree applicants for September
2003.
17.
During the 2002/03 academic year 72 per cent of students studied on a full-time
basis and 28 per cent were part-time. Forty-one per cent were male and 59 per cent
were female. Of all first year students, 56 per cent were aged 21 or over on entry
while 27 per cent of full-time students entered after a break of at least one year in
their formal education.
18.
The student disposition across all programmes for that academic year was 21 per
cent postgraduate and research, 65 per cent first degree, 5 per cent
HNC/HND/DipHE, 7 per cent studying for professionally accredited qualifications or
vocational programmes, and under 2 per cent non-advanced. Because many of the
University’s undergraduate and postgraduate programmes are vocational, reflecting
the strength of the relationship between teaching and the needs of business and the
professions, a significant proportion of degree programmes are accredited by, or
qualify graduates for, more than 70 professional and statutory bodies with which we
are affiliated.
19.
48 per cent of undergraduate students examined achieved a first class or upper
second award, 2 per cent failing at the first attempt. Of students surveyed six months
after completing their programme of study, 92 per cent had either moved into
employment or were engaged in further study.
20.
During 2003/04 Some 61 per cent of first year full-time and sandwich students and
74 per cent of part-time home students come from the Greater Manchester or other
North West areas. There are also more than 1300 international students.
21.
Students are invited voluntarily to declare their ethnic origin on their enrolment forms
by choosing from a list of categories. In 2001 these categories were updated to
match those introduced for the 2001 Census.
22.
In 2002-03, 72% of first-year students declared their ethnic origin under the various
White categories. The next largest grouping was 13% under the Asian categories
(including Chinese), whilst 3% declared themselves as Black, 2% under the Mixed
categories (which were newly introduced for the Census) and 1% as Other.
23.
The remaining 9% were of unknown ethnic origin, of whom 5% had specifically
declared their refusal to answer the question.
24.
The figures are sensitive to mode of attendance: among full-time students, 67% were
White and 17% Asian, whereas among part-time students the figures were 84% and
5% respectively. Similarly, among male students the White and Asian proportions
were 67% and 17%, whereas among females the figures were 76% and 11%.
25.
Published ethnicity figures for the sector specifically exclude unknowns and refusals
to answer. On this basis, the percentage of non-White first-year students in the
sector as a whole has been consistent at 14% since 2000-01. By contrast, over the
same period the corresponding figure for the Institution (calculated on the same
basis) has increased from 17% to 21%.
Page 14 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The University’s special features
26.
We are proud of our strong local identity. The University’s role in the life and culture
of Manchester is reflected in its cosmopolitan character, the breadth of its activities,
the diversity of its student and staff populations, and the urban and rural mix of its
campuses. Despite its size it has a valued reputation for its open, welcoming,
friendly atmosphere and for the support it offers to its students. It is much more than
a local institution, however. Mirroring the city and region in which it plays so
significant a part, the University also has an important national and international
profile. The University’s priorities are to pursue high quality teaching and learning,
both undergraduate and postgraduate; research of national and international
significance; the widening of access and broader study opportunity; and collaboration
with regional agencies and the wider community.
27.
We have both an undergraduate and postgraduate teaching record and a research
profile that place us among the best of the modern universities created in 1992. Few
can better the 14 subjects rated excellent in QAA review.
28.
In research the University is one of only three of the post-1992 universities to have
achieved a 5*, the maximum, in the 2001 research assessment exercise (RAE). It did
so for sport related subjects, and gained a further seven grade 4s for research in
education, environmental sciences, metallurgy and materials, English language and
literature, art and design, library and information management and history of art,
architecture and design. Additionally, poetry (part of the English submission) was
‘flagged’, as having achieved the equivalent of a grade 5*; similarly, TV drama (part
of the drama, dance and performing arts submission) was ‘flagged’ as the equivalent
of 5 and, subsequent to the RAE outcome, the performance in the sports related unit
was ‘designated 6*’ for 2004/05. The depth of the University’s research capability is
illustrated by the 3a ratings achieved by a further twelve units of assessment.3 The
management of research activity through internal units of assessment enabled its
positive impacts to be realised across the majority of the institution. The University is
committed to further significant improvement in its research ratings in key subject
areas for the next RAE together with increased external funding.
29.
We are an inclusive institution. Our Widening Participation Strategy4 includes the
targeting of students from families without a tradition in higher education. 95 per cent
of first degree entrants to full-time courses in 2002 came from state schools or
colleges, 34 per cent from social classes iiim, iv and v, and 18 per cent were from low
participation neighbourhoods. The latest HEFCE Performance Indicators rate the
University as similar to, or exceeding its benchmarks.5 The University is also an
active and committed contributor to the Greater Manchester and the
Cheshire/Warrington Aimhigher Partnerships for Progression.
30.
In September 2003 the University Foundation Year, which acts as a springboard to a
large number of Honours degree programmes, enrolled 650 students against a target
of 400, attracting a significant increase in the proportion of applicants from target
groups. Progression rates for Foundation Year students are typically 70 per cent of
those examined.
3
AP 5
AP 8
5
URL 1
4
Page 15 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
31.
Reflecting the University’s growing international reputation, commitments set out in
its Strategic Plan and the outcome of the 1997 Strategic Review exercise which
identified the further internationalisation of the student population as a medium-term
objective, the number of international students has grown at a steady, planned rate
since the Quality Audit in 1999.
32.
The University contributes to economic growth and regeneration, to social change
and to the quality of life of the region. A strong ReachOut agenda engenders close
and mutually-beneficial ties with business and the professions via work placements,
applied research, voluntary and community projects and collaborations in regional
specialisms such as food, textiles and the creative industries. The University’s
ReachOut committee encompasses our engagement with business, the professions
and the community. A ReachOut Policy and Action Plan are part of our revised
Strategic Plan and faculties are incorporating ReachOut into their own Strategic
Plans.
Some faculty achievements
Art and Design
33.
The Faculty of Art and Design is home to the very popular BA (Honours) Theatre Arts
(Acting) programme that, as only one of three nationally to be accredited by the
National Council for Drama Teaching, is able to provide graduates with their own
Equity card. In addition, students on the Faculty’s art and design programmes
annually display their work at graduate shows such as New Designers, Graduate
Fashion Week and Fresh Art, and have a good record of gaining awards at these
events.
Community Studies and Education
34.
The Faculty of Community Studies and Education is developing in a number of
exciting ways, most significantly in relation to academic provision in health and social
care. Most recently, Physiotherapy has been integrated from the NHS as an
academic department within the Faculty. The Institute of Education, jointly based
within the Faculty at Didsbury and MMU Cheshire at Crewe, has a track record of
high quality teaching and research as evidenced in OFSTED reports and the recent
RAE (We are the only post-1992 University to achieve a 4 rating in Education).
Overall the Faculty has a rapidly expanding set of relationships with the NHS,
education and social services in the North West region.
Food, Clothing and Hospitality Management
35.
The Department of Clothing Design and Technology, with 1,000 students on its
undergraduate, Masters and postgraduate research programmes, is held in high
regard by the industry for its contribution to apparel/textile technology education and
particularly for its partnerships with leading clothing companies both nationally and
internationally. Hospitality Management is notable for being one of only two UK
candidates invited to become a member of the Leading Hotel Schools of The World,
and Food Technology is marked out both by its applied research through KTP and
LINK projects and by DEFRA recognition as the NW Regional Technology Transfer
Centre.
Page 16 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Humanities, Law and Social Science
36.
The Writing School within the Faculty of Humanities, Law and Social Science’s
Department of English is outstandingly successful and numbers such eminent poets
as Carol Ann Duffy, Sophie Hannah, Simon Armitage, Jeffrey Wainwright and
Michael Schmidt, founder and managing editor of Carcanet Press, among its
academic staff. Creative writing – poetry, novel writing, children’s fiction and life
writing - is taught at Masters and undergraduate level.
Science and Engineering
37.
In the Faculty of Science and Engineering the needs of business and industry are
integral to much of the research undertaken. The Atmospheric Climate and
Environment Research Centre is well respected for its international work with
atmospheric pollution and the aviation industry. Research into biomedical and
environmental areas is linked to strong postgraduate programmes, some by distance
learning. Computational fluid dynamics is applied to problems such as coastal
erosion, whilst the Intelligent Systems Group has developed 'Silent Talker' an
adaptive psychological profiling technique. The latter has generated national interest
and enriched the student experience in its development. The Faculty houses a
nationally recognized Centre for Studies in Materials and Polymer Science. It is a
focus of research railway vehicle dynamics with short courses for industry in this area
and in areas such as Profibus.
MMU Business School (MMUBS)
38.
MMUBS is one of the largest university business schools in the UK. Its taught
programmes have strong links to business and are accredited by the key
professional bodies; for example: the Association of MBAs, which accredits its fulltime and part-time MBA programmes; the Chartered Institute of Personnel and
Development, for which MMUBS is a designated ‘Centre of Excellence’; the
Association of Chartered Certified Accountants; the Chartered Institute of
Management Accountants; the Chartered Institute of Management; the Chartered
Institute of Marketing; and the Institute of Public Relations, whose large ‘1+3’ doctoral
training programme is fully recognised by the Economic and Social Research Council
(ESRC); and the European Doctoral Association for Management and Business
Administration (EDAMBA).
MMU Cheshire
39.
The 15 per cent of the University that constitutes MMU Cheshire provides a clear
alternative to study in the city centre. The two large campuses offer a distinctive
community for the Faculty's relatively high proportion of residential students, and are
the only university presence in Cheshire. With a wide ranging subject base, this
university in microcosm includes the internationally recognised research area of
Sport and Exercise Science which has supported the achievement of many elite
sports performers, including Olympic gold medallists. Work in Contemporary Arts,
Humanities, Applied Social Studies, Business and Management, and Environmental
and Outdoor Studies supports both specialist and joint honours provision as well as
having strong community links. The Faculty is also the home of the Centre for
Promotion of Social Inclusion which, amongst its projects, has provided
complementary support to the institutional initiative of staff development toward the
DDAIV Framework for Implementation.
Page 17 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Collaborative Provision
40.
Although Collaborative Provision will receive a separate QAA Audit, it is important to
stress the position of such provision in the fulfilment of the University's mission and
its quality assurance.
41.
Collaborative arrangements are strategically important to our mission, reflecting the
commitment to widen participation and opportunity. Collaborative academic
partnerships reflect our emphasis on establishing strong local and international links,
developed in a strategic way and managed as part of the University's core activities.
One example of this is the recent submission for additional student numbers for
Foundation Degrees in collaboration with local colleges.
42.
Quality assurance of such provision is driven by the principle that the University
accepts responsibility for the academic standards of its awards, however and
wherever programmes approved as leading to its awards are delivered.
43.
Hence, the University’s approval processes for collaborative provision are founded
on the same principles of internal and external peer review as its quality assurance
arrangements for other provision. Collaborative programmes are judged by the same
criteria as campus-based programmes along with additional considerations that
reflect the particular nature of different categories of collaboration. These are
specified in the University's Institutional Code of Practice: Collaborative Provision,6
which also addresses the precepts of the QAA Code of Practice: Section 2.
44.
The University will approve a collaborative arrangement only for programmes of
study that fall within its own subject expertise and authority. Collaborative
programmes, as with all other University programmes, are subject to approval by the
Academic Board after earlier consideration by the Academic Standards Committee
(ASC), Programme Approval Sub-Committee (PASC) and the Directorate.
Strategic Alliances
Greater Manchester Strategic Alliance
45.
Within the sub-region of Greater Manchester there are currently seven higher
education institutions and twenty-five post-16 colleges, offering a very wide range of
higher education learning opportunities. The University has, with a number of these
institutions, formal and longstanding collaborative links. The Strategic Alliance,
initiated in 2003, is seeking, however, to establish more effective partnerships
between these institutions so as to enhance the experience of learners and potential
learners in the sub-region by providing a more co-ordinated approach to progression
pathways, credit accumulation and transfer and the curriculum framework. More
specifically the strategic alliance aims to help the universities and colleges in Greater
Manchester meet the challenging targets set for increasing and widening
participation in higher education by 2006 with particular emphasis on the
development of Foundation Degree provision.
Cheshire and Warrington Strategic Alliance
46.
6
Similarly, within the Cheshire sub region MMU Cheshire is an HE member of the
FE/HE consortium. This strategic alliance has recently led to a consortium bid for a
Foundation Degree with additional student numbers and the subsequent
development of a number of additional pathways.
AD 12, Section C22
Page 18 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Governance, management and committee structure
Instrument of Government and Articles of Government
47.
The constitutional documents of the University are the Instrument of Government and
the Articles of Government.7 The Instrument of Government was made by the Privy
Council on 26 April 1993 and deals mainly with the composition and membership of
the Board of Governors. The Articles of Government deal with the functions of the
Board of Governors, the Academic Board and the Vice-Chancellor, procedures for
meetings, and matters related to staff, students and finance. The present Articles,
incorporating amendments to reflect the provisions of the 1992 Act, came into effect
from 1 February 1995 with the approval of the Privy Council.
Board of Governors
48.
The Board of Governors is responsible for the determination of the educational
character and mission of the University, for oversight of its activities, for the effective
and efficient use of resources, for the solvency of the institution and for safeguarding its
assets. The Board meets four times a year: a business meeting is held near the end of
each term and a special meeting to consider strategic issues is held early in the
academic session. The Board has five Standing Committees, three of which meet each
term: Audit Committee, Estates and Services Committee, and Finance and Human
Resources Committee. The Nominations and Governance Committee and
Remuneration Committee meet annually.
The Academic Board
49.
The roles, responsibilities and membership of the Academic Board are set out in the
Constitutional Provisions of the University.8 Chaired by the Vice-Chancellor and
making termly reports to the Board of Governors, it is responsible for general matters
relating to the academic business of the University including teaching, research,
scholarship, the policies and procedures under which these activities are conducted,
and for advising the Vice-Chancellor on related matters.
Directorate
50.
7
8
The Directorate is the University's senior management group, comprising the ViceChancellor, the Heads of the central divisions and the Deans of Faculty (who are also
Pro-Vice-Chancellors). The Directorate normally meets weekly throughout the
academic year with a scheduled core agenda relating to the cycle of planning and
monitoring of the institution's business and development. It manages the process of
matching demand with resources. Decisions are disseminated through Deans and
their faculty senior management teams. Directorate papers (excluding reserved
business) are also circulated to Faculty Secretaries, the Academic Registrar and the
Head of Management Information (MIDAS) for action if necessary. Senior
Management Seminars, attended by all Heads of Department and equivalent senior
staff, Faculty Secretaries, and staff from the central divisions, are also held regularly.
AD 3
AD 3, p 34
Page 19 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
ACADEMIC BOARD COMMITTEE STRUCTURE
ACADEMIC BOARD
UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC
ETHICS
COMMITTEE
HONORARY
AWARDS
COMMITTEE
ETHICAL REVIEW
(SCIENTIFIC PROCEDURES)
SUB-COMMITTEE
PSB
STANDING
GROUP
PROGRAMME
APPROVALS
SUB-COMMITTEE
ACADEMIC
STANDARDS
COMMITTEE
RESEARCH
DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
FACULTY
LEARNING &
TEACHING
COMMITTEES
LEARNING
& TEACHING
SUB-COMMITTEE
EXTERNAL
EXAMINERS
SUB-COMMITTEE
FACULTY
ACADEMIC
STANDARDS
COMMITTEES
FACULTY
BOARDS
RESEARCH
DEGREES
COMMITTEE
FACULTY
RESEARCH
DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEES FACULTY RESEARCH
DEGREES COMMITTEES
BTEC
PLACEMENT
STANDING LEARNING
GROUP
GROUP
PROGRAMME
REGULATIONS
STANDING
GROUP
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Note: broken line denotes reporting relationship; continuous line denotes formal line of authority
Page 20 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Management Structure
VICE-CHANCELLOR
FINANCIAL
DIRECTOR
HUMAN RESOURCES
DIRECTOR
DEPUTY
VICE-CHANCELLOR
& ACADEMIC
DIRECTOR
SERVICES
DIRECTOR
EXTERNAL
RELATIONS
DIRECTOR
HEADS OF
DEPARTMENT
CHIEF
ACCOUNTANT
PERSONNEL
MANAGER
ACADEMIC
REGISTRAR
LIBRARIAN
BUSINESS
PARTNERSHIPS
FACULTY
SECRETARIES
COMMERCIAL
ACCOUNTANT
DEVELOPMENT
AND TRAINING
MANAGER
DIRECTOR OF
RESEARCH
DEVELOPMENT
HEAD OF
CUSTOMER
SERVICES
REGIONAL
OFFICE
CORPORATE
SERVICES
ACCOUNTANT
EMPLOYEE
RELATIONS
MANAGER
HEAD OF
ACADEMIC
STANDARDS
HEAD OF
INFORMATION
SYSTEMS UNIT
INTERNATIONAL
OFFICE
HEAD OF DATA
CAPTURE AND
SYSTEMS CONTROL
HEALTH AND
SAFETY
ADVISOR
HEAD OF
MANAGEMENT
INFORMATION
HEAD OF MEDIA
SERVICES
COLLEGES AND
SCHOOLS
LIAISON
HEAD OF STUDENT
SERVICES
HEAD OF
ESTATE PLANNING
SERVICES
PR & MARKETING
SECRETARY
&
CLERK TO BOARD
OF GOVERNORS
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
DEANS OF
FACULTY
& PRO-VICE
CHANCELLORS
HEAD OF LEARNING
AND
TEACHING
HEAD OF WIDENING
PARTICIPATION
Page 21 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
FACULTY STRUCTURE (as at December 2003)
FACULTY
DEPARTMENTS (or equivalent)
Art and Design
School of Architecture (Joint with University of Manchester)
School of Art
School of Design
School of History of Art and Design
MIRIAD
Community Studies and
Education
Applied Community Studies
Health Care Studies
Physiotherapy
Psychology and Speech Pathology
Institute of Education*
Food, Clothing and
Hospitality Management
Clothing Design and Technology
School of Food, Consumer, Hospitality and Tourism Management
Humanities and
Social Science
Economics
English
History and Economic History
Information and Communications
Languages
School of Law
Politics and Philosophy
Sociology
MMU Business School
Business Information Technology
Corporate Reporting and Compliance
Financial Management
Human Resource Management and Organisational Behaviour
International Business
Management Science
Marketing
Retail Management
Strategy and Entrepreneurship
MMU Cheshire
Business and Management Studies
Contemporary Arts
Environmental and Leisure Studies
Exercise and Sport Science
Humanities and Applied Social Studies
Institute of Education*
Science and
Engineering
Biological Sciences
Chemistry and Materials
Combined Honours and Foundation Studies
Computing and Mathematics
Engineering and Technology
Environmental and Geographical Sciences
i
+ non-departmental matrix structure in operation
* the Institute of Education operates across two faculties
Page 22 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Management Structure
51.
Overall co-ordination and management of the academic, administrative and physical
infrastructure of the University is provided through six central divisions:






52.
Academic Division, headed by the Academic Director/Deputy Vice-Chancellor
External Relations Division, headed by the External Relations Director
Finance Division, headed by the Financial Director
Human Resources Division, headed by the Human Resources Director
Services Division, headed by the Services Director
Secretary's Department, headed by the University Secretary
The major academic groupings of the University are its seven faculties:







Art and Design
Community Studies and Education
Food, Clothing and Hospitality Management
Humanities, Law and Social Science
Science and Engineering
MMU Business School
MMU Cheshire
53.
Faculties are the main academic communities of the University. Each is managed by
a Dean assisted by a Faculty Secretary, who hold permanent full-time appointments.
For five faculties the organisation is based on departments, which provide subject foci
and supporting administrative and academic management structures. The Faculty of
Art and Design and the MMU Business School have each adopted a matrix structure,
involving different arrangements for the organisation of academic subjects and
administrative support.
54.
The Dean, together with the faculty’s senior management team, is responsible for
annually updating the Faculty Strategic Plan, approved by the Faculty Board and
submitted to the Academic Board. In the case of new programme developments,
Deans are responsible for considering their appropriateness in the context of the
Plan, confirming, through the ‘approval in principle’ process (see below 124), that
required resources are available, that processes are in place to assure the quality of
provision and that the implications for centrally provided resources such as
information and learning systems are acknowledged and agreed.
55.
Faculties and central divisions are the main budgetary cost centres to which
resources are allocated annually by the Vice-Chancellor and the Finance Director.
Those accruing to faculties are determined on the basis of recruitment of students
against annually agreed targets, which also determine the staffing allocation. Deans
are responsible, in turn, for allocating revenue and staffing resources to the
departments and other units within their area of responsibility. Many departments
and units also generate additional income from commercial, external and other
activities, a proportion of which is retained.
Page 23 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
56.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Each faculty has a clearly defined administrative structure led by the Faculty
Secretary, who is a senior member of the University and of the faculty management
team. The Faculty Secretary is responsible for administration and the management
of non-teaching staff, the co-ordination of a range of professional support services at
faculty level, and for the dissemination and observation of institutional policies and
regulations. Faculty Secretaries meet monthly with the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the
Academic Registrar and other senior members of the Academic Division to discuss
administrative matters and to promulgate consistency in practices and procedures
across the University.
Research Institutes
57.
Analysis of the outcomes of RAE 2001 recognised the benefits that would accrue
from stronger focussing of research activities and the targeting of associated support.
Consequently a revised institutional strategy for research was produced in 2002/03.9
As a result research management is now based on ten Research Institutes which
bring together associated work across faculties and departments, co-ordinating the
research activities of staff and research degree students. Each Institute is
administered by a Director, with a management team that includes relevant Deans.
Further work is in progress on integrating the Institutes within faculty structures.
Vision, mission, strategic goals, core strategies and policies
58.
The University's vision, mission, strategic goals, core strategies and policies were
established in a comprehensive Strategic Plan published in 1999, itself the
culmination of an inclusive review process, embracing the whole University
community, and intended to determine the institution's future direction. Good
progress has been made in achieving many of the priorities established in that
Strategic Review. However, five years on, the external and internal environment had
changed in many ways, not all expected, so the impact of those changes needed to
be appraised. Accordingly, the University reflected on its original goals and reaffirmed its strategic direction in an Interim Strategic Review during the 2002/03
academic year. After consideration by the Academic Board and the Board of
Governors, these revisions were then incorporated into the Strategic Plan 2003201010, which was submitted to HEFCE in July 2003. It reflects the strategic aims
established in the HEFCE Strategic Plan 2003-0811, and has been circulated widely
to staff across the University.
Vision
59.
Our vision encompasses the University's long-term aims and the focus of our
development over the next decade. We aim to:




consolidate our position as a leading UK-based University with high
reputation and standing nationally and internationally;
be successful and confident in the high quality of our provision of our
teaching, learning, research and scholarship;
ensure access to high levels and quality of student experience for all with the
ability and motivation to benefit;
produce employable graduates who are well-equipped to respond to the
demands of their chosen professional or vocational careers and have the
capacity for responsible citizenship;
9
AP 3
AD 21
11
URL 2
10
Page 24 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University




Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
be a first choice for a broad range of students;
ensure that all our staff feel valued and able to make a full contribution to the
success of the University;
behave professionally and ethically in all our activities to ensure that we are
respected for our core values;
project a strong successful corporate identity and be recognised for the
distinctive contribution we make to the various communities we serve.
Mission
60.
Our Mission is the shortest of our defining statements but the most important,
because it distils the essence of our purpose and is the benchmark against which we
expect to be judged:
61.
The Manchester Metropolitan University is dedicated to the success of all with
the ability and motivation to benefit, meeting the needs of the professional
and wider communities it serves through the excellence of its teaching,
learning, research and scholarship.
Strategic Goals
62.
Our strategic goals provide the long-term objectives we are striving to achieve
through our strategic plan:









To enhance the quality of the experience, increase the satisfaction and
improve the retention of students;
To exceed our benchmarks in widening participation;
To increase our graduate employment rate and contribute to the graduate
retention rate in the North West;
To define and meet quality and esteem measures for ReachOut
To provide equal opportunities, particularly through our action plans for RRAA
and SENDA;
To increase the volume of (national and international standard) research
active staff year on year;
To achieve success in external quality engagements;
To deliver the Estates Strategy on time and to budget
To maintain a balanced budget while increasing the non-exchequer income to
the University year on year.
Core Strategies and Policies
63.
Our core strategies and policies relate to the deployment of the University's
resources in achieving our primary goals:



To provide high-quality learning opportunities for our students and establish a
reputation for the provision of excellent, varied and innovative learning and
teaching;
To sustain and develop further our position as an inclusive institution which
both seeks out, and is sought out by, those in under-represented groups who
have the potential to achieve high quality outcomes;
To maintain, and further develop, a strong research capability across the
University;
Page 25 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University






64.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
To offer our students a comprehensive range of well regarded academic,
vocational and professional qualifications via academically coherent, high
quality programmes subject to appropriate external accountability;
To ensure a high quality educational experience for all our students supported
by effective information and communication strategies;
To develop and maintain our relationships with business, the professions,
practice and the communities in which we are located, as a distinctive and
integral part of our collective identity;
To develop and maintain close relationships with all our key markets and
external stakeholders, to support the achievement of our vision and strategic
goals;
To deliver an HR strategy, which supports our strategic goals, and
demonstrate through the opportunities, flexibility, support and rewards offered
that we value our staff, its diversity, commitment and responsiveness;
To develop and maintain financial strengths, appropriate processes, and
structures to ensure short, medium and long term viability.
The Strategic Plan incorporates a series of more detailed objectives and actions for
each of the Core Strategies.12 The University reviews its current operation and sets
yearly targets to implement its strategies and policies in the Corporate Planning
Statement13 (previously the Annual Operating Statement), submitted to HEFCE in
July each year. It identifies the following key categories:









Learning and Teaching
Widening Participation
Research and Scholarship
Academic Quality and Programmes
The Learning Environment
Developing and Maintaining a High Reputation and Standing, Internally &
Externally
Human Resources
Financial Management
ReachOut.
65.
The current Statement monitors progress to date and, in the Summer term, identifies
planned activities for each of the categories. A member of the Directorate is
responsible for the outcomes of each category and, collectively, the Directorate and
the Board of Governors formally monitor the achievement of these outcomes
regularly throughout the year.
66.
The University also publishes a summary Annual Review14 and an Annual Report,15
which, inter alia produces the audited accounts for the year, notes aspects of the
student profile and draws attention to a number of significant activities that have
taken place during that year.
Developments since the previous QAA Quality Audit
67.
The University received a QAA Quality Audit ('Continuation Audit') in 1999. The
confirmed version of the Report arising from the Audit was published in January
2001.
12
AD 21, pp 9 -17
AD 4
14
AD 2
15
AD 1
13
Page 26 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
68.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
That Report concluded as follows:
Overall there can be confidence in the University's management of its academic quality and
standards and in the way it discharges its function as a higher education awarding body. There
are strong arrangements in place at the level of the course and faculty, although the degree of
local interpretation of institutional guidance is a matter the University needs to continue to
address. The University would also do well to satisfy itself that the lines of reporting from faculties
to central committees, and from central committees to faculties and course teams, are fully
effective and that the particular quality assurance requirements of collaborative provision are
given sufficient consideration.16
69.
The University spent considerable time reflecting upon the Report, debating its
response at Academic Standards Committee (ASC), the Academic Board and within
faculties. The Institutional Follow-Up Response17 (April 2002) addressed the
Report’s recommendations, discussing action already taken and proposals for the
future. Since then a number of revisions have been made to those proposals as the
working practice of the University has evolved, for example a reconsideration of the
procedures for the review of quality for University support services.
70.
The Quality Audit Report commended the following matters of good practice:
i
the University's decision to undertake a Strategic Review, the commendable manner of its
conduct, and the sustained reflections on, and engagements in the University's corporate
affairs the process has encouraged;
ii
the work of its faculties in carefully operating its validation and review processes;
iii
the energy and commitment of the University's staff and, in particular its course teams, to the
support of its quality control arrangements, as exemplified by its annual monitoring and Quality
Action Plan procedures;
iv
the scale of involvement of external peer review in its processes and the thoroughness of its
approval processes for such external peers;
v
the comprehensiveness of the information it provides to its students, particularly in the form of
student handbooks.
71.
The Report advised that the following points should be further considered as the
University continued to develop its quality arrangements:18
72.
i
continue, as a high priority and on an institution-wide basis, the implementation of those
findings of its Strategic Review that relate to quality assurance ;
Response
The University's Strategic Review resulted in a Strategic Plan identifying eight aspects of
University procedures or activities that would enhance quality and standards. These are
designated (a) to (h) below and against each a brief commentary on implementation and/or a
review of progress to date is made:
(a)
Engage effectively with external schemes of subject review and institutional audit:
As paragraphs 84-88 identify, the overall outcomes for the University across 22
subject level reviews and 2 Developmental Engagements have been very good;
analysis of such engagements is provided by ASU.
16
URL 3, para. 140
AP 1
18
URL 3, para.141
17
Page 27 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
(b)
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Provide clarity with respect to the objectives, content and level of all programmes of
study:
Programme specifications were introduced in 2001/02 (see below, 193) and work is
ongoing in relation to the levels associated with qualifications and the components
from which they are constructed.
(c)
Agree and implement actively, a uniform regulatory and structural framework for all
programmes to contribute to a proper and consistent adherence to academic quality
standards:
University-wide undergraduate regulations were introduced in 2001/02.19 These
were informed by the QAA Code of Practice: Section 6 and their development
followed extensive internal consultation; they are reviewed annually by a standing
group commissioned by ASC. University-wide postgraduate regulations were
developed in 2002/03, again through an extensive process of consultation.
Principles20for these were approved in 2003 by the Academic Board for
implementation in 2004/05. Further work has resulted in an institutional scheme for
moderation of summative assessments,21 tariffs for plagiarism, and a pilot concerned
with the use of discipline external advisers to engage with similar subject provision in
different parts of the University.
(d)
Raise standards of course provision by enhancing those parts of the monitoring and
evaluation process concerned with assessing the effectiveness of programme design
and student performance:
The principal procedures for achieving this objective are the processes of periodic
review and of annual monitoring, which lead to an evaluation of student performance
within and across programmes of study. Both employ external reference points.
Revised AME procedures are currently being piloted (see 161-167) and a new
student record system will be introduced in 2004/05 (see 223).
(e)
Encourage active participation by staff with their relevant professional bodies and in
other external activities to ensure that programmes reflect current developments in
their discipline;
A large number of the staff of the University (in both academic and support staff
roles) are members of professional bodies. Many participate in activities such as
accreditation, approval, subject development, etc. on behalf of the institution.
Additionally, staff operate as external examiners, academic reviewers and auditors.
In appointing academic staff to the University it is normal practice to expect such
involvement. In the subsequent development of staff within the University, for
example through PDR (see below 233), they are encouraged to play an active part in
external, professional and subject bodies. The ReachOut Strategy also encourages
strong links with the local community. The University could do more to systematise
the recording of this activity (as is currently the practice, for example, in the Faculty of
Art and Design) and use it to inform staff and disciplinary development (see below,
150).
(f)
Encourage staff to engage in collaborations or partnership ventures with industry,
research organisations and public or private consortia, so as to ensure that they are
operating at the leading edge of their discipline:
19
AD 17
AD 14
21 AD 12, Section C 18.4
20
Page 28 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Staff involvement with teaching company schemes, knowledge transfer partnerships,
spin-out and incubation activities, engagement in commissioned and collaborative
research and related activities form an important element in the University’s strategic
plan and its operationalisation, and these continue to grow year on year. The Careers
Service also works in regular partnership with employers and employment
organisations of all kinds. Many close collaborations exist at discipline and
programme level, for example, placement tutors on sandwich and other work-based
experience programmes. The establishment of External Relations Division in 2000
has brought significant benefits to the University’s collaborative engagement with
external organisations.
(g)
Establish clear links between University qualifications and those of related
professional bodies to improve graduates’ chances of employment and to facilitate
students’ entry to their chosen profession:
A large number of the University’s programmes are characterised by their significant
professional and vocational orientation. Hence, for many, their curricula are strongly
influenced by the need to secure professional recognition or licence to practise status
via the award. Currently the University’s programmes secure recognition by more
than 70 professional bodies. From time to time there is, of course, the possibility of
tension between the university award regulations and those required by professional
recognising bodies. ASC has established a PSB Standing Group to advise on
resolution of any such differences and to ensure consistency of engagement with
these issues. Identification of any engagement with PSBs is an explicit requirement
of the PARM process (see 124).
(h)
Engage external examiners and advisors actively and effectively in our processes
and systems:
The University has continued to strengthen the role of external experts in contributing
to the enhancement of quality. An Institutional Code of Practice informed by the QAA
Code of Practice: Section 4 sets out the operational framework and requirements.
Input from, and responses to, external examiners remains a central feature in the
annual monitoring exercise and periodic programme review requires involvement of
external experts. More recent developments include institution-wide overview of
reports and the piloting a of discipline external advisor role (see below 131; 170; 175178; 179-188).
73.
ii
give more consideration centrally, and at a senior level, to reports by external agencies (e.g.
professional bodies) on its programmes and awards ;
Response
Since the previous institutional audit the University now has a requirement that formal
consideration is given by Academic Standards Committee to exchanges between
programmes and their professional subject bodies. Recognising, however, the variable level
of scrutiny expected by different professional bodies, a PSB standing Group was established
in 2003 to facilitate greater consistency of engagement (see below 149; 200).
74.
iii
take a more active part, as an institution, in the current national debate on academic standards
in higher education;
Page 29 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Response
National participation by University staff is extensive with senior staff closely involved in the
development of national policy in HE. For example, the Vice-Chancellor participates at the
highest levels of HEFCE (TQI, TQEC), UUK, LSC, UKOSA, HESDA and QAA, other senior
managers work with UCET, Parliamentary Select Committees and the QAA Steering Group
for Benchmarking; many staff have been members of QAA Subject Benchmarking Groups,
subject reviewers and auditors; many are active members of PSBs, LTSN Subject Centres
and the ILTHE. In addition, the University plays an active part in consultation exercises
initiated by HEFCE, QAA and other national and governmental agencies. Developments in
quality assurance initiatives in higher education give rise to periodic publication of proposals
from HEFCE, QAA and other national and governmental agencies that require comment or
other action on the part of the University. Whenever the time scale of response permits,
such developments take place via consultation with the Academic Board, Academic
Standards Committee and Faculty committees. Additionally, when it is appropriate, the
Heads of the Academic Division units are able to liaise (rapidly if necessary) with a wide
University community in formulating a position statement, comment or draft response. Even
in those circumstances when there is insufficient time for a lengthy institution-wide
engagement, full consideration is always given by the Directorate to any submission or
statement issued in the University’s name.
75.
iv
take steps to strengthen the overview taken of its policies, practices, and operations in respect
of collaborative provision, and their management and co-ordination at institutional level;
Response
An ICP on Collaborative Provision has been implemented, as mentioned above (43),
informed by the QAA Code of Practice: Section 2. Reporting of collaborative provision now
takes place in revised AME and PASC procedures; it is now a requirement that all
collaborative partners engage with the University’s policies and regulations.
76.
v
review regularly the ways it combines its devolution of responsibility for quality and standards
with its policy of increasing consistency and comparability of quality assurance practices;
Response
As has always been the case, ultimate responsibility for quality and standards resides with
the Academic Board. It is devolution of operational responsibility that occurs through
faculties. Since the last Quality Audit a series of developments has ensured planned
introduction of greater consistency and comparability of practices has not been
compromised by devolution of operational responsibility. The most significant of these
developments have been: the introduction of undergraduate and postgraduate regulations,
revised PARM procedures, current piloting of revised AME procedures, current piloting of a
'discipline external advisor’ role, the development of FASCs, the inclusion of all FASC chairs
as members of ASC. These all enhance what was already a very strong quality
management structure, as recognised by the previous Quality Audit and recent
Developmental Engagement reports. Quality management is built on a foundation of
centrally monitored University regulatory frameworks for all academic provision,
supplemented by guidelines and policies (such as the ICPs) containing principles and
recommendations of good practice which inform and guide practice, permitting some
flexibility in local engagement, depending upon disciplinary needs. This is a model that has
been seen to work effectively in the case of the QAA Code of Practice, where compliance
with precepts may be balanced with engagement with guidance, to allow particular local
requirements to be addressed appropriately.
77.
vi
implement and review periodically its new teaching and learning strategy and enhance ways of
disseminating good practice across the institution;
Page 30 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Response
The Head of Learning and Teaching co-ordinated the revision of the University's Learning
and Teaching Strategy, which was submitted to HEFCE in July 2002 (see below, 110).
Implementation of its provisions is guided by an Action Plan and continuously reviewed
through the Corporate Planning Statement mechanism. Each Faculty Learning and Teaching
Committee has assembled and approved its own Learning and Teaching Strategic Plan22
informed by the University’s Revised Learning and Teaching Strategy.23
The identification and dissemination of good practice is a major strand within the Revised
University Learning and Teaching Strategy; it is addressed in several connected ways:








78.
Faculties host seminars and workshops, presentations and demonstrations to share
examples of good practice;
Faculties are introducing dedicated Learning and Teaching Days to present evidence
of good practice. In 2002-03 MMU Business School extended this event to two days
and MMU Cheshire hosted its first Learning and Teaching Conference. (A regional
conference, hosted by all four Greater Manchester universities, entitled Quality
Assurance in Open and Distance Learning is planned for 27 April 2004);
The University’s Learning and Teaching Committee provides the forum for
identification of potential institution-wide good practice and for formulating policy.
Examples of good practice are disseminated in the in-house, termly publication
Learning and Teaching in Action24;
Practice and research based evidence is also captured in published texts within the
Open and Distance Learning series. Over the last three years twelve books have
been published;
A research database has been created and is currently being populated with
references to published research by MMU colleagues. This is now a research
management system (RMS), replacing a number of separate databases so that
research degree students and those managing research can use a central archive
which will, eventually, link to the finance management system to include information
on research income;
A showcase, consisting of eight 5-minute web-based multi-media presentations, that
provide an overview to examples of innovations in learning and teaching, is being
assembled. It will be possible to view/hear/read further information from presenters –
publications, extended interview, contact details etc;
The University has introduced a scheme for the appointment of Learning and
Teaching Fellows and Senior Learning and Teaching Fellows, to reward excellence,
research learning and teaching developments, encourage dissemination of good
practice, and (in the case of the Senior Fellows), take a strategic role, linking faculty
activities with the Learning and Teaching Unit;
Fellows and Senior Fellows play a significant role in the organisation of learning and
teaching seminars and workshops, which facilitate the sharing of experience and the
dissemination of good practice.
vii
revisit its quality assurance arrangements to ensure that research students' own reports on
their progress are available directly for University scrutiny, and are not subject to prior
monitoring and/or editing by supervisors;
22
URL 4
AP 2
24
URL 5
23
Page 31 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Response
New procedures for the annual monitoring and review of research students were introduced
in 2001-02. Students are now required to undergo an annual review carried out by an
independent reviewer to establish whether they are actively engaged with their research
programme, are making satisfactory progress with their research and maintaining frequent
and useful contact with the supervisory team. A copy of the independent reviewer’s report
from the annual review is provided to the student and to the supervisory team, as well as
being submitted to the chair of the Faculty (or Institute, in the case of the Institute of
Education) Research Degrees Committee and the Faculty (or Institute) Research
Administrator. This process is intended to identify areas where the committee might be able
to seek improvement in the support and general academic environment for research
students and their supervisors. FRDCs submit an annual monitoring report to the RDC,
which the chair of the RDC draws on when compiling the annual report and action plan for
Academic Board. An ICP on Postgraduate Research Programmes25 has been approved,
informed by the QAA Code of Practice: Section 1.
79.
viii
ensure that its official minutes and reports include sufficient information to enable the reasons
for decisions to be understood by later readers.26
Response
The University’s practice has been developed so that minutes give an informative guide to
discussion and decisions. An audit of current minutes of the University’s committees
concerned with quality and standards will show a fuller minuting style than was extant at the
time of the last Quality Audit. Annual training is available for committee secretaries and
guidelines on minuting practice are issued. Training and guidelines are also made available
to staff through professional associations such as the Association of University
Administrators. Minuting conventions are currently undergoing a periodic review to ensure
consistency of practice across the University and updated guidelines have been issued for
consultation.
80.
Although not a specific recommendation, it was also suggested that:
the University may wish to consider the desirability of keeping under review the work of the Research Degrees
Committee and its relations with the faculty research degrees committees.27
Response
The University has now established a Research Development Committee (RDevC) with
faculty-based equivalents. This has clarified the roles of quality assuring and monitoring
research activities (the Research Degrees Committee (RDC)) with strategic development
and management matters (RdevC). Terms of reference for University committees were
reviewed in 2002/03. Following the recent establishment of Research Institutes (see 57;
111; 249) a review of the operation of faculty research degrees and research development
committees in the light of that development will be undertaken during 2004, as a part of the
review of the Academic Board (see below 103).
25
URL 6
URL 3 para 142
27
URL 3 para 143
26
Page 32 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
81.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Other issues from the QAA Quality Audit Report:
Service Quality Reviews:28
Response
Since its comments in the Institutional Follow-up Response,29 the University has
reconsidered its views on the periodic quality review of the University’s support services, in
favour of effective annual quality procedures based, where appropriate, on an operating
statement submitted to the Directorate and the Board of Governors and a revision of the
Annual Monitoring Exercise (AME). For example, the Services Division publishes annually
a Services Development Plan and Operating Statement reporting on monitoring methods
and, where appropriate, the previous year's performance relative to targets. The Services
Director also conducts annual service quality reviews with each faculty.
Most academic-related service providers such as the Library and Student Services
undertake regular customer satisfaction surveys, and the quality of learning resources is
formally addressed in programme review and the Annual Monitoring Exercise (AME). Under
revised AME procedures, academic-related services will also report to the plenary session of
ASC, which evaluates the AME, and will be included in the annual ASC report.
82.
To quote again from the Audit Report:
the degree of local interpretation of institutional guidance is a matter the University needs to continue to address.
The University would also do well to satisfy itself that the lines of reporting from faculties to central committees,
and from central committees to faculties and course teams, are fully effective30
Response
Many more University-wide frameworks now exist to regulate, or give guidance on,
consistent and systematised procedures, including an integrated network of central and local
committee structures, providing much denser interaction between the centre and the
faculties. Examples of this are PASC, central and faculty academic standards, research
development, research degrees, and learning and teaching committees.
83.
The University's Institutional Follow-Up Response31 also addressed a series of other
issues referred to in the conclusions of the Quality Audit Report. There have been
many developments since the Quality Audit and the University's formal response,
with the result that several of these are no longer directly relevant to the current
situation or to future plans for enhancement.
QAA Subject Reviews
84.
Since the last major revision of the process in 1995, the University received 22
HEFCE Quality Assessments and QAA Subject Level Reviews, covering 24
discipline areas:32
28
URL 3 para 100
AP1, 3.8
30
URL 3 para 140.
31
AP 1
32
AP 4
29
Page 33 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
85.
In every case, the quality of provision was approved. We received only one Grade
Total under 20 (Food Science, 1997), and only one Aspect of Provision Graded
Profile of 2 (again for Food Science, in Curriculum Design, Organisation and
Content). This provision was extensively redesigned shortly after the review and has
since undergone two successful internal periodic reviews, which included external
scrutiny.
86.
Four subjects received Grade Totals of 20. Six subjects each received a Grade Total
of 21; eight subjects received 22; and three 23.33 Following these reviews,
programme teams were required to respond to the report recommendations in the
Annual Monitoring Exercise and at periodic review. Each Subject Review Report
was also considered by ASC, submitted to the Academic Board and to the Board of
Governors.
87.
In addition, an ASU Overview Report, analysing the Grade Profiles and comments
noted in all Subject Review Reports received so far, was considered by ASC in 2001,
and was subsequently circulated to faculties and departments for information. In
March 2003 an updated version, containing an analysis of all 22 Review Reports,
was circulated to faculties.34 The Report contributed towards the many ways in
which Subject Review supported the University’s longstanding and continuous
process of enhancing its provision. It also enabled us to link our existing student
support strategies to newly developing Government initiatives in areas such as
learning and teaching, widening participation, the drive to improve retention rates and
the emphasis on employability. Faculty Learning and Teaching Strategic Plans have
also been influenced significantly by the outcomes of these subject reviews.
88.
The Academic Board and ASC debated at some length how the University as a
whole might learn from the experience of subject reviews. This was a considerably
more difficult task than responding at discipline or programme level, because most of
the grading judgements and recommendations in the review reports applied to
specific issues that did not have institution-wide application or general relevance, as
is confirmed in the Overview Report. However, the development of the Learning and
Teaching Strategy (see below 110) and the review of the AME are two of the ways in
which the University has continued to address the issue of enhancing its academic
quality.
QAA Developmental Engagements
89.
33
34
In 2003 the University took part in two QAA Developmental Engagements, in Law
and History, as part of QAA transitional arrangements in the move to Institutional
Audit. After considerable discussion by the Law and History programme teams it
was decided, in both cases, to submit specially written self evaluation documents,
and to work closely with programme student representatives and with the Students'
Union. In the event, the experience was found to be extremely positive. The
constructive nature of the engagement, the emphases on testing institutional
procedures at discipline level, on the primacy of the student learning experience
(formally recognised by the invitation to submit a student written submission), and on
working in critical partnership with the University (particularly through the role of the
institutional nominee) were all found to be successful innovations.
AP 4
AP 7
Page 34 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
90.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Both the engagement events themselves and the subsequent reports, in judging
broad confidence in academic quality and standards, provided helpful commentary
on internal procedures, reassurance of much good practice in current quality
management and useful recommendations for improvement. In the case of the
History report these included several issues of possible institutional significance, for
example, the need for clarity in the articulation of intended learning outcomes with
the assessment strategy, the embedding of the QAA Code of Practice, and the
quality assurance of exchange programmes. These have, therefore, been discussed
by ASC and the Academic Board, as well as by the relevant FASC and the
programme teams concerned, as part of the AME.35
QAA Foundation Degree Reviews
91.
The University has received two Foundation Degree reviews, in Health and Social
Care, and New Media Design. The review reports have been received by ASC and
are currently being discussed by the relevant programme teams. Both included
collaborative provision, and so will also form part of the University's QAA audit of
collaborative provision, the date of which will be determined when the QAA
consultation exercise on the proposed Operational Description has been
completed.36
92.
The Overview Report on Foundation Degree Reviews (2003)37 included the two
reviews of the University's Foundation Degree provision published so far.
QAA Institutional Audit: England - key features and findings of the first audits38
93.
The review of the key findings of the first eight QAA Institutional Audits, published in
January 2004, noted that the institutions reviewed were actively and appropriately
engaging with the Academic Infrastructure, were using external participants in
internal arrangements, and that the majority currently lacked systems for collecting
and responding to feedback from employers. We would accept that such an
evaluation is a fair reflection of our own situation. With reference to the latter point,
an institution such as our own, with its strong vocational and professional emphases,
is always concerned to ensure that its engagement with employers remains effective.
We are continuing to develop these systems but it is worth noting that finding a
collective voice for a growing and diversifying SME sector remains challenging.
Nevertheless, continued use of Employers Advisory Groups by many programmes
make a very effective contribution to these aims. Employers are also represented on
the panels of most professional bodies that scrutinise many of our programmes.
QAA Overseas Audits
94.
MMU and the International Hotel Management Institute and the International Tourism
Institute, Lucerne, Switzerland received a QAA Audit in May 2002.39 The confirmed
Report noted the following:
35
Developmental Engagement Report: History
URL 7
37 URL 8
38 URL 9
39
URL 10
36
Page 35 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Reviewing carefully the available evidence, it is considered that the University's collaborative
arrangement with the Institute is basically sound and that there can be broad confidence in the
way that the University is exercising its stewardship of the quality and standards of its awards
offered in association with the Institute. In taking forward the collaborative partnership the
University will, however, wish to explore the means by which it might establish, where relevant,
a more participative involvement in respect of the Institute's development aspirations, thereby
ensuring that full consideration is given to the implications of these developments for the
security of the standards of the University's awards. The University will additionally wish to
satisfy itself that its collaborative activities adhere to QAA's Code.40
95.
The Report was discussed by ASC and the faculty concerned has spent much time
considering the recommendations and preparing its response. In particular, the
University's Institutional Code of Practice on Collaborative Provision, which was
under review at the time of the audit, has since been approved by the Academic
Board and incorporated into the Quality Assurance Manual. The University has
prepared a draft response41 which, at the time of writing has been approved by ASC.
96.
The University’s initial teacher training programmes (ITT) are regularly reviewed by
OFSTED.
97.
PSB/Accreditation visits are dealt with below (195-201).
40
41
URL 10, Para 55
AP 6
Page 36 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
2
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
INSTITUTIONAL PROCESSES FOR THE ASSURANCE OF ACADEMIC QUALITY
AND STANDARDS
Framework for managing quality & standards
98.
The University's mission statement commits us to achieve excellence in teaching,
learning, research and scholarship. This goal underpins our procedures for quality
management and enhancement and is linked to several of our core strategies: to
provide high quality learning opportunities; to offer a comprehensive range of
qualifications via high quality programmes subject to appropriate external scrutiny;
and to ensure a high quality educational experience. Our procedures address the
various requirements of the QAA's Academic Infrastructure, ensure academic quality
across the University, and combine consistent central regulation with flexible local
involvement sensitive to disciplinary requirements (see 76; 189-193).
99.
Three key documents regulate the quality management of the University's taught
provision:

The Quality Assurance Manual (QAM) which sets out criteria, systems and
processes, is produced by the Academic Standards Unit. An online version42 is
available on the University's Academic Division website and is updated at regular
intervals; the hard-copy version43 is updated annually;
The Regulations for Undergraduate Programmes of Study (currently in force), and
Regulations for Postgraduate Programmes of Study (approved in principle, for
implementation in 2004/05), which are the responsibility of the Registry;44
The Regulations for Academic Awards45 (currently in the process of extensive
revision to include the range of regulatory changes made by the University in the past
five years), which are also the responsibility of the Registry.


100.
The key features of the institutional framework and processes for assuring the
academic standards of our awards and the academic quality of our programmes are
as follows:
University level
101.
Policies and procedures relating to quality assurance are determined by the
Academic Board, which has responsibility for ensuring that the University's awards
are consistent and comparable in standard with similar awards throughout the UK.
The Academic Board and its committees
102.
The Academic Board has established the following committees:

Academic Standards Committee, which has delegated authority for the oversight of
all matters relating to the standards and quality of taught programmes and their
academic environment;

Research Degrees Committee which is responsible for the standard and quality of all
matters related to research degrees;
42
URL 11
AD 12
44 AD 17 and AD 14
45
AD 16
43
Page 37 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document

Research Development Committee which makes recommendations to the Academic
Board regarding matters of research policy, management and development;

University Academic Ethics Committee which advises the Academic Board on
policies relating to ethical issues (this committee is likely to have its remit extended to
include research misconduct);

the Honorary Awards Committee, which makes recommendations to the ViceChancellor as chair of the Academic Board, for the award of honorary degrees to
persons of distinction.
103.
The Vice-Chancellor, at a meeting of the Academic Board held on 5 November 2003,
established a working party to review the Board's role and that of its committees, to
consider whether the University's ability to respond to recent developments in higher
education might be better served by revising its structure.
104.
The Academic Standards Committee, the Research Degrees Committee and the
Research Development Committee are paralleled by Faculty equivalents. There are
arrangements at faculty level to address ethics on either a faculty-wide or
departmental basis.
105.
The Academic Standards Committee (ASC) has established three sub-committees:

Programme Approvals Sub-committee (PASC) which makes recommendations on
the approval in principle of new programmes and programmes subject to
review/modification and considers recommendations from Faculty Panels;

External Examiners Sub-committee which considers nominations and approves the
appointment of all external examiners, and advises ASC on related matters;

Learning and Teaching Sub-committee which identifies and disseminates good
practice, meets professional needs and fosters regional, national and international
collaboration;
106.
In addition, ASC has established a number of standing groups monitoring specific
aspects of quality management. Currently these include BTEC; Placement Learning;
PSBs and the University Regulations for Undergraduate and Postgraduate
Programmes. Single-task working groups are frequently commissioned to
recommend action on areas such as the QAA Code, Subject Benchmark Statements,
and annual monitoring procedures.
107.
The Academic Standards Unit, based within the Academic Division, provides
administrative support for the work of Academic Standards Committee, having
responsibility for the Quality Assurance Manual and for liaising with faculties to
ensure that quality management procedures are followed.
108.
The Programme Approvals Sub-committee also advises the Directorate on strategic
and resource issues relating to the approval in principle of new programmes or the
review of/modifications to existing programmes, to ensure that all support services
and other academic stakeholders have been involved.
Page 38 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
University Learning and Teaching and Research Strategies
109.
These two strategies are central to the University’s mission and to the management
of its academic standards and academic quality, so they are closely integrated.
Learning and Teaching Strategy
110.
The University revised its Learning and Teaching Strategy in July 2002.46 The
Strategy guides our planned developments for learning and teaching by means of
annual action plans. It consolidates earlier developments and is informed by the
judgements of subject review and other forms of external and internal scrutiny.
Among its aims are the identification and dissemination of good practice, academic
and professional development, pedagogic research and publication. Good practice is
stimulated by encouraging a wide range of projects and is identified in the key
elements of the quality assurance process, for example periodic review.
Dissemination within and across faculties is greatly facilitated by Senior Learning and
Teaching Fellows and a range of staff development events (see below 243-245).
Research Strategy
111.
In March 2003, following extensive consultation and detailed discussion at the
Research Development Committee, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor and the Director of
Research Development jointly produced a paper47 that was submitted to the
Academic Board, outlining a research strategy for the University based on a number
of fundamental principles, together with a series of recommendations for the future
management of Research, based on the establishment of a number of research
institutes (as noted in 57; 80; 249). Inter alia, this strategy reaffirmed the University’s
commitment to the underpinning of its major subject areas by high quality research
operating at least to national standards of excellence. From 2004 onwards the
Director is responsible for reporting on the implementation of the strategy and annual
performance of the Research Institutes against their own strategic plans to the
Research Development Committee and to the Academic Board.
Academic management
112.
46
47
Managerially, the overall responsibility for the University's Quality Assurance
procedures relating to academic provision lies with the Academic Director/ Deputy
Vice Chancellor who heads the University's Academic Division and chairs the
Academic Standards Committee. Senior staff in the Division comprise: the Academic
Registrar; the Head of Academic Standards; the Director of Research Development;
the Head of Management Information (MIDAS); the Head of Learning and Teaching;
the Head of Student Services; and the Head of Widening Participation. Central
implementation and monitoring of procedures for taught provision is conducted
through the Academic Standards Unit working with Deans, Heads of Departments (or
equivalent), Faculty Secretaries, chairs of FASCs, and other faculty academic and
administrative staff. Central implementation and monitoring of procedures for
research degree provision is conducted through the Research Development Unit
working with Deans, Heads of Departments (or equivalent), Faculty Secretaries,
chairs of FRDCs, and other faculty academic and administrative staff. Academic and
student regulatory matters are supervised by the Academic Registrar.
AP 2
AP 3
Page 39 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The quality management of central divisions
113.
The Academic Director/Deputy Vice-Chancellor submits a termly report to the
Academic Board and to the Board of Governors on academic developments,
research, faculty activities, student achievements, and senior staff appointments or
resignation. The report also incorporates a review of the work of the Academic
Division.
114.
The External Relations Director submits a termly report on the activities of the
Division to the Academic Board,48 the Directorate, and to the Board of Governors.
115.
The Directors of the three central service divisions (Finance, Human Resources, and
Services49) report regularly to the Directorate and to each Sub-Committee of the
Board of Governors (Audit, Finance and Human Resources, and Estates and
Services,).
116.
Units of central service divisions that provide learning support (for example the
Library, Media Services, Information Systems, Estates, Student Services) are also
integrated into academic quality management in the following ways:

Service providers must be consulted before approval in principle is agreed in the
programme approval and review process;
Learning resources (academic-related services) are one of the key items to be
evaluated and reported on by the panel at programme approval and review events,
which includes discussion with students and staff;
Learning resources are evaluated by programme teams during the Annual Monitoring
Exercise;
In revised AME procedures for 2003/04 central providers of academic-related
services will submit reports to the plenary session of ASC, which will be incorporated
into the ASC Report, circulated to all stakeholders.



117.
The Secretary’s Department is headed by the University Secretary and Clerk to the
Board of Governors. As University Secretary he is responsible to the ViceChancellor and as Clerk to the Governors is responsible to the Chairman of the
Board, acting on behalf of the Board.
Faculty and sub-faculty levels
118.
Each faculty has its own Faculty Board, chaired by the Dean, which reports to the
Academic Board. The Board’s membership includes all members of the faculty’s
senior management team, chairs of faculty sub-committees, representatives of
academic staff, students, and co-opted members. Its terms of reference include
implementation at faculty level of the policies determined by the Academic Board in
relation to teaching, research and a number of other areas.50 The Board also
receives the annually updated Faculty Strategic Plan (see above 54) before its
submission to the Academic Board. The Faculty Board sub-committees comprise:



Academic Standards
Learning and Teaching
Research Degrees
48
URL 12
AD 18
50
AD 3 pp 47-48
49
Page 40 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document

Research Development
119.
The Faculty Academic Standards Committee (FASC), oversees all matters relating to
the standards of taught programmes, their quality and the academic environment in
which they operate. Due to its size and the complexity of its provision, the Institute of
Education has its own committee for Academic Standards (IASC) which reports
through the MMU Cheshire FASC. FASCs operate according to terms of reference
determined by the Academic Board. All FASC chairs are members of ASC. The
committee structure works in parallel with the University management structure so
the Dean, the Faculty Secretary and the chair of FASC are pivotal links between the
systems, with support from ASU. Deans carry forward quality and resource issues to
the central divisions and monitor responses. FASCs oversee academic quality
management. Faculty Secretaries ensure that the University’s procedures are
followed, and attend monthly meetings with senior staff of Academic Division as
noted above (56).
120.
The Faculty Research Degrees Committee (FRDC) also reports to the University’s
Research Degrees Committee (RDC), and oversees all matters relating to research
degree provision, to ensure that the standards and quality of research awards are
maintained and the interests of research degree students are properly addressed.
The Institute of Education has its own Research Degrees Committee (IRDC), which
reports through the Faculty of Community Studies and Education FRDC. FRDCs
operate according to terms of reference and membership determined by the
Academic Board. All FRDC chairs are members of RDC. As with taught provision,
for research degree provision the committee structure works in parallel with the
University management structure so the Dean, the Faculty Secretary and the chair of
FRDC are pivotal links between the systems, with support from the RDU. Deans
carry forward quality and resource issues to the central University systems and
monitor responses. FRDCs oversee academic quality management. Faculty
Secretaries ensure that University procedures are followed.
121.
Quality assurance in academic departments (or the approved sub-faculty academic
management in faculties that have restructured) operates through line managers and
programme teams in collaboration with faculty administrators, either with FASC and
the Academic Standards Unit, or with FRDC and the Research Development Unit.
122.
All undergraduate and postgraduate programmes are managed by a Programme
Committee. Terms of Reference are determined by the Academic Board and must
be specified in the Definitive Document.51
123.
The awards for all taught programmes are determined by its Board of Examiners.
Boards of Examiners are constituted under the authority of the Academic Board.52
51
52
AD 12, Section C 16.2, Appendix Cxi. (Section 4.1.2)
AD 3, pp 54 – 56.
Page 41 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
PROGRAMME APPROVAL PROCEDURES
Programme Development Teams plan academic development proposals, consulting
with relevant internal and external stakeholders
FASCs/Deans consider Programme Approval Forms for new programmes (PAF/1)
ASC Programme Approvals Sub-committee (PASC) considers Faculty-approved
PAF/1s and either requests further information or reports to Directorate
Directorate considers PASC/1 reports (with PAF/1s appended) from PASC
summarising key strategic/resource issues and forwards to ASC those PAFs it
approves (with or without conditions)
Academic Standards Committee receives Directorate-approved PAF/1s (with PASC/1
report proforma) and decides on approval in principle
Faculty arranges consideration of fuller documentation: Programme Approval
documentation submitted to Dean and Faculty Secretary for approval and to ASU for
verification of adherence to MMU policies and regulations & QAA academic
infrastructure. Amended after scrutiny for submission to Programme Approval Panel.
Faculty Programme Approval Event organised: Panel with two external assessors
chaired by University/ASC Representative. Agenda designed to link with QAA
arrangements. Report template used to provide coverage of appropriate issues
PASC considers Programme Approval Event Report
(with Programme Specification appended)
Academic Standards Committee decides on recommendations of PASC: Approval
subject to next five-year review with or without conditions
Page 42 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
PROGRAMME REVIEW PROCEDURES
Programme Teams commence review process and plan academic development
proposals, consulting with relevant internal and external stakeholders
FASCs/Deans consider Programme Approval Forms for programmes subject to
Review (PAF/2)
ASC Programme Approvals Sub-committee (PASC) considers Faculty-approved
PAF/2s and either requests further information or reports to Directorate
Directorate considers PASC/1 reports (with PAF/2s appended if necessary)
summarising review proposals and relevant strategic/resource issues and forwards to
ASC those PASC/1s it approves (with or without conditions)
Academic Standards Committee receives Directorate-approved PASC/1 reports and
decides on approval in principle
Faculty arranges consideration of fuller documentation: Review documentation
submitted to Dean and Faculty Secretary for approval and to ASU for verification of
adherence to MMU policies and regulations and QAA academic infrastructure.
Amended where necessary after scrutiny for submission to Review Panel.
Faculty Review Event organised: Panel chaired by University/ASC Representative.
Minimum two external assessors. Standard agenda designed to link with QAA
arrangements. Report template used to provide coverage of appropriate issues.
PASC considers Review Event Report
(with updated Programme Specification appended)
Academic Standards Committee decides on recommendations of PASC: Approval
subject to next five-year review with or without conditions
Page 43 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Internal approval, review and modification processes for taught provision
124.
Internal procedures for the approval, review and modification of taught provision (PARM)
were revised two years ago, to take account of the QAA Code of Practice: Section 7 and
other aspects of the QAA’s Academic Infrastructure. They are explained in detail in the
Quality Assurance Manual.53 All programmes undergo periodic reviews (normally every
5 years). Programme approval and review involves two key stages: first, consideration in
principle at local and central levels (via FASC, PASC, the Directorate, and ASC) and
second, consideration by a Faculty Programme Approval or Review Panel. Within the
totality of this process there is a comprehensive engagement with the provision and the
quality assurance framework within which it must operate, including:

Peer review is conducted by external and internal members;

The scrutiny of initial proposals, to give a first stage 'approval in principle' ;

At an early stage in planning, consideration of resource issues, any potential overlap
with similar provision, and the expected market;

Consultation with external examiners, PSBs and students on the appropriateness of the
proposed curriculum development;

A second stage, involving an approval/review event that requires appropriate
engagement with the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications, Subject
Benchmark Statements, University policies and regulations and, if appropriate, PSBs;

The submission of a self evaluation document, Programme Specification and Definitive
Document (together with appendices including external examiner reports, AME
documentation and student feedback);54

An approval/review event based on:



the judgement of specialist external assessors;
determination of the academic viability and effectiveness of proposals;
the importance of the student learning experience, (including, in the case of a
review, a meeting between the panel and a representative group of students);

An agreed report, following the University template, recently modified to provide a
summary to be uploaded on to the HERO site for TQI publication;

Faculty oversight of the process through FASC;

Institutional oversight through PASC, and by regular PASC reports to ASC, the
Directorate, and to the Academic Board
125.
The standard agenda for Faculty Programme Review reflects the categories of a QAA
DAT SED and covers:
53
54
AD 12, Sections C 12, 13, 14
AD 12, Section C 13.5.4
Page 44 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document







Programme aims and learning outcomes
Programme content and assessment
Teaching and learning
Student admission and progression
Learning resources
Quality and standards
Examples of innovation and good practice
126.
Review events are chaired by an experienced member of staff from outside the faculty
responsible for the relevant programme. In addition to two external assessors the panel
normally includes the Dean, the Faculty Secretary, a FASC member and a
representative from the ASU. At the conclusion of the event, the panel submits a report
to ASC (via PASC) expressing a judgement on the programme and setting any
conditions and/or recommendations.
Modification to programmes
127.
55
Between periodic reviews programmes may, to maintain or enhance academic quality
and standards, seek approval to modify their provision. Proposals can take a variety of
forms, for example, slight regulatory changes, the introduction of new units, or more
significant proposals that would impact considerably on the student learning experience.
To reflect this, such proposals are grouped into several categories, according to their
scale and impact, with appropriate procedures for consideration and approval for each.
Relatively small amendments are considered under procedures for ‘minor faculty
modification’. Proposals for more significant amendment are dealt with either as ‘major
faculty modification’ or ‘ASC modification’, requiring fuller documentation and sometimes
an approval event. The selection of the appropriate procedure is explained in the
Quality Assurance Manual.55 All proposals must be approved and supported by an
external examiner. All are scrutinised by FASC and monitored by the ASU and ASC, to
ensure that University policies and regulations, the relevant Subject Benchmark
Statements and the FHEQ are complied with and that, where necessary, liaison has
taken place with PSBs. The Definitive Document is amended annually to take account
of any such modifications.
AD 12, Section C 14.
Page 45 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
ANNUAL MONITORING PROCEDURES 2003/2004
Programme Committee
September 2003
October November 2003


commences Programme Log for 2003/2004
agrees Quality Action Plan (QAP) for 2003/2004
Head
(or equivalent)
discusses QAPs with Programme Leaders
confirms or amends QAPs
produces Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) for 2003/2004
submits QIP to FASC and Dean




Dean of Faculty
NovemberDecember 2003


discusses 2003/04 QAPs with Head and confirms/amends
discusses 2003/04 QIP in context of Faculty Strategic Plan and confirms/amends
Chair of FASC
January 2004

reports to Dean on Faculty AME procedures for 2003/04
Dean of Faculty
February 2004


31 March 2004




May 2004

produces Overview Report (after receipt of confirmed QIPs and FASC Report)
submits Dean’s Overview and FASC Report to Chair of ASC for consideration and to
Faculty Board and FASC for information
Academic Standards Committee
Plenary Meeting with Faculty Secretaries considers
Deans' Overview Reports
FASC Reports
Report from Students’ Union
Reports from Central Service Providers
Chair of Academic Standards Committee
produces Draft Report on Annual Monitoring Exercise, including:






2 June 2004



23 June 2004


Summary of Outcomes of AME
Issues from SU and Service Provider Reports
Matters of institutional significance/trends/generic themes
Summary of findings from External Examiners’ Reports
Examples of good practice
Recommendations for enhancement
Academic Standards Committee
discusses draft Report on Annual Monitoring Exercise
decides on recommendations for enhancement
submits report to Academic Board
Academic Board
considers report from ASC on Annual Monitoring Exercise
decides upon recommendations for enhancement


Academic Division
circulates approved report on Annual Monitoring Exercise to all Stakeholders
publishes report on MMU website

Directorate
considers resource/strategic issues raised by annual monitoring report
June - July 2004
June - July 2004
Page 46 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Annual monitoring and evaluation of taught provision56
128.
As noted above (124-126) a key set of data considered by the panel at a programme
review event is that relating to the Annual Monitoring Exercise (AME) from the previous
two years, including relevant Quality Action Plans (QAP), external examiners' reports
and student feedback.57 The AME has been subject to minor revision since the 1999
Quality Audit, and many aspects have been praised as models of good practice in
external reviews (the QAA Quality Audit Report and, most recently, the Developmental
Engagement Reports). However, the University is currently piloting more significant
revisions to the AME as part of its commitment to enhancement, as described in 161167 below, and has introduced revised FASC and Quality Improvement Plan (QIP)
procedures for all faculties in 2003/04.
129.
At the beginning of each academic year programme committees evaluate the quality of
their programme by scrutinising the previous academic year's performance. They also
plan its enhancement for the current academic year and consider longer term
developments leading up to the next periodic review. This is summarised in a QAP. A
key part of this exercise is the monitoring of action, particularly responses to:

comments in external examiners' reports relating to the integrity of the assessment
process and the standard of awards;
issues raised in student feedback;
significant trends identified in progression data;
key University policies or initiatives (for example, equal opportunities).



130.
These responses are particularly important to ensure ‘loop closing’, by feeding back the
results of action taken to stakeholders (see below, 184; 210).
131.
Heads of Department (or equivalent) then discuss the QAPs with their programme
leaders. Once approved, these are submitted to the Dean, together with an overview of
all programmes within their area of responsibility (the QIP). The Dean discusses the
documentation with the author of the QIP and agrees any necessary amendments. The
Chair of FASC reports on the conduct of the faculty's AME procedures (including
comments on any ODL and collaborative provision). The Dean then submits a faculty
overview, together with the FASC report, to ASC. After a Plenary Session of ASC which,
for the first time in 2003/04, will include contributions from the Students' Union and
academic-related central service providers, the Chair of ASC reports to the Academic
Board confirming satisfactory completion of the AME and recommending actions
planned in response to issues raised, to enhance quality. The confirmed report will then
be circulated back down through the system to provide feedback to all levels. The
Directorate subsequently considers resource and strategic issues raised by the report.
56
57
AD 12, Section C15
AD 12, Section 13.5.4
Page 47 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Internal systems for the management of information and their contribution to the effective
oversight of quality and standards of taught provision
132.
An integral part of the AME is the collation and analysis of sources of evidence to
provide reliable performance indicators for academic planning, and to judge the success
of programme management. The University's AME procedures require programmes
formally to address key issues raised in external examiners' reports, to respond
appropriately, and to inform the external examiners of that response. They must also
poll student opinion and, again, respond appropriately, informing students of the
response. The University regards this as the minimum requirement in the secure
oversight of quality and standards.
133.
The third key source of information available to programme teams is statistical data
supplied by MIDAS. The University recognises that addressing this data at programme
level has not been straightforward in the past. Hitherto a relatively narrow range of
centrally held data has been made available to programme teams as part of the AME
process, however, increasingly it has proved to be insufficiently sophisticated to serve
the needs of detailed review. A Monitoring Statistics Working Group was, therefore,
established by ASC to consider improvements and to suggest possible revisions to the
presentation of data and the ways in which programme teams engaged with it. The
Working Group submitted a series of recommendations to ASC in 2003 (see 226),
although this work has now been somewhat overtaken by events.
134.
The University is moving towards the provision of much improved statistical data to
programme teams through the development of the TARDIS system and particularly by
its current major project, the acquisition of a new student record system for
implementation in 2004/05 (see below, 217- 225). An important part of the AME review,
discussed below (161- 167) is the involvement of programme leaders in the process of
determining improved programme-level information requirements, and the provision of
training in its use and application (see below 221- 2).
The regulation and monitoring of research degree provision
135.
58
59
The quality management of research degree provision is monitored by the Academic
Board, through the Research Degrees Committee structure (see above, 120).
Procedures regulating research degrees conform to the University’s ICP on Research
Degree Programmes,58 which complies with the precepts of the QAA Code of Practice:
Section 1. They are published in the Regulations for Research Degrees59 covering, for
example definitions of awards and programmes in approval, enrolment, registration,
approval of projects, group projects, transfer and withdrawal, appeals and complaints,
appointment of the Director of Studies and the Supervisory Team, supervision and
examination. Under the regulations, the Research Degrees Committee of the Academic
Board is deemed to be the relevant Board of Examiners, making recommendations to
the Academic Board for the conferment of research awards.
URL 6
AD 15
Page 48 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
136.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
As discussed above (78) the RDC has introduced revised monitoring and review
procedures for research students, requiring that they should have an annual review
interview with an independent reviewer, in the Annual Assessment and Monitoring
Evaluation Review (AAMER) process. Due to the diverse nature of research activity,
each FRDC uses a basic pro-forma designed by RDC, tailored to its own requirements.
The RDC receives an annual monitoring report from each FRDC, including statistical
data, compiled from the information received from the AAMER. The RDC then reports to
the Academic Board on the annual research student monitoring exercise.
Strengths and limitations of current institutional arrangements for the assurance of
quality and standards:
Strengths
137.
The University takes its responsibility to uphold academic standards and to provide high
quality learning experiences for its students very seriously. This section selects
particular features of the current institutional arrangements for assuring quality:
138.
The Quality Assurance Manual60, providing a comprehensive description of quality
management procedures and guide to their use, regularly updated by the Academic
Standards Unit.
139.
The establishment and gradual implementation of common undergraduate and
postgraduate regulations (as noted in 72 (c) above).
140.
Its integrated network of central and local committees overseeing the implementation of
its quality management, particularly two bodies introduced since the last QAA Quality
Audit:

The Programme Approvals Sub-Committee, which has permitted a much enhanced
institution-level monitoring, a more consistent and systematic discussion of academic
planning, and an increased awareness of overlap of provision and the potential problems
of competing claims to 'ownership' of discipline areas and award titles;

The FASCs and IASC, formalising local involvement in quality management, including
programme leaders, with their invaluable experience of the practical impact of
procedures 'on the ground', and enhancing the University's quality management at
faculty level;
141.
The Annual Monitoring Exercise (AME), an extremely thorough set of procedures,
consistently praised by external panels, which has evolved as a result of debate and
reflection by practitioners and stakeholders over many years, resulting in incremental
improvement rather than radical change, based on the principles of:




Programme-level engagement
Self-evaluation
Focus on enhancement
Peer review
60
AD 12
Page 49 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document


The fundamental role of external examiners
Engagement with sources of evidence as performance indicators
142.
The widespread local ownership of the commitment to improve quality and the
associated management procedures, permitting a devolved but secure process that has
the confidence of those operating it.
143.
The work of the University's programme leaders, the key personnel in the routine
operation of quality management, the maintenance of a high standard for our students'
learning experience, and enhancement of academic provision. The University provides
staff development for newly appointed programme leaders and is currently piloting
training in their use of the TARDIS system.
Areas currently identified for improvement
144.
The University has identified limitations in certain aspects of its quality management
procedures and is currently piloting changes. The most important of these are:
145.
The effectiveness of the AME depends upon reliable and accessible information, and a
number of initiatives are seeking to enhance this, for example, progression and
completion statistics could be used more effectively in programme monitoring. This will
be significantly improved by replacing the HEMIS student record system, as is discussed
below (217- 225).
146.
The polling of student opinion is a requirement for all programmes, and is achieved in
diverse ways, depending on the needs of the programme. The HEFCE-sponsored
Student Feedback Project Steering Group identified the primary purpose of internal
feedback systems as contributing to the management and enhancement of quality,61 and
the University is determined to achieve this more systematically by improving its own
internal procedures. A new feedback model is being piloted in the MMU Business
School during the 2003/04 academic year, which will then be evaluated with the intention
of rolling out a University-wide scheme. The pilot includes regular online polling and is
intended to test more pro-active engagement with the whole student learning
experience. It will include academic provision and learning support services, and
evaluate procedures for the collation, analysis and publication of the feedback, as
discussed below (210).
147.
For all its undoubted strengths, the University's AME procedures gather monitoring
information more effectively than they communicate feedback back to staff at
programme level. The review of AME, currently being piloted, will address this, as
discussed below (161-167).
148.
Peer support: the observation of teaching is one of a number of important strategies in
the professional development of staff which have a direct bearing on the management of
quality. In 2002/03 the University agreed a new policy on peer support, to be introduced
across the institution in 2003/04, as discussed below (246).
61
URL 13, para 15
Page 50 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
149.
PSB reports are responded to as part of periodic review and AME procedures. They are
also discussed at institutional level, but engagement with PSB recommendations could
be undertaken in a more systematic manner, and to address this, ASC has established a
PSB Standing Group (as discussed in 73 and 200).
150.
The external activities of staff could be more systematically recorded at institutional level
and used to inform staff and disciplinary engagement. This is under discussion by the
Human Resources Division (72 (e); 245).
151.
Any large organisation faces the twin challenges of reacting in due time to the need for
change, and in consistent compliance with procedures. The University accepts that it
also faces these challenges and deals with them.
Intentions for the enhancement of quality and standards
152.
The University intends to develop a number of initiatives to enhance its management of
quality and standards for the immediate future, covering approximately the next three
years. Paragraphs 144-151 have identified several of these. Further work, some of
which has already commenced, includes:
Faculty restructuring
153.
The institution has maintained a traditional faculty/departmental structure since the
inception of the Polytechnic. The stability and continuity of structures has enabled the
intellectual energy and drive of academic staff to be devoted to academic and student
concerns. However in a limited number of areas there has been some development of
the structural forms within faculties. In both the Faculty of Art and Design and the
Faculty of Management and Business (now retitled Manchester Metropolitan University
Business School, MMUBS), changes in the curriculum portfolio and developments within
the component sub-disciplines led to a blurring of the boundaries between existing
departments. For example, within MMUBS, the distinction between the essentially interdisciplinary Departments of Business Studies and Management became steadily less
clear, while large and coherent groups of human resource management staff coalesced
in both departments. Reorganisation into a matrix structure, with academic staff
clustered by academic teaching and research interest and programmes drawing on staff
from across the respective faculty, has allowed both the Faculty of Art and Design and
MMUBS to sharpen the focus of its teaching and research, whilst providing a more
coherent portfolio of taught programmes.
Page 51 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
154.
The Institute of Education is also undergoing structural change. With the merger of the
Crewe + Alsager College with the University in 1992 the University had two significant
Schools of Education, providing QTS through both BEd and PGCE qualifications. For
students, once recruited onto the appropriate programme, and for staff clearly located
within the structure at either Didsbury or Crewe, the existence of two parallel but
different structures was not a problem. However, for partnership schools, particularly in
geographical areas where students from both campuses could undertake their school
experience, the lack of a single University BEd and PGCE was, at least, confusing. An
overarching Institute of Education has therefore been created, and new parallel and
identical programmes have been developed. Delivery is, and will continue to be, from
two sites, but a single philosophy, set of values and curriculum underpin the University
offering. Quality processes, largely interacting with the TTA and OFSTED, have been
put in place, and internal structures are still developing. The University is confident that
it can better ‘punch its weight’ in teacher education and demonstrate more clearly the
comparability of standards through a combined Institute, rather than through separate
campus-based provision.
155.
The University is aware that developments such as those noted above carry with them
both the opportunity for enhancement of provision but also a potential risk to the clarity
of management structure arising out of change. It undertook, therefore, extensive
preparation and consultation at the planning stage, and great efforts have been made to
assure the maintenance of effective, robust and secure quality management as the
exercise approaches completion. For example:

To ensure that key roles and responsibilities identified in the 'traditional' structure, such
as those performed by the Head of Department, are still undertaken properly by
equivalent senior staff, and that the alternative arrangements are approved,
documented, monitored and, above all, are clear, both to those directly involved and to
all stakeholders;

To ensure that the generation and use of information for the monitoring of quality and
standards, which has been based on traditional internal structures, is not compromised
by the new structures

A commitment by ASC to satisfy itself, through the AME process, that assurance of
quality is no less effective under the new arrangements.
Estate Strategy
156.
The University has, since its inception as a Polytechnic in 1970, been based on several
sites. Successive mergers added to the number, so that, from 1992 there have been
seven major sites, many of them comprising several buildings. The strategy up to the
late 1990s was to make faculties site-based, thus minimising student travel and giving a
discipline-based ‘character’ to each site. Each site became virtually self-contained with
library, IT, refectory as well as learning and teaching and research accommodation.
Page 52 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
157.
A radical re-appraisal of the early estate strategy identified the weaknesses of multiple
sites, in terms of academic development and student satisfaction as well as cost.
Separate sites inhibit cross-site developments, and therefore cross-disciplinary initiatives
are not encouraged. Students based on campuses away from the All Saints centre felt
marginalized and comparatively deprived away from the central Students Union, the
Library and sports facilities. In terms of cost, each main site has certain irreducible fixed
costs, for maintenance, cleaning, security, IT support, etc. The considerable core
infrastructure savings possible through rationalisation can be added to the front line
academic support and delivery processes to the benefit of both staff and students. For
example, some rationalisation of the estate will permit the reallocation of resources to
improve access to facilities such as the Library at weekends and during vacations and
extend access to other specialist facilities.
158.
In July 2001,The University Board of Governors therefore adopted a revised Estate
Strategy, which planned greater concentration onto a fewer number of sites: in
Manchester probably two, at All Saints and at Didsbury; in Crewe and Alsager (MMU
Cheshire) on the Crewe campus. The strategy covers at least a ten year period and
involves very significant capital investment. Decisions to implement the strategy have
been taken, and work is in train to deliver the early stages of the outcome. The Board of
Governors has taken a close interest in the development of the strategy, and has
insisted that the programme is incremental, with fixed points at which initial decisions
can be re-affirmed and to authorise the succeeding stage.
159.
Again, this revised strategy involves the management of significant change and, for
those directly involved, considerable upheaval, although it will provide progressively
better facilities for staff and students, facilitate academic co-operation in teaching and
research, and ultimately reduce costs. Much preparation and planning has been
involved in each of the stages completed so far, currently under way, or planned for the
future. To provide just two examples:

The recent move by the School of Law from the Elizabeth Gaskell campus to the new All
Saints West building on the All Saints Campus, has resulted in a significant improvement
in the learning environment of all concerned. Nevertheless, the ancillary planning
(moving the Law Library to the All Saints Library, ensuring that services on the All Saints
site could cope with the influx of several hundred new users, relocating the School of
Law in a different faculty, moving the new Department of Physiotherapy into the space
vacated by the School) were well considered and very effective;

The current redevelopment of the John Dalton Campus for the Faculty of Science and
Engineering will greatly improve the learning environment for teaching and research, and
detailed forward planning followed by strenuous operational efforts made by the Dean
and her staff, in close co-ordination with the Services Division, are ensuring that
academic quality for current staff and students is not compromised during the inevitable
upheaval.
The Strategy document is due to be updated early in 2004.
Page 53 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Information management
160.
The University wishes to improve the management of the information generated at all
levels of the institution, and has already commenced the enhancement of its information
management, for example by planning for a new student record system in 2004/05
(223). The appointment of an Internet Manager and faculty officers comprising the Web
Development Team is resulting in a rationalisation of the University website, introducing
a consistent presentation together with guidelines on webpage design,62 although the
range and number of restricted-user sites and intranets, not all based on compatible
platforms, is an indication of the size of the task ahead. The University has approved an
Information Strategy63 and has established a Steering Group (chaired by the Deputy
Vice-Chancellor) to oversee its implementation, which has now begun work, as
discussed below (338 - 341). This issue will be of major significance for us over the next
few years, not merely to ensure the accuracy and consistency of information, but also to
ensure compliance with legislation such as the Data Protection Act and the Freedom of
Information Act and to ensure that the University maximizes the value to it of the
information it holds.
Review of Annual Monitoring Exercise (AME)
161.
As noted above (128), although subject to minor revision, the annual monitoring
procedures have remained much as those described in the 1999 Quality Audit, based as
they were then on the ‘Red Book’: Framework for Quality. This has now evolved into the
Quality Assurance Manual. However, for a number of reasons, the University has been
debating more radical change. These reasons include:

Recommendations for improvement in subject review reports, which tended to be
directed at areas outside the formal quality assurance process, focusing particularly on
consistency in operation between programmes rather than defined weaknesses within a
programme, in areas such as student feedback, staff development, and quality
enhancement;

AME is still based on QAA Core Aspects of Provision, with self-grading. Although this
served the University well in providing a good basis for self-evaluation, it no longer
synchronises with QAA methodology;

A perception that there is insufficient distinction between Core Aspects, and some
confusion about categorising issues;

Although there is widespread agreement that the process is extremely secure, it can
also be very time consuming and paper driven, attempting to combine the functions of
monitoring, evaluation and audit in one procedure;

There is a sense that considerable information is necessarily sent up through the tiers of
the system, with less consistent feedback to programme teams (as noted in 147);

New requirements formally to address equal opportunities and race equality policies;
62
63
URL 14
URL 15
Page 54 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document

The Quality Audit Report noted that key outcomes might become attenuated in the
application of the various stages of the process.
162.
ASC therefore established a Working Party, with representatives from each faculty, to
review procedures and to make recommendations. After widespread consultation a
report suggesting a proposed revised approach was submitted to ASC and the
Academic Board. The Board accepted the suggested approach but resolved to pilot the
revised procedures in 2003/04 using a selected number of programmes, together with
amendments to the upper tiers of the AME to be applied across the University, with the
primary objectives of:






Improving quality management;
emphasising action-based enhancement;
separating the evaluatory from the monitoring/audit aspects;
improving the use of progression statistics;
incorporating FASCs into the process (which previously had responsibility for oversight
of the AME in their terms of reference, but no formal role in the process);
Producing an ASC AME report highlighting institution-wide and/or generic issues, noting
common themes in external examiner reports, including input from the Students' Union
and academic-related central service providers, and providing recommendations for
action;
Taking advantage of lessons learned from the pilots to confirm the final scheme.
163.
At programme level, the pilot consists of two elements:


evaluation, based on a brief but focused action plan;
monitoring, based on a programme log, ensuring that programmes maintain full
documentation, audited at regular intervals.64
164.
The pilot proposals were to be co-ordinated with recommendations from another ASC
working group that considered revisions to programme progression and completion
statistics, although the work of that group has now been somewhat overtaken by events
(see 133; 221- 2). The University is also currently evaluating choices for a
comprehensive new student record system to replace the existing HEMIS system, to be
introduced in 2004/05, as discussed below (223).
165.
The pilot will be evaluated at the end of the 2003/04 academic year and, after debating
possible revisions, ASC will consider whether to recommend to the Academic Board the
rolling out of improved procedures across the University as a whole. So far, although in
its early stages, the Interim report to ASC was very encouraging.

64
Programme logs are based on existing good practice in the Faculty of Art and Design, and were praised
in their TQA Review (QME gaining a grade 4).
Page 55 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
166.
Feedback from the pilot teams has been very positive. It suggests that
recommendations will focus on ensuring that the revised procedures address the
achievement of programme learning outcomes, and that standard templates are devised
for the programme log, to ensure a properly documented engagement with, and
response to, information basic to the monitoring of the programme and the verification of
its good standing.
167.
Evaluation will also consider how good practice is formally documented and
disseminated, how procedures ensure that feedback to stakeholders is systematic and
consistent, and whether current QIP, FASC and Dean's report templates should be
modified. Consideration is also being given to the introduction of guidelines on good
practice for quality management at unit level.
Comparability between similarly titled awards offered in different faculties
168.
The University is developing a number of procedures to assure comparability of quality
between similarly titled awards offered in different faculties. Although this was
mentioned in the Quality Audit Report,65 external examiners and external subject
reviewers, in comparing the standards of our awards with similar provision elsewhere,
have never noted it as an issue of concern. The most significant response so far has
been the introduction of common regulations for undergraduate and postgraduate
programmes of study.
169.
Also, partly due to the work and experience of the Programme Approvals SubCommittee (noted in 140 above), areas of similar provision no longer act in isolation, as
new procedures for programme approval, review and modification require engagement
with other providers within the discipline, often in other faculties. After considerable
discussion about subject liaison, formal, permanent arrangements have been considered
impractical. However, the new PARM procedures have resulted in healthy engagement,
and some improvement in managing the issue of 'territoriality' (the 'ownership' of
discipline areas and award titles). In those few areas where PARM procedures are
unable to resolve different views on ownership, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, on behalf of
the Directorate, holds a meeting with the parties to agree a resolution.
170.
The University has addressed the issue in other ways. For example, membership of
approval or review panels now routinely includes representatives from similar
programmes elsewhere in the institution, to consider comparability. Where appropriate,
senior staff with extensive experience of comparable programmes may be invited to
chair panels. Also, the University is beginning to pilot a new form of external
engagement, the appointment of discipline external advisors (DEA), with a role clearly
distinguished from that of external examiner. The DEA will be asked to monitor areas of
similar provision, to ensure consistency of the student experience and comparability of
programme development, within the framework of relevant QAA Subject Benchmark
Statements. Although in its early stages, this is a practical development with
considerable potential, as the initial experience has demonstrated.
65
URL 3, para 137
Page 56 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
171.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
In a related issue, negotiations have commenced to investigate the feasibility of
developing a common regulatory structure for the University’s three separate large
modular programmes (based, for entirely historical reasons, in different faculties). These
have begun very constructively, with an intended starting date of 2005/06 for the two
Manchester based programmes. The MMU Cheshire programme will, it is hoped, be
included in due course.
Equal opportunities
172.
A major challenge for the University's management of change is the implementation of
our equal opportunities, race relations and DDA polices. We have already drawn up and
circulated institutional action plans linked to these policies, which address legislative
requirements and the QAA Code of Practice: Section 3. A Diversity Forum, open to all
staff and chaired by the Vice-Chancellor, met on a termly basis between 2001 and 2003
to discuss equal opportunities issues, and a number of academic departments have
instigated diversity audits. The policies are gradually becoming embedded in institutional
quality management procedures, and we have established an Impact Assessment
Working Group and an Equal Opportunities Action Group to monitor delivery and
achievement. The fundamental changes to the University's culture and working
practices that must ensue have yet, we believe, to be fully developed, but we are under
no illusions about the fundamental importance of this work. We have, for example,
introduced compulsory staff development in these areas, which is a major change in
University policy (see 238).
Staff development
173.
The University is currently considering the enhancement of a number of other staff
development areas. Examples include: more centrally planned induction and support for
associate staff and postgraduate students who teach and assess (to supplement the
programme-based and departmentally-based arrangements currently operating); the
introduction of an annual forum for external examiners; training for academic staff to
encourage them to undertake external examining as part of their engagement with their
own discipline (see 72 (e); 150; 245); and improved support for programme leaders in
the use of TARDIS in programme monitoring (see below 222).
Page 57 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Widening participation
174.
We have a longstanding commitment to the linked initiatives of widening participation,66
ReachOut and improving student retention, which are central to our mission and core
strategies, and few issues are of more importance in planning for the future. The
University achieves its HEFCE benchmarks,67 but will not easily be satisfied and is
developing further initiatives in these areas, for example the Opportunity Bursary
Scheme and the consideration of institution-wide guidelines on good practice for pastoral
care (see 299)68. ASC is considering the development of more flexible learning patterns
(see below 252). Widening participation is centrally co-ordinated from a unit within
Academic Division, and we have a host of central and local projects addressing
retention. However, these issues are of such significance that it is worth considering
whether they are sufficiently well integrated into the University's formal committee
structure. The Vice-Chancellor’s recently established Academic Board working party to
review the Board's composition and terms of reference (see above, 103) will provide an
opportunity to address this.
External participation in internal review processes for taught provision
175.
As has already been noted, external specialists have a significant role in the University's
internal quality procedures. This takes three distinct forms:


External examiners (see below 179 - 188);
Discipline external advisers - currently being piloted to assure the comparability of
academic standards and quality across similar provision within the University (see
above, 170);
External assessors.

176.
Two external assessors, who are authorities in their field, are required for each approval
and review event.69 Assessors are provided with advance copies of full event
documentation, and may also ask for additional information. They play a lead role as
panel members in approval/review events, directing the interrogation of documentation,
the discussions with students (review) and programme teams, and playing a primary part
in the formulation of judgements reached. In particular, external assessors ensure that
academic quality and academic standards are appropriate, within the guidance of
relevant components of the QAA Academic Infrastructure.
177.
In certain cases the University requires external assessors to be additionally qualified,
for example in the case of professionally accredited programmes,70 if ODL is a major
component of a programme,71 in the case of large, complex or multidisciplinary
provision,72 or to provide employer representatives in the case of Foundation Degree
programmes.73
66
AP 8
URL 1
68
AP 9 Section 5
69
AD 12 Section C 13.4.3 iii
70
AD 12 Section C 13.4.4 i.
71
AD 12 Section C13.4.4 iii
72
AD 12 Section C13.4.4 ii.
73 AD 12 Appendix C xix
67
Page 58 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
178.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
When events are held simultaneously with PSB reviews, professional representatives
are full panel members.
External examiners and their reports
179.
External examiners have a key role in the maintenance and enhancement of the
University's academic standards and quality. They are the guarantors of the academic
standard of our awards. Their duties are specified in the Institutional Code of Practice:
External Examiners74, which was drawn up in response to the QAA Code of Practice:
Section 4, and will be revised when the recently published draft revision of that section is
confirmed. External examiners are nominated by undergraduate and postgraduate
programme or discipline areas, and then undergo a thorough approval process at faculty
and institutional levels. The ICP requires that they have experience and expertise
appropriate to what is to be examined.75 Induction and support is provided by both
central documentation and local engagement. Institutional processes ensure consistent
central regulation, whilst programme teams engage with specific disciplinary
requirements. The ICP on Collaborative Provision76 (see above, 43) also recommends
that the same external examiners have responsibility for both campus-based and
collaborative provision.
180.
External examiners are required by the ICP to report on whether the standards set are
appropriate for the awards; whether the standards of student performance are
comparable to similar programmes elsewhere, and whether processes for assessment,
examination and the determination of awards are sound and fairly conducted.77 They
thereby safeguard the integrity and quality of our assessment procedures. External
examiners play a fundamental part in the approval of assessment methods, their
marking and moderation. In June 2003, Academic Board approved the piloting of
regulations for a University scheme for the moderation of summative assessments,
which is to be implemented during the current academic year. External examiners
attend the final Examination Board, and are required to approve the decisions of all
Boards at which recommendations for final awards are made. In addition, other visits by
arrangement with programme teams are common practice in some disciplines, for
example science and engineering, where engagement with students over project work
can take place.
181.
In their annual report, external examiners are asked to follow the University's template to
ensure that key aspects are covered. These include: commentary on the standards of
the award; standards achieved by students; performance in relation to comparable
provision elsewhere; strengths and weaknesses of student performance; the quality of
knowledge and skills demonstrated, the structure; organisation, design and marking of
assessments; the quality of teaching; and the implementation of assessment
regulations.78
74
AD 12 Section C 19.3
AD 12 Section C 19.3.17
76
AD 12 Section C 22.10.1
77
AD 12 Section C 19.3.3
78
AD 12 Section C 19.3. 27-30; Appendix Cxvi
75
Page 59 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
182.
The report template has been revised for 2003/04, so that it includes an explicit request
to comment on the achievement of the programme’s intended learning outcomes. The
revised format also includes the TQI report summary template as an appendix, to be
completed by all external examiners. External examiners will, therefore, submit their
own summary that will then be uploaded on to the HERO site. For the first time external
examiners will be able to submit their reports online, greatly facilitating the TQI process.
183.
Reports are received by the Faculty Secretary and circulated to relevant programme
leaders, the Dean, the Head of Department (or equivalent), other faculty staff as
appropriate, and the Academic Division.
184.
The formal response to reports, compiled by programme teams, are a primary source of
evidence for periodic review, external review processes, and annual monitoring. They
form a particularly important component of the AME process, as described above (129;
132), with systems in place to ensure that key issues are addressed, documented, and a
satisfactory response communicated back to the external examiner.79 However, partly
due to the sheer size of the institution and the risk of losing significant issues in a mass
of generalisation, the University has not, hitherto, attempted to compile a synopsis of
generic issues raised in the 600 plus annual reports. In 2003/04 this will, however, be
undertaken for the first time in a report to ASC, as part of the piloting of revised annual
monitoring procedures.
185.
Recently there has been a shift towards the appointment of discipline/subject based
external examiners rather than by programme. This ensures that, when provision is
offered across a number of programmes, all students taking particular units are the
responsibility of the same examining team, both internal and external, to assure
consistency of standards. The University recognises that programmes should have at
least one external examiner who is able to take a programme or discipline-level
overview. Some programmes already appoint chief external examiners we are currently
considering procedures to apply this consistently across the institution.
186.
In addition to this primary function, programmes are also required to maintain close
relations with their external examiners for several other purposes directly linked to the
quality assurance or enhancement of provision. For example, external examiners must
be consulted at the approval in principle stage of periodic review and must also approve
programme modification to ensure that proposed curriculum development at unit level is
of appropriate standard and retains the quality of the award (see above 124-126).
187.
External examiners are given specific rights under the University’s regulations to ensure
that they can discharge their functions properly and raise formally matters of concern to
them.80
79
80
AD 12 Section C 19.3.32
AD 12 Section C 19.3.5-11
Page 60 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
188.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
External examiners are also appointed for the assessment of research degree students.
One appropriately qualified external examiner, appointed by the RDC, takes part in the
assessment of each candidate, (two if the candidate is a member of staff) together with
independent internal examiners. In the case of the submission of a thesis, each
examiner submits an independent preliminary report and then participates in the oral
examination of the candidate. In addition, and entirely separate from the external
examiner, if appropriate, specialist external supervisors may also be appointed to a
research degree student’s supervisory team.
External reference points
The QAA Academic Infrastructure
189.
The University has engaged with each component of the QAA's Academic Infrastructure
as these have been developed. This engagement is integrated into the University’s
quality procedures.81
190.
Academic staff engage with the Academic Infrastructure in a variety of ways. The full
engagement the University has adopted at institutional level (identified as a feature of
good practice by the Law Developmental Engagement Team82) means that individual
members of staff are not expected to be familiar with the individual precepts of each
section of the Code of Practice, because they can have confidence that, provided they
follow institutional procedures, they will comply with the Code's good practice. As the
Handbook for Institutional Audit recommends:
[QAA] is not seeking evidence of compliance, but rather for evidence that the institution has considered the
purpose of the reference points, has reflected on its own practices in the relevant areas, and has taken, or is
taking, any necessary steps to ensure that appropriate changes are being introduced.' 83
Staff are, however, expected to be aware of the Code, upon which institutional practice
is based. Staff engage with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications and with
their own discipline's Subject Benchmark Statement, as these must be directly
addressed in programme approval, review or modification procedures.
191.
ASC is currently reviewing institutional engagement with the Academic Infrastructure to
assess, in the light practical experience, whether any procedural amendments should be
considered to enhance practice. For example, it has resolved that appropriate members
of the senior staff will be allocated responsibility for ensuring compliance with each
section of the Code of Practice, note the need for review if necessary (for example in
response to QAA consultation exercises or publication of draft revisions to sections), and
report annually to ASC.
192.
The University welcomes the appointment of a QAA Institutional Liaison Officer as a
major step forward in the QAA's development of enhancement-based practice, providing
the opportunity for closer, more regular contact.
81
AD 12 Section E 26
QAA Developmental Engagement: Law, Report para 26.
83
URL 16, para 55
82
Page 61 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The development, use and publication of programme specifications
193.
Since their introduction at MMU, programme specifications have been treated less as
public documents, more as instruments of academic planning, primarily for staff use in
quality procedures. This partly reflects the HE sector's debate about their value to a
wider, more general readership, whether students or other potential stakeholders, due to
the technical nature of their content and the difficulty of making them user friendly.
Current preparations for TQI, the re-statement of QAA guidance that programme
specifications should be made publicly available, and awareness that, post December
2004, Institutional Audits will monitor progress in this, make it an appropriate moment to
review their current design, content and use. ASC and PASC are currently considering
this, with a view to establishing a revised programme specification, possibly in 'tiered'
electronic form, as the core document for all taught provision, the foundation upon which
academic mapping for quality assurance, external examiner responsibilities, programme
information, and TQI publication etc., are all based.
Other external reference points
194.
The diversity of the University's provision requires engagement with a wide range of
external reference points which benchmark quality and standards in many different
ways. These include other QAA review activities, for example the Major Review of NHSfunded health professions programmes to be held in 2004/05, Foundation Degree
reviews, and the audit of collaborative provision, which will be held after the conclusion
of the current consultation exercise on the Proposed Operational Description for
collaborative provision audit.84 In addition, OFSTED sets its own benchmarks, as do
each of the over 70 individual PSBs with which the University works in partnership. The
latter are normally addressed by individual programmes in their accreditation
arrangements, and will be monitored at University level by the ASC PSB Standing Group
(see 73; 200).
Programme-level review and accreditation by external agencies
195.
The University has a strong commitment to professional and vocational education and
many of its awards are recognised or accredited by various professional and statutory
bodies (PSBs). The development and maintenance of our relationship with business
and the professions is, therefore an integral part of our identity, and its maintenance and
development is a our core strategies.
196.
The views and reports of PSBs provide a very important external perception of the
quality of the University's programmes. Issues they raise are addressed as part of the
annual monitoring process at programme and departmental level and make a valuable
contribution to the assurance of quality. It is important that the University, at both faculty
and central levels, is fully aware of the nature of interactions between departments and
their relevant professional and statutory bodies. Systematic engagement with PSBs
helps to:


Address any requirements or conditions which they may stipulate;
Monitor the implications and outcomes arising therefrom;
84
URL 7
Page 62 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document

Support the dissemination of good practice.
197.
Quality assurance arrangements involve the relevant programme leader, Head of
Department (or equivalent), Dean and the Head of Academic Standards in each of the
following stages:



Commenting on draft submissions to PSBs;
Receiving copies of the final version of submissions which must be submitted over the
signature of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor;
Participating as appropriate in meetings and visits;
Receiving copies of reports arising from such meetings and visits receiving copies of all
other significant correspondence;
Monitoring the outcome of accreditation requirements and recommendations.
198.
The purpose of these arrangements is:

To assist programme teams in discussions with professional and statutory bodies,
particularly where academic policies and resources are at issue;
To ensure that the University, which is ultimately responsible for the programmes
accredited by PSBs, is fully aware of the current status of all such programmes and of
any potential changes as they develop, and has an opportunity to verify information
provided to external bodies;
To ensure that applicants and potential applicants are not misled about the status of
programmes for which they are applying;
To ensure that opportunities to identify and capitalise on current or potential good
practice to the benefit of the University are secured.





199.
PSBs vary considerably in their procedures, arrangements, timescales and interaction
with departments. In some cases programme approval or review and professional body
accreditation is conducted jointly between the University and the relevant PSB.
However, many PSBs demand their own separate and distinctive arrangements. In such
instances Heads (or equivalent) notify their Dean and the Head of Academic Standards
about dates of visits and other key events at an early stage. Where possible, draft
submissions are made available for comment in good time before any deadline.
200.
Since the introduction of the University's Regulations for Undergraduate Programmes of
Study, it has been necessary to consider how best to respond to PSB requirements that
do not articulate with the regulations (for example, in rights to reassessment,
compensation of failure, the mark required for a pass, etc.). ASC now considers each
case individually, either granting exemption from the regulations or, where that is not
possible, requiring the programme to make clear the differences between the regulations
for an academic award and those for professional qualification, where these differ. The
establishment of the new PSB Standing Group will greatly facilitate consistent interaction
with the University's PSB partners.
Page 63 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
201.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Following receipt of an accreditation report from a professional/statutory body, the Head
(or equivalent) and Dean of Faculty are asked by the Academic Standards Unit to
comment. The report itself and their comments on it are submitted to the Academic
Standards Committee. The report and the University's response to it, as approved by
ASC, are then submitted to the Academic Board. These procedures ensure that the
relationship between the University and its professional and statutory bodies is clear and
effective and makes a positive contribution to the maintenance of quality and standards.
Student representation at operational and institutional level
202.
The University's mission dedicates us to the success of all with the ability and motivation
to benefit. One of our core strategies is, therefore, to ensure a high quality educational
experience for our students. This can best be achieved by their active participation in
their own educational process and in the management of its quality.
203.
The University’s procedures make clear that students have the right to be represented at
all levels of the University's governance, quality management and committee structure
(excepting only Boards of Examiners and a small number of other committees, such as
Honorary Awards and Research Degrees). This includes membership of the Board of
Governors, the Academic Board, Academic Standards Committee, Faculty Boards,
FASCs, Faculty Learning and Teaching Committees, Faculty Research Development
Committees, and Programme Committees.85
204.
In the case of central University committees, representation is specified - normally the
President of the Students' Union or the Vice President (Education). At faculty level
membership is normally through elected programme representatives.
205.
Student representation is also sought for 'ad hoc' groups, for example the working
parties preparing for Developmental Engagement. The Institutional Audit Working
Group, in particular, valued its student members and established from its inception that
the student learning experience was central.
206.
The role of the Students' Union is fundamental to the success of student participation in
the University's quality management. Members of the Students’ Union Executive play a
full part in central decision-making, providing an essential contribution reflecting student
opinion, a role that will be enhanced in the 2003/04 academic year when, for the first
time, the President will be asked formally to report to ASC on issues of concern as part
of the Annual Monitoring Exercise. The Students' Union also organises training for
student representatives, a vital contribution as this provides advice and support, together
with an induction to the role.
85
AD 3
Page 64 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
207.
Student representatives consistently make a valuable and constructive contribution to
committee discussion and decision making. The University has been very well served
by students who are prepared to devote their free time to such activities. The main
shortcoming in practice is that it is never easy, and is becoming more difficult, to
encourage students to be representatives, especially at faculty level. This is not so
apparent at central or programme levels (although the increasing pressure of nonacademic commitments on our students has recently reduced participation at
programme level also). Beyond competing financial imperatives, this may be due to an
unsurprising lack of engagement of students with faculty-level processes. Faculty
identity is probably more of an administrative convenience, little impinging on students,
whose focus is more obviously on their own programme or the institution itself. However
the Students' Union, supported by the University, is developing a number of strategies to
encourage, support, and communicate regularly with student representatives, to ensure
that the opportunities for student participation in our quality assurance procedures are
utilised. Senior staff make themselves available to support these objectives.
208.
Students are represented at programme level in a number of ways, most directly as full
members of the Programme Committee, which meet at least twice in each academic
year. This involvement provides students with a direct input into programme
development, annual monitoring, and routine management. In addition, many
programmes have staff-student liaison arrangements, sometimes by means of formal
minuted committees, which encourage student concerns to be addressed on a regular
basis. It is also expected that student representatives will liaise directly with the
programme team as part of the process of students communicating with their tutors to
reflect current concerns, to ensure that these are addressed with expedition.
Occasionally this may not work, and in those rare cases, the University and the
Students’ Union work together to resolve the issue86. Students play a crucial role in the
periodic review of programmes, as a group of representatives meets the review panel to
discuss the student learning experience. Frank reporting is encouraged and assured by
being documented anonymously. Programme teams are then required to address any
key issues raised.
Feedback from students, graduates and employers
Student Feedback
209.
86
All programmes are required to poll student opinion as part of the formative process of
quality enhancement. The evidence thus recorded is one of the key indicators for both
the Annual Monitoring Exercise and for periodic review.
AP 9, 3.1.2
Page 65 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
210.
The collection and analysis of such feedback, although required, is not centrally
determined. The University is currently (2003/04) piloting online student feedback
processes at MMUBS, so that it may be gathered, documented, analysed and
responded to in an overtly consistent manner. One of the most valuable aspects of the
pilot will be recommendations on the coverage that may be included, linkage with PDP,
and also how a University model might interact and co-ordinate with other means of
polling, conducted for a wide variety of reasons by programmes, units, service providers
etc. The University intends to roll out a uniform procedure across the institution after an
evaluation of the pilot, to coincide with the introduction of the National Student Survey in
2005. This is consistent with the recommendation in the TQI National Student Survey
Report that, although internal feedback will no longer be required to be published, its use
should be strengthened as an important aspect of quality.87
211.
Graduate feedback is gathered and analysed as part of a programme team's self
evaluation at periodic review. Some programmes undertake this regularly as part of
their engagement with alumni and employers’ needs. The Careers Service produces
Longitudinal Surveys in collaboration with programmes wishing for more detailed
analysis. The Careers Service (with the help of MIDAS) also routinely collects
information from graduates as part of the national Destinations of Leavers from Higher
Education (DLHE) Survey 2003. As well as forwarding the required data to HESA, the
information collected is compiled and distributed to the Board of Governors, the
Academic Board and Deans; it is available more widely on request.88
212.
All units within Student Services gather feedback from clients. Users of the Counselling
Service are asked to complete a form indicating whether they would be prepared to be
contacted. Those who have replied in the affirmative are sent a detailed questionnaire.
Results are analysed and included in the service’s Annual Operating Statement.
Disabled students who use the Learning Support Service are also invited to complete a
questionnaire. The Careers Service collects user evaluation information through
questionnaires and focus groups; short-term projects are also evaluated. Feedback
from clients using Sports facilities is also routinely collected, mainly through suggestion
boxes.
213.
In September 2001 the External Relations Division undertook the first University-wide
new-student survey, polling 2688 full-time undergraduate students, to determine the
most effective marketing tools for recruitment by gathering information on students'
motivation to enter higher education and for choosing the University.89 It has continued
to gather and analyse this information annually for three years. The Education Liaison
Office collects evaluative data from prospective students and their parents attending visit
days and open days and uses this information to improve the level of service offered at
such events. A similar exercise was undertaken with postgraduate students at MMUBS
early in the 2004/05 academic year.
87
URL 17
AD 8
89
AD 10
88
Page 66 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Employer feedback
214.
As would be expected in a university with a strong professional and vocational
emphasis, views of employers are important to us. Such feedback is gathered in a
variety of ways so that we have a better understanding of employer views on the
learning experiences provided and the skills developed through students’ participation in
our programmes. At programme level the picture is varied, as would be expected. In
some areas, especially those focusing on vocational education (for example: clothing,
food, education, information and communications, architecture, art and design, business,
science and engineering, law) extremely close and important links are maintained with
graduates, employers (ranging from SMEs to the NHS), employer associations and
PSBs. Liaison is particularly close where placement, sandwich, consultancy projects,
and work experience are significant components of the programme. Many programmes
and departments have Employers’ Liaison or Industry Advisory Panels, and have
employability as a key theme in their programme design (for example, the Department of
Environmental and Geographical Sciences, which has an employability strategy).
215.
At a more general level, both the External Relations Division and the Careers Service
maintain close relations with the business community and with other employers,
addressing one of our core strategies. For example, the Business Partnerships Office
has been established to strengthen relationships with business of all kinds. It operates
the Business Gateway, a specialised service that supports businesses working with the
University. The Gateway supplies information, deals with enquiries and helps broker
partnership arrangements.90 We are also actively involved in a wide range of initiatives
focused on economic development in the North West. The Regional Office is a key
contact point for information and advice on regional development issues, particularly
dealing with the public sector. These central support units work closely with
departmental teams. Each of these different means of engagement with employers
generates information of value in the development and evaluation of our programmes.
216.
Some discipline areas, perhaps most obviously those in the Humanities have,
traditionally, less strong or direct links with employers, partly because of the diversity of
employment taken by their graduates. This has certainly changed in recent years, as all
disciplines recognise the importance of employability as one of the key/transferable skills
expected by their applicants and required by their graduates.
The monitoring of student progression and completion
217.
90
91
Student application and admission statistics are analysed on a weekly basis from the
Autumn term throughout the academic year. The analysis includes time series data to
expose trends and variations. Figures are presented termly to the Academic Board and
published annually. 91
URL 18
AD 22
Page 67 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
218.
Enrolment targets are set, by the Directorate, in the form of minimum enrolment
numbers (MENs) early each Spring term as part of a rolling 3 year number planning
process. This process identifies targets at Institutional, faculty, departmental or
programme level. As part of the process, progression data are evaluated based on the
most recent information available from the previous academic year. The numbers so
identified form an integral part of the updating of Faculty Plans, which are presented to
the Directorate and the Academic Board in the Summer Term.
219.
Performance data at programme level is collated by MIDAS92 and disseminated in a
common format on an annual basis as a key component of the AME. The data are
initially generated from the central student record system, supplemented by more
detailed analyses compiled by departmental administrative staff. Central data include
MENs, enrolments, application numbers, offer summaries, age profiles, disability data,
ethnicity data, qualifications on entry, and a framework for plotting cohort progression
information. Degree classification information is added as an outcome from the ‘degree
classification engine’, which was introduced during 2002/03, and which will be fully
implemented throughout the University in 2003/04, as part of the implementation of the
University's Regulations for Undergraduate Programmes of Study.
220.
The strengths and weaknesses of these procedures have been subject to regular review
and evaluation over the last three sessions, the most significant debate being the level of
data disaggregation to be applied to cohort analysis, which should clearly reflect the
current organisational structures of academic programmes whilst providing for some
degree of time series analysis. This has presented particular challenges where
programme networks and matrices have undergone relatively rapid reorganisation and,
for some, increasingly complex types of flexible learning provision. The review process
has identified the need to improve guidance and training for staff in the application of
progression statistics (particularly since the source data is now more readily available to
academic staff through web based reporting facilities such as TARDIS (‘The Academic
Records Distributed Information System’), the need for improved synchronisation
between central and local holders of data and better integration of the analysis of data
into QAP preparation. These needs are being met through a combination of workshops,
demonstrations and training sessions together with co-ordination through the Information
Strategy Steering Group.
221.
In 2001, as part of the discussions to revise the AME (see 133; 164), an ASC working
group was established to improve the course monitoring statistics. The group consisted
of academic and administrative representatives from each faculty. The result was a
proposal to evolve a more transparent, dynamic and sensitive dataset that would be
based on TARDIS reports, permitting programme teams to have access to current live
information that could be downloaded/printed as required, with a series of key
programme indicators for AME purposes, supported by a series of more detailed
admission and progression tables for monitoring and audit purposes, available on
demand.
92
URL 19
Page 68 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
222.
The AME pilot is currently helping to devise and test these new reports which, if
successful, will replace the programme monitoring statistics pro-forma. A series of
workshops with the leaders of programmes in the pilot scheme commenced in
December 2003, and the success of these will be built on by offering them to programme
leaders in all faculties. Although the main drive for the pilot is, rightly, a critical analysis
of current procedures, it is within the context of an institution which regularly exceeds its
nationally derived benchmarks for the efficiency of its outcomes.
223.
A decision was taken at the end of 2002 to replace the central student records system
and, in so doing, to resolve a number of the outstanding academic and administrative
issues which had been identified during the review process, particularly the academic
programme portfolio dataset, examinations processing, the central incorporation of some
faculty databases and the integration of student records with the institutional virtual
learning environment. The process of identifying the replacement student records
system is well advanced, with implementation due to begin in the summer term 2004.
This, together with the ‘degree classification engine’, will permit much more effective
institution-wide analysis of progression and completion rates.
224.
First destination statistics for the University are collated and published by the Careers
Service.93 The University has a good record of employment for its graduates and a
significant number of others go on to study for a higher degree.
225.
Student Statistics 2002/03 show that we are matching or exceeding the widening
participation and retention benchmarks established by HEFCE,94 and demonstrate the
success of our admissions policies. Management Information (MI) analyses admissions
and recruitment data, which is presented to the Directorate, the Academic Board and
faculties. The Directorate monitors student statistics closely, noting trends and, as a
result, University policy is actively informed, for example by initiatives to improve
induction, retention and student support. The Marketing Office (on behalf of the
University Marketing Group) undertakes a survey of all first year undergraduate students
at the start of the academic year,95 and the Educational Liaison Office has researched
factors affecting progression to university, used to inform our recruitment strategy and to
identify areas where students may need advice and guidance.96 Ethnic minority data are
collected through the enrolment process and are collated by MI.
93
AD 8
URL 1
95
AD 10
96
Getting them in: factors affecting progression to HE of 16-19 year-olds in full time education’
MMU/LSDA January 2004.
94
Page 69 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Assurance of quality of teaching staff: appointment, appraisal & reward
226.
Part of the University's vision is to ensure that all our staff feel valued and able to make a
full contribution to its success. The University's Human Resources (HR) Strategy97 (one
of its core strategies) was submitted to HEFCE under the Rewarding and Developing
Staff Initiative and was unconditionally accepted as a full strategy. It integrates with
other University Strategies, including the Learning and Teaching Strategy.98 There are
clear links within the strategy (in for example recruitment and retention, staff
development and PDR) to the enhancement of teaching quality. The University has a
high profile equal Opportunities Policy and a Race Equality Policy that has been judged
by HEFCE as exemplary. An important and developing activity within the University is
academic planning. This is led by the Vice Chancellor and acts as the interface between
HR, finance and academic activity. Rolling three year plans are produced to ensure that
there is coherence between these three important strategic areas. All senior academic
staff, including Deans and Heads of Department (or their equivalent), are issued with a
Personnel Manual by the HR Division, containing all HR policies and procedures.
Appointments
227.
In 2003 the University introduced a revised Code of Practice for staff recruitment and
selection,99 with a strong emphasis on equality issues. It establishes a clear process for
recruitment and selection based upon thorough and comprehensive understanding of
the job. A new suite of staff development activities, some of which are mandatory,
supports the Code. These activities cover the recruitment process: job analysis, writing
job descriptions and person specifications, interview skills and chairing panels.
228.
A new guide is currently being introduced to support the use of a wider variety of
selection techniques, including testing. The guide includes specific examples related to
assessing teaching quality and the wider range of academic duties. Enhancements to
the CPIS will allow a greater and more systematic monitoring of our recruitment practice.
This development will be essential support to the establishment of equal opportunities
staffing targets in Summer 2004.
229.
Most full-time academic staff are appointed on contracts that include teaching, research
and administration,100 although there are a number of other appointments. All staff new
to teaching or without a teaching qualification at appointment are required to undertake a
PGCE (HE) at the University’s Institute of Education.101 The programme is validated by
ILTHE and it must be completed within three years of appointment. It is now offered on
two sites to facilitate attendance. Successful completion of the PGCE is a feature of the
University’s proposals for the development of “golden hellos” and, under new
arrangements for the determination of salaries, academic staff are entitled to a salary
increment on successful completion of an in-service PGCE.
97
URL 20
AP 2
99
URL 21
100 URL 22
101 URL 22
98
Page 70 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Recognition of teaching excellence in promotion and rewards
230.
Following the adoption of the HR Strategy, a reward group was established to review
aspects of the University’s reward strategy for academic staff. To date, the policy on
Principal Lecturers has been revised and updated and a new policy on pay and grades
for research staff has been introduced.102 In addition, reviews have been concluded on
the determination of initial salary for academic staff, and on an accelerated salary
progression for Lecturers and Senior Lecturers. An independent evaluation of the
Senior Learning and Teaching Fellowship Scheme is being considered for
implementation.
231.
To reward research excellence the University annually invites application from staff for
the posts of Reader and Professor.
232.
The University is in consultation with its trades unions about a scheme for accelerated
salary progression. Acceleration is evidence based and one of the possible routes
involves excellence in teaching and programme administration. Candidates choosing
this route will be expected to possess either a PGCE (HE) or membership of the ILTHE.
Professional development and review (PDR)
233.
The PDR scheme has operated since 1992. It was subject to external review in 1996,
and as a feature of the HR strategy will be again in 2004. The scheme places emphasis
on professional reflection as the basis of review and seeks to establish outcomes in
terms of work related objectives staff and career development. The first phase of the
current review was an audit of practice and although the report highlighted some areas
for improvement and development, there were many areas of good practice. Particularly
interesting was the quite common use of structured approaches to preparation for PDR
discussions. The second phase of the review, to take place in March 2004, will focus on
exploring ways of ensuring the schemes continued fitness for purpose. One of the
options under consideration is a more explicit focus on the various components of the
academic role. Although the University has recently established a policy on peer
support, which includes the observation of teaching, this is not part of the PDR scheme.
Assurance of quality of teaching staff: support and development
234.
102
Several of the points made above (226-233) could appropriately be repeated here in
relation to the Human Resources Strategy, Equal Opportunities Policy, and Race
Equality Policy. Additionally, the HR strategy reflects the significance of creating an
appropriate environment in which staff can work. In policy provision this is illustrated by
the revised Harassment and Bullying Policy, the Stress Policy (and associated employee
assistance programme) and revisions to the Health and Safety Policy.
URL 22
Page 71 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
235.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
There is also a recognition that the way staff are managed is important, and the
University has invested heavily in a Senior Management Development Programme. The
SMDP is about to welcome its third cohort. The programme has a strong emphasis on
action learning, and the current cohort is completing a project based on the effectiveness
of introducing change in learning and teaching. The outcome of the project will be
discussed with the Vice-Chancellor in the final module of the programme. In the early
months of 2004 a pilot development programme has been launched for Principal
Lecturers. This will make use of both face to face delivery and e-learning.
Staff development
236.
The University formally introduced a comprehensive Staff Development Policy in
2002/03 for all staff as part of the HR Strategy. The policy includes revised
arrangements for the evaluation of development activity which will be progressively
introduced during 2004.103
237.
University staff development priorities are established by the Directorate on the advice of
the Staff Development Forum. This group brings together representatives of central
training providers with clients. Membership includes the Head of Learning and Teaching
and other academic staff.
238.
University staff development priorities are established on an annual basis, but the
University signals the significance of learning and teaching as an underpinning priority
each year. This practice has been maintained for 2003/04 and a review of the induction
arrangements for newly appointed academic staff is a specific institutional priority. In
previous years student retention has been prioritised and this resulted in a series of
workshops on several University sites. The process of establishing priorities has been
subject to review, resulting in the confirmation of e-learning as a University-wide priority
in 2003/04. Some staff development is compulsory, for example for members of
interview panels, to address equal opportunities (see 172). The University is considering
whether to extend compulsory staff development into other areas, such as good practice
in postgraduate research provision (currently being piloted across the University), to
ensure participation in the current valuable, but voluntary programme.
239.
This programme takes the form of an extensive range of staff development activities
based on institutional priorities and made available to staff. Many of these are provided
in the co-ordinated programme offered jointly by the Development and Training Unit, the
Academic Division, the Information Systems Unit, Student Services, the Learning and
Teaching Unit, the Research Development Unit, and the External Relations Division.104
240.
Activities include:

an annual induction event for newly appointed programme leaders offered by the
Development and Training Unit. This is a two-day event and is well attended;
103
104
AD 19
AD 20
Page 72 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document

regular faculty and department-based staff development events, often in co-ordination
with the Development and Training Unit and/or the Learning and Teaching Unit (which
has a database of such events on its website), and/or the Research Development Unit.
Topics include disability issues, equal opportunities awareness, and a wide range of
learning and teaching and student support issues, and are a good examples of the close
liaison between the Units and academic departments
241.
Further areas of enhanced staff development currently under consideration include, for
example, additional support for associate staff and postgraduate students who teach and
assess, training for staff wishing to become external examiners, and improved support in
the use of TARDIS for programme leaders (see above, 134; 221-2).
242.
Staff development reports (part of the annual planning process) record the extensive
additional programmes in support of teaching organised by faculties and departments,
although the University recognises that these could be enhanced by being more
evaluative.
Learning and Teaching Unit
243.
The Unit co-ordinates the implementation of the University’s Learning and Teaching
Strategy by sponsoring staff development.
244.
Recent activities include:

an Audit of Academic and Professional Development Needs within the Crewe and
Alsager Faculty (now MMU Cheshire) in July 2001, which identified both preferences for
the form(s) of staff development activities and a focus for them. The findings have
informed the work of the Faculty Learning and Teaching Committee and faculty based
staff development activities. The audit is to be replicated with the Faculty of Food,
Clothing and Hospitality Management in 2004;

The establishment of a programme of Visiting Scholars;105

Publishing the University's in-house journal Learning and Teaching in Action;

Co-ordinating the University's WebCT Project; each faculty is sponsoring a project that is
designed to illustrate both the features of online learning and innovative learning and
teaching practices within the University. It is intended that the development of online
learning and support to academic staff will be a feature of this initiative;

Encouraging membership of the ILTHE (and the new Higher Education Academy), and
hosting local events;

The maintenance of a comprehensive website to support academic staff.106
105
106
URL 23
URL 5
Page 73 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
245.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
As part of their own professional development, academic staff are expected to engage in
scholarly activity within their own disciplines, for example participating in conferences,
LTSNs, membership of professional bodies, acting as QAA reviewers and auditors and
as external examiners.107 The University recognises the value it obtains from such
engagement, although it recognises that it could record this activity more systematically
(see above 72 (e); 150).
Peer support
246.
A variety of teaching observation and peer support schemes have operated in the
University, usually on a local basis, often as the result of particular imperatives, such as
preparation for external review or other scrutiny. In 2002/03 ASC decided that it was
important to have a more consistent institutional approach to the support of teaching,
and so it agreed a peer support policy proposed, after consultation, by the Head of
Learning and Teaching. This policy, based on a set of standard principles which include
the observation of teaching, was agreed by the Academic Board in June 2003, for
introduction across the University during the 2003/04 academic year. To emphasise the
importance of such developmental activity participation in the scheme is expected, but is
not part of the formal PDR procedure, as noted above (233). Its results will be assessed
as part of the Annual Monitoring Exercise.
247.
Effective communication of information to staff is of primary importance for quality
management. The University addresses this in a variety of ways. The minutes of the
Academic Board and ASC are circulated to all Heads of Department (or equivalent), for
wider dissemination as appropriate. Faculties are also notified of new and revised
procedures by memorandum from ASU. Notices are regularly issued from the ViceChancellor, and the central divisions publish news letters (for example Human
Resources Updates; Learning and Teaching in Action; Library News; What’s New in
studentservices; Making it Happen (the widening participation newsletter); and the
general University newsletter MMYou. In addition, extensive use is now made of the allstaff email service, providing a daily digest of staff messages.
Links between teaching and research
248.
107
108
The University's strategies for learning and teaching and for research are based on the
principle that both benefit from their interconnections. This is why the maintenance and
further development of a strong research capability across the University is one of our
core policies. We believe that practitioner research is one of the most effective ways of
improving teaching, with an individual’s teaching activity forming the basis for their
research. Thus the creation and support of Senior and Learning and Teaching Fellows
is one way in which this connection can be made and supported by the institution.
Indeed, the University has moved to locate the Learning and Teaching Unit in close
physical proximity to the Research Development Unit as yet another way of facilitating
the natural connections between the two units’ activities.108
URL 22
AP 2 and AP 3
Page 74 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
249.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
A key objective of our medium to long term strategy is to encourage staff to develop their
research activity still further in a supportive environment. After extensive consultation
across the University it was agreed that the University’s sortal concept for research
should be the Research Institute (discussed above, 57; 80; 111). Ten proposals for
Research Institute status were accepted by the University in September 2003 and these
began operating in October. All research active staff are encouraged to be either
Members or Associate Members of an Institute that best reflects their research interests.
Their research is, in the main, supported financially by their Research Institute, with
beginning researchers (Affiliate Members) drawing financial support from their
Department and Faculty. A key indicator of the University’s support for research can be
seen in the fact that approximately one third of the Institutes’ research budget is
provided from University funds.
University Research Institutes and Directors
The Dalton Research Institute (DRI)
Dr D Raper
The Education and Social Research Institute (ESRI)
Prof H Torrance
The English Research Institute (ERI)
Prof J Wainwright
The Institute for Biophysical and Clinical Research into Human
Movement (IRM)
Prof A Sargeant
The Institute of Culture, Gender and the City (ICGC)
Prof S Walklate
The Manchester European Research Institute (MERI)
Prof C Archer
The Manchester Institute for Research and Innovation in Art
and Design (MIRIAD)
Prof J Hyatt
The Manchester Metropolitan Research Institute for Business
and Management (RIBM)
Prof O Jones
The Research Institute for Health and Social Change (RIHSC)
Prof C Kagan
The Information Research Institute (TIRI)
Prof R Hartley
250.
Other universities’ experience of creating separate units within which research is located
has been shown to carry with it the danger of separating research from teaching, with
researchers located in separate research groupings. One of the key principles
underpinning our research strategy is that research and teaching should not be
disconnected so this possible schism is addressed above, and also by insisting that
members have teaching responsibilities. Another possible concern would be those staff
whose research programmes do not easily fit into existing research institutes’ centres
and this is a particular aspect of the strategy that will be reviewed in the summer of
2004.
Page 75 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
251.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The Research Development Unit,109 under the leadership of the Director of Research
Development, is charged with ensuring that research activity is managed appropriately.
The creation and continuing support of the Research Institutes represents one example
of the Unit’s work, another being the design and creation of the Research Management
System (RMS), this last being an innovative piece of software (that a number of other
universities have expressed an interest in acquiring). The Unit provides courses, for
both staff and research students, to sustain and improve their research profile.
Moreover, short-term secondments to the Unit will continue this process of inducting
staff into good research practice, especially ways to improve their research proposals to
charities and funding agencies. This then becomes a cascadable resource when the
individuals move back into their departments. The interaction between Senior and
Learning and Teaching Fellows and research secondees will be further supported by the
fact that they will be located in the same building and share a range of facilities. .
Assurance of quality of teaching delivered through distributed and distance methods
252.
The growth in distributed and distance learning methods within the University has been
significant, although this has mostly taken the form of online units operating as part of
traditionally delivered programmes. There are a small number of programmes delivered
mostly or entirely by ODL, for example the Sociology Postgraduate Certificate, the MSc
in Geographical Information Systems, and one route through the MA in Creative Writing.
From an almost zero base in 1998, today there are over 200 academic staff and
approximately 12,000 students engaged in online learning to some extent, ranging from
the Foundation Year to postgraduate programmes. These developments form an
important part of the University's move towards the development of more flexible
learning patterns, currently under discussion by ASC (as noted above in 174).
253.
Administrative, technical and pedagogic support is provided by the Learning and
Teaching Unit with part-time server support from Media Services. Issues regarding the
central funding and administration of the University Virtual Learning Environment (VLE)
coupled with its local delivery and support are being addressed by the Vice-Chancellor's
Initiative in Teaching and e-Learning Task Group (VITAeL).110 The University will
continue the investment it has already made to support the infrastructure for a Managed
Learning Environment (of which the VLE is part).
254.
ODL programmes are subject to the same rigorous approval, review and monitoring
procedures as ‘standard’ taught provision, although in addition, as already noted (2.4.4),
for programme approval or review of major ODL provision, at least one of the external
assessors must be experienced in ODL. External examiners must have experience and
expertise appropriate to what is to be examined,111 so those appointed for ODL
programmes are expected to have relevant experience in that area. The FASC AME
report must comment on ODL provision.
109
URL 24
URL 25
111
AD 12 Section 19.3
110
Page 76 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
255.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
In 2003 the ASC Learning and Teaching Sub-Committee reported to ASC on compliance
with the QAA guidelines on the quality assurance of distance learning. The University is
currently engaged in the consultation exercise on the draft document proposing revisions
to the guidelines as part of a review of the Code of Practice: Section 2: Collaborative
Provision, which includes flexible and distributed learning (including e-learning).
Learning support resources
256.
The primary purpose of our range of learning support is to help our students achieve
success in their studies and to ensure a high quality learning experience, a key part of
the University's vision and one of our core strategies. There is a major programme of
investment in the University's learning support resources, which are very varied,
including its buildings and facilities, its service units and the expertise of its staff.
Increasingly many resources are becoming web-based, both for the delivery of
academic-related services and for materials supporting programme delivery, greatly
enhancing the quality and extent of provision. Targets for the University’s Learning
Environment are included in the Corporate Planning Statement.112
257.
The major providers of academic-related support services for students are:


Academic Division (for Student Services, see below 302-323);
The Services Division.
The Services Division comprises five Services





Library
Information Systems Unit
Media Services
Estate Planning Services
Customer Services
258.
The Services Division supports the University’s mission and contributes to the aims set
within the Strategic Plan. In particular, the Services are committed to:

Aim for excellence in the provision of services in support of learning, teaching,
scholarship and research;
Be accessible and responsive to the needs of students and staff;
Contribute to ensuring that the overall student experience is of the highest quality;
Develop networks of external links with other educational institutions and the wider
community.



259.
112
Each Service is resourced individually. Routine day-to-day funding is normally carried
forward each year, with appropriate adjustments for inflation or to achieve savings. If
demands on an aspect of Service provision are showing a significant increase beyond
that which the Head of Service can manage, then this is examined separately and
additional provision may be made. Building or major equipment projects are also
considered individually and funded if approved.
AD 4, Section E
Page 77 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
260.
The responsibilities of the Division, plus the priorities for development, are detailed in the
Services Development Plan,113 which runs for three years and is rolled forward annually.
The current Plan runs from 2003 to 2006. Development targets for the first year are
detailed in the Services Operating Statement. This is included in the same annual
publication as the Services Development Plan, together with a review of the success in
meeting the targets set in the previous year's Operating Statement. The Development
Plan and Operating Statement are presented to the Directorate annually. As well as
reviewing the quality of service delivery, they also respond to a wide variety of other
policies within the University’s Strategic Plan, including the Equal Opportunities Policy
and Action Plan, the Race Equality Policy and Action Plan, and Special Educational
Needs and Disability Act. SENDA, for example, has clear implications for Estate
Planning Services in adapting buildings to meet its provisions, but also impacts on Media
Services and Information Systems in the provision of auxiliary aids and services to
support the learning and teaching process.
261.
Each of the Services uses appropriate methods for monitoring and evaluating its
achievements:

Customer Services uses questionnaires to survey levels of satisfaction with catering and
cleaning; measures the success in meeting accommodation targets; and monitors
satisfaction with the Conference Office service;
Estate Planning Services is subject to detailed monitoring in respect of the Estate
Strategy and individual building projects, by senior management and the Estates and
Services Committee of the Board of Governors;
The Information Systems Unit monitors the performance of the IS network and central
systems, in terms of reliability and speed of access. The unit has recently carried out a
satisfaction survey among users of the Halls of Residence broadband connection, the
results of which are currently being analysed;
The Library utilises user satisfaction surveys and other means of obtaining direct
feedback;
Media Services monitors targets for responding to telephone calls and turnaround times
for reprographics. Questionnaires are used to evaluate user opinions of the Audio-Visual
service;
iiP accreditation is encouraged.





262.
113
The outcomes of the Service monitoring, together with actions taken as a result, are
included in the review of the previous year's Services Operating Statement.
AD 18
Page 78 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The University Library
263.
The Library seeks to support the mission and strategic aims of the University by the
efficient and effective provision of materials and services to all members of the
Institution.114 It develops its targets in co-ordination with the University’s key strategies,
for example, the Strategic Plan, the Learning and Teaching Strategy, and the Estate
Strategy. It provides a service on each campus where teaching, learning and research
take place and, increasingly, information resources are provided electronically via the
Library website, enabling remote access 24 hours per day.115
264.
The Library’s organisational structure mirrors the University’s academic structure, with
individual library services managers (LSMs) having responsibility for ensuring that their
team liaises with the teaching and research staff. This happens at both the formal level,
with library staff regularly attending Academic Standards Committee, Faculty Boards,
Learning and Teaching Committees, Programme Committees, etc, and informally, via
discussion and e-mail, to ensure that academic developments are understood and that
services can be developed in such a way as to best meet needs. The outcome of this
continual interaction feeds into induction sessions, information skills teaching (face to
face sessions complemented by online inductions, tutorials, workbooks and help
sheets), the production of guides, service development and particularly stock selection,
which is reviewed annually in close consultation with academic staff. Pump priming
funds are made available to support new or substantially revised academic programmes.
265.
The Library participates in wider, cross-University initiatives such as the Researchers'
Generic Training Programme, TIPS, and faculty learning and teaching events. Feedback
is sought regularly on a wide range of library-related issues, with a Library User
Satisfaction Survey being run during alternate years, the results of which, where
appropriate, are fed back into the planning system and to users.
266.
The Library provides extensive support for research, including a series of online and
email updates, for example the Researchers’ Weekly Bulletin, the Call for Papers, the
Researchers@mmu mailing list and, in collaboration with the Research Development
Unit, Research Fortnight Online. 116
267.
The Library is a member of NoWAL (the North West Academic Libraries consortium that
comprises the libraries of all fifteen institutions of higher education in the region). Its
activities include:

consortial procurement of library materials, both in hard copy and electronic
(negotiations are currently underway for the acquisition of around 15,000 electronic book
titles for the combined user population of upwards of 200,000, by far the largest
acquisition of electronic books ever in the UK);

mutual access to all fifteen libraries (for all users) and borrowing (for certain classes of
users);
114
URL 26
URL 27
116 URL 28
115
Page 79 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document

an extensive (and prize winning) programme of staff training and development that
includes a general training programme, an accredited, award-bearing programme for
staff normally without professional qualifications, and a senior management training
scheme (participation in this programme was helpful in securing Investors in People
status for the Library).
268.
The Library is also a member of national schemes, such as UK Libraries Plus and
SCONUL Research Extra, that allow access to a wide range of UK academic libraries.
Information Systems Unit
269.
ISU is responsible for central systems and networks, central IT purchasing
arrangements and organisation of staff training. This includes developing IS policy
proposals, facilitating access from outside the University and maintaining system
security. ISU supports Local Information Systems Teams in each faculty and other
major IT users. It provides computer drop in centres in each faculty and in the University
Library.
270.
ISU has instituted a system of Contract Review meetings to ensure that the relationship
with its key suppliers remains beneficial both to the University and to the supplier. IS
policy formation involves a strong element of consultation with staff and student
representatives. The services provided by ISU are defined by a set of service level
statements (SLS).117 These are currently under review, and are being introduced for the
services provided by local ISU teams, as one of the initial projects identified by the
Information Systems Structures Group (see below, 340). This should be complete by
the end of January 2004. Mechanisms to cover for critical systems out of normal office
hours are currently also being explored within ISU, after consultation on the required
level of cover.
271.
ISU maintains close links with its colleagues in other institutions through regional
organisations such as G-MING and NetNorthWest, national organisations such as
UCISA, and individual collaborations on specific issues. It also maintains more general
links with the IT industry through user fora, trade fairs and the British Computer Society.
Media Services118
272.
117
118
Media Services develops and supports the effective and efficient use of communication
media and information technology in order to provide a comprehensive support service for
academic and administrative activities throughout the University. The services offered
include classroom and lecture theatre support, graphic, web and multimedia design,
printing and photocopying facilities, photography and video production, computer
servicing, telecommunications and video conferencing.
URL 29
URL 30
Page 80 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
273.
Many lecture theatres and teaching rooms are equipped with state of the art audiovisual
technology, to enhance course delivery and the learning experience. The University is
committed to the continued improvement of audiovisual technology in lecture theatres
and teaching rooms, and has funded a rolling programme for the installation of this
technology, based on a standard platform approach. Media Services and the Learning
and Teaching Unit provide training for academic staff on the use of the new advanced
facilities.
274.
The University has also invested in the provision of video recording and language suites.
There are a number of video recording rooms with remote control cameras for
interpersonal skills development. The University-wide language programme (UNIWIDE)
is supported with language laboratories and drop-in learning centres equipped to receive
live satellite broadcasts. Satellite programmes in a variety of languages are recorded on
a weekly basis and made available to students.
275.
Media Services is represented on various Learning and Teaching Committees to ensure
that the services provided meet academic requirements.
Estates Planning Services119
276.
has responsibilities to:

Deliver the physical aspects of the Estate Strategy by the planning and execution of the
associated building projects;

Maintain and improve the quality of the environment through the provision of new buildings,
landscaping, furniture and equipment, and high quality planned maintenance of building
fabric, engineering services and grounds;

Ensure that all University properties comply with all appropriate legislation;

Provide a service for the maintenance and installation of teaching equipment;

Arrange for the acquisition and disposal of properties.
277.
The University Estate Strategy,120 developed during two stages of consultation with staff,
the Students’ Union and outside bodies, provides for a concentration on a smaller
number of sites in order to facilitate academic cooperation and achieve the reinvestment
of financial savings into improved buildings and services, in order to improve the
environment of the University campuses for students and staff (see above 156-159). It
includes a substantial building programme to provide high-quality teaching and learning
facilities, for example the recently completed All Saints West building for the School of
Law, and the current redevelopment of the Science and Engineering campus. The Head
of Estate Planning Services reports annually on developments.121
119
URL 31
AD 7
121
URL 32
120
Page 81 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Customer Services122
278.
This is the largest department in the University and employs a quarter of the University’s
staff (750), over a wide range of activities. These include the catering service,
conference office, bars and residential accommodation (see below 324-328) as well as a
comprehensive facilities management function incorporating portering, cleaning,
security, reception, mail and messenger, transport and removals, and building
maintenance services. These services are delivered over 7 sites throughout Manchester
and South Cheshire, in over 60 buildings, 14 catering outlets and 18 halls of residence.
279.
It is committed to providing a quality and responsive service for its customers (for
example to address issues raised at MMU Cheshire123) and to continuously improving its
performance through a comprehensive training programme for its staff to enable them to
realise their full potential.
Academic guidance, support and supervision
280.
The University's academic guidance is initially programme-based, and takes many
forms, depending upon the nature of the programme and the needs of its students.
281.
Quality management procedures, both annual monitoring and periodic review, place
great emphasis on the support, retention and progression of our students, and the latest
HEFCE performance indicators confirm that the University is meeting its targets.124
282.
The University's academic provision is (possibly uniquely) complex. Our student
population is also extraordinarily diverse, reflecting our longstanding commitment to
encourage entrants from non-traditional backgrounds.125 In addition to the needs of
'standard' full-time undergraduate students, the University also includes large numbers
of part-time, mature, postgraduate, research degree, home-based ethnic and
international students, in addition to those with individual special needs, studying for a
very wide range of types of award, at levels from Foundation Year to doctorate. It has
not, therefore, been considered practicable to impose a central model for academic
supervision and guidance, with the exception of research degree students (see below,
285-6). The University is confident, however, that local systems, designed to meet the
specific needs of students, are robust, sensitive and effective, and also that quality
management processes assure this.
283.
All programmes are required to provide a student handbook, as the basic explanation of
the support and guidance systems available to its students, and to operate effective
pastoral and academic monitoring. Each programme's Definitive Document must
include details of this provision.126 Increasingly, monitoring, support and supervision is
becoming supplemented by web-based mechanisms, such as WebCT. The University's
Regulations for Undergraduate Programmes of Study and the recently approved
Principles for Regulations for the Postgraduate Programmes of Study assure a
consistent regulatory framework.
122
URL 33
AP 9 Section 6.2
124
URL 1
125
AD 22, AP 8
126 AD 12, Appendix Cxi (Section 4)
123
Page 82 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
284.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
A most important aspect of academic guidance is the close liaison between programme
staff teams and the Learning Support Unit (see below 315- 317), which offers a range of
services, either in partnership with academic staff or direct to students, to guide and
support their learning. Students can be supported on an individual basis or through
workshops on such areas as managing time, presentations, note taking, revision etc.
The unit is also supported by the TIPS (Transition, Induction and Progression Strategies)
team which offers workshops on revision, study skills, etc.127 The Learning Support Unit
has a comprehensive website.128
Research degree students
285.
The supervision of research degree students is regulated by a series of documents
approved by the University's Research Degrees Committee (RDC). These include the
Research Students Handbook (a comprehensive guide to each stage in the process of
research, including information about the University's programme of skills training
workshops for research students), Guidelines for Supervisors, and Regulations for
Research Degrees. As a result of a consultation exercise, all these key documents have
recently been rewritten to make them more user-friendly and are also available online on
the Research Development Unit (RDU) website,129 all of which are supported by a series
of faculty-based workshop events to ensure that the procedures are well understood.
To complement this, faculties and departments often issue their own guidance.
Research degree students take part in an annual monitoring and review process, as
noted above (78; 136). Proposed projects undergo an approval process, which also
considers ethical issues.130 All students (whether working alone or on group projects)
are supervised by a Director of Studies together with a supervisory team, who provide
guidance, supervision and support in accordance with the University’s Regulations for
Research Degrees. The RDU is currently considering a review of the generic training
programme for research degree students.
286.
An Institutional Code of Practice on postgraduate research programmes131 was
approved by Academic Board in 2003, complying with the precepts of The QAA Code of
Practice: Section 1. The University's Research Degrees Committee has also issued
'guidelines of good research practice' as a consultation document. This has not yet
been formally approved, pending the results of the HEFCE consultation exercise on
improving standards in postgraduate research degree programmes.132
127
URL 34
URL 35
129 URL 24
130
AD 12, Section C 23
131 URL 6
132
URL 36
128
Page 83 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Foundation Year students
287.
The Foundation Year is an important element in the University’s widening participation
core strategy (see above, 30; 174)133. It is intended for those who would like to study for
a degree who have studied Advanced level subjects not closely related to their choice of
degree programme or who may not have achieved the Advanced level results specified
for entry directly into year one of our degree programmes. The support provided for
Foundation Year students is comprehensive, supplementing extensive pre-entry and onprogramme individual support with web-based guidance.134 Of particular note is the
Academic Methods unit taken by all students, which guides those not experienced in
self-directed learning through an introduction to study skills appropriate for higher
education. Students’ progress is monitored centrally and positive interventions to
enhance student success are taken at all stages of the student life-cycle.
288.
A number of University programmes provide special provision for ‘non-traditional’
students. For example, the BA (Honours) Humanities/Social Studies programme offers
a dedicated scheme of study for mature students at Level One.
Personal Development Planning (PDP)
289.
Many University programmes have been testing different PDP models as part of their
student support and monitoring systems. In 2003 ASC established a working group to
determine their features and the implications for adoption of a single University scheme,
embodying the recommendations of the QAA guidelines. An Interim Report was
submitted in May 2003. Following discussion of the report, the Academic Board
requested the working group to select two pilots for consideration as University
schemes; one to be administered through personal tutor systems, and the other to be
incorporated within the unitised, credit-rated curriculum. The approved scheme will be
introduced by 2005/06.
Personal support and guidance
Admissions
290.
Effective learning support begins long before enrolment. It is important both for the
University's mission and also for the welfare and retention of its prospective students
that entrants are received on to appropriate programmes that will allow them to achieve
success.135 All programmes are required to publish their admissions criteria and any
arrangements for exemption based on prior qualification or experience within the
Definitive Document136 in accordance with University regulations, which comply with the
QAA Code of Practice: Section 10. There is some variation in the treatment of AP(E)L at
present, so ASC has established a working group to formulate proposals for revised
regulations. Applications are processed and monitored centrally by the Registry, based
on a recently revised applications protocol.
133
AP 8
URL 37
135
URL 38
136
AD 12, Appendix Cxi (Section 1)
134
Page 84 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
291.
Admissions are managed by each programme team, normally co-ordinated by an
admissions tutor with support from administrative staff. They operate within admissions
targets decided in the context of current student statistics, supervised by each faculty
and established by the Directorate. The University provides extensive staff development
for academic, admissions and other staff, including an annual meeting for admissions
tutors with the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic Registrar and Head of Management
Information.
292.
The Education Liaison Office (ELO) aims to refer students to appropriate
programmes.137 This reflects the University's mission, and its commitment both to
ReachOut and to widen participation. Central to the strategy are relationships with key
stakeholders and include a range of activities. For example, road shows are held during
the Autumn term in schools and colleges, to offer potential students general advice on
going into HE and specific advice on the UCAS application process, and to encourage
the involvement of teachers. Open Days are held at the University and, in the Spring
term, weekly Visit Days target applicants, with the aim of ensuring that they receive
accurate information, are comfortable with their choice of programme, and have the
opportunity to confirm this by meeting staff and students and by touring facilities.
293.
A particularly important aspect of the information available to applicants is the financial
advice provided both pre and post enrolment by the Registry, which works very closely
with the Students’ Union on matters relating to student benefits. Students’ Union
representatives are invited to our annual training seminars on student financial support.
294.
We recruit student ambassadors, who are trained to help promote the University and
support potential students in applying for or finding out about the University. The
ambassador programme also gives students an opportunity for self-development. The
Education Liaison Office holds working lunches on specific, recruitment related topics
each month that are open to all staff, and half day events for particular groups of staff
once or twice per term. Regular training sessions for student ambassadors reach a peak
in August with 6 days of intensive training for the Clearing Hub. Overall, the aim is to
provide an excellent service to assist students to make the right choices.
295.
The ELO has developed a series of other initiatives, and has recently won a HEIST
award for its work. Especially valuable to the University is its extensive market research.
Approximately 100,000 enquirers per year are now collated on an information database
which provides a rich resource of material for analysis and synthesis of the market.
296.
The work of other units also has direct bearing upon student support, particularly for
prospective applicants. The focus spans both our global market and also our immediate
vicinity, and both require specialist, high quality support. The International Office
supports the growing numbers of international students (currently over 1300), as
discussed in 2.17.10 below. Closer to home, a Foundation School has been established
as part of the new Centre for Urban Education which is being developed with
Manchester City Council to address aspiration and achievement, teacher retention and
CPD in urban education.
137
URL 39
Page 85 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
297.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The University makes special provision for the admission of students with disabilities,
producing a guide for applicants based on the principles of the Disability Statement.138
Pastoral Care
298.
For the reasons already discussed above (282), the University does not impose a
uniform model for pastoral care and/or personal tutors but, once again, quality
management ensures that local schemes operate effectively. These must be included in
the programme Definitive Document139 and are formally monitored, annually and at
periodic review, either to confirm that students are satisfied with arrangements or to
rectify perceived weaknesses. Programmes are required to devise their own systems,
appropriate to the needs of curriculum design and the profile of their student intake.
Increasingly programmes are offering additional online or email tutorial support, and the
opportunity for students to engage in mutual support and collaborative work through
online discussion forums and bulletin boards. The University also provides extensive
provision at institutional level, also supplemented by online help.140 It is confident,
therefore, that it offers a comprehensive package of support for all its students that is not
merely reactive, not solely available ‘when things go wrong’, but which provides a useful
and sensitive structure of support and guidance that is well publicised and easy to
access.
299.
Students are given a clear indication of the personal support that they may reasonably
expect in their programme handbook. Staff undertaking pastoral roles are briefed by
Programme Leaders and Heads of Department (or equivalent) on their responsibilities.
However, in view of the findings of the Students’ Union IA questionnaire, the University
is considering the introduction of institution-wide guidelines on good practice for pastoral
care (see 174).141
300.
On initial enrolment both undergraduate and postgraduate students undergo a
programme-based Induction that combines contributions from programme staff with
those from central services such as the Library and Student Services. Workshops on
financial support are also provided in each faculty at the start of the academic year.
Students are issued with a Student Handbook through their home faculty, containing
information produced centrally by the Academic Registrar, which covers University
facilities, health and safety, financial matters, general information, student regulations
and procedures, information on disability, special needs, equal opportunities, the
University Code of Practice on freedom of speech, attendance and absence regulations,
rules for student conduct, examinations, the student complaints procedure, and student
representation. Undergraduate entrants are also issued with a programme handbook,
the Regulations for Undergraduate Programmes of Study, the Learning and Support Unit
Study Guide, and a range of other materials from central and local units and from the
Students’ Union.
138
URL 40
AD 12, Appendix Cxi (section 4)
140
URL 41
141
AP 9 Section 5
139
Page 86 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
301.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The University works in close partnership with the Students' Union to provide pastoral
care and support, particularly when normal systems might not work as effectively as they
should.142 So, for example, information on financial help is available from the Registry
and also through the Students’ Union Advice Centre. This includes a comprehensive
booklet and website.143 An annual report on the operation of student financial support is
presented to the Finance and Human Resources Committee of the Board of Governors.
We also administer an Opportunity Bursary Scheme.
Student Services144
302.
Student Services have centres at both the All Saints and Alsager sites and staff also
provide sessions at the other major teaching sites. Extensive online provision is
available, and is continually being enhanced. Student Services report annually to the
Directorate on the work of the previous year and produce twice yearly newsletters for all
staff, outlining key initiatives. Each of the Units evaluates its work through user feedback
and the Services are currently planning for iiP accreditation. Its principles, objectives
and methods of delivery are published as the Student Services Service Level
Framework.145
303.
Student Services staff also work closely with academic departments and programmes on
both a general and individual basis, and in a range of ways, including:

Contribution to academic programmes though online career development learning,
provision of study skills units;
Contribution to the PGCE courses on disability related issues;
Support to staff on such issues as working with dyslexic students and those with mental
health difficulties;
Provision of staff development both through the university’s programme and on a
customised basis.



304.
The services contribute to policy development in a range of ways. Recent examples
include the development of:



Disability Discrimination Act Part IV – Framework for Implementation
Framework for Student Career Management and Development
Guidelines on Supporting Students Experiencing Mental Health Difficulties
These are all underpinned by relevant staff development and awareness raising
exercises.
305.
The following professional services are offered in support of the learning experience:
142
AP 9 Section 0.2.1
URL 42
144
URL 43
145
URL 44
143
Page 87 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The Counselling Service146
306.
This service provides students with one to one confidential consultations with
counsellors, group counselling, therapy sessions, and support for those experiencing
personal problems (including referral to other agencies when appropriate). The service
takes the lead in providing advice on supporting students with mental health difficulties
and new initiatives include a mental health network, relaxation and stress management
groups. There is also close liaison with academic staff.
The Careers Service147
307.
The Careers Service offers advice about future career options, helps students to develop
their career management skills and provides contacts for summer placements and
vacation work opportunities. The Service played a major role in devising the University’s
Framework for Student Career Management and Development, which is informed both
by the QAA Code of Practice: Section 8: Career Education, Information and Guidance,
and by the Harris Report. It has substantial links with local employers and benefits from
a number of joint regional projects such as:




SAGO – student and Graduate Online (www.nwstudentandgraduate.ac.uk);
The BEST initiative - Business Enterprise Support Team (www.bestbnw.org);
North West Business Access (www.businessaccess.ac.uk);
Interface and Interact (www.diversitymentoringuk.com).
308.
All these initiatives serve to enhance students’ experience of the world of work and
harness the Careers Service links with local employers and professional organisations.
Information is increasingly available on the Careers Service web pages.
309.
The Service works closely with academic departments in developing students’
employability, through specific initiatives and dedicated projects. Specific examples
include:
Online career development learning
310.





An online career development learning half-unit, with subject-specific tailoring, is
available for departments to incorporate into student programmes. This is designed to
help enhance student employability and has been adopted by the following areas:
BSc Exercise & Sport Science
BSc Biological Sciences
LLB
BA Health & Social Care
BA/BSC Joint Honours
311.
A strong feature is the resulting partnership between the Careers Service and academic
departments. This has been recognised nationally, with several awards being made

The 1998 AGCAS Award for Innovation
146
147
URL 45
URL 46
Page 88 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document

The 2000 Prospects International Bursary

The Higher Education Careers Service Unit Website of the Year Award 2002
Careers Service online registration
312.
Students can elect to register online with the Careers Service, specifying their individual
areas of interest. Careers information can then be selectively emailed based on these
interests. This technique allows the Careers Service both to target information delivery
and to gain information about the profile of engagement of students with the Careers
Service and their interests, for example according to:

Age, ethnicity, gender, disability status

Course

Faculty
This information can then provide the opportunity to make strategic decisions about
service delivery.
Vacancy handling
313.
The Careers Service leads a partnership of 13 North West university careers services in
the development and running of ‘Graduate Vacancy Partnership’. This Web-based
system148 allows partners to share their efforts in employer liaison and vacancy handling.
Targeting of enhanced services to disadvantaged groups
314.
The Careers Service is currently implementing a pilot project, using a virtual learning
environment (WebCT) linked to the University student record system. This allows the
recognition of students’ status on log in, and can deliver services accordingly. Currently
the Careers Service delivers guidance by email to minority ethnic students only, thus
allowing limited resources to be targeted at students most in need.
The Learning Support Unit149
315.
148
149
The Unit provides an inclusive approach to students’ learning needs. The team runs
study skills workshops, and offers individual study skills sessions. Staff work closely
with tutors both in responding to individual student needs and in providing customised
sessions on taught programmes (see 284). The Unit produces the Study Guide which is
issued to all first year undergraduates; this is backed up by information leaflets, webbased material and targeted sessions.
URL 47
URL 35
Page 89 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
316.
A key role of the Learning Support Unit is to act as the focal point for the organisation of
practical support for students with disabilities or learning difficulties (for example
dyslexia). Numbers of disabled students are increasing year on year and the Unit works
closely with staff in faculties and departments and the Access Summit Resource Centre
to ensure that individual students receive appropriate support. The Unit also has played
a key role in the University's response to special educational needs legislation, taking
responsibility for the Framework for Implementation and supporting departments across
the University in understanding and addressing its implications.
317.
The Unit compiled the University’s Disability Statement,150 which is informed by the QAA
Code of Practice: Section 3: Students with disabilities, and makes a major contribution to
the University’s staff development.
318.
The coMMUni team provides students and staff with advice on voluntary work in the
local community. This is a HEFCE funded initiative, which has generated considerable
interest and involvement and helps to develop students’ skills and understanding of the
working and community environment.
319.
The TIPS (Transition, Induction and Progression Strategies) team151 is an ESF funded
project targeted at pre-entry and first year for identified groups of students including
those on the Foundation Year and from Excellence Challenge areas. The team provides
individual advice in relation to study skills, financial support and referral, as well as
running workshops on areas such as budgeting, exam revision and CV support. Staff
work closely with colleagues in Student Services, ELO and academic departments in
both receiving and undertaking referrals.
320.
The Sports Unit152 provides a range of facilities and programmes to address students’
health and fitness needs, offering excellent provision including the Commonwealth
Games Aquatics Centre.
321.
The Chaplaincy:153 Chaplains are funded by their own churches/faiths to serve all
members of the University. They organise a range of activities in which students can
participate and are available to talk to students and staff at any time. Chaplains are
involved in Student Services initiatives and provide a valuable additional resource for
both students and staff
322.
For the Manchester sites, the University jointly owns, with Manchester University, the
Dryden Street Nursery which offers high quality childcare for the children of students and
staff; the nursery accommodates up to 96 children.
323.
Healthcare: the University publicises a list of local general practices and there is a local
branch practice based on the All Saints site.
150
URL 40
URL 34
152 URL 48
153 URL 49
151
Page 90 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Support for students in University accommodation154
324.
The University’s policy is to provide a place in a Hall of Residence for every full-time first
year student from outside Greater Manchester who requests one before 31st August.
The University currently has at its disposal a total of 3735 rooms, either provided in Halls
managed and owned by the University or in Halls managed by others on a lease
arrangement. All the leases are direct contracts between the University and the student
so that the student is protected and has the security of properly managed
accommodation. Because this is insufficient to meet the demand (apart from at MMU
Cheshire), students are also accommodated in Halls of Residence in the private sector,
a system regulated on our behalf by a jointly owned and managed housing bureau,
Manchester Student Homes155. The bureau, owned by the three Manchester universities,
registers property and ensures compliance to a voluntary accreditation scheme. First
year students who fail to obtain a place in a University Hall are only directed to Halls that
are accredited by MSH.
325.
The University provides a high standard of accommodation for its residential students,
much of it recently built. With only one exception, all Halls managed by the University have
broadband internet connection in each room.
326.
The University is committed to providing pastoral care for its residential students as a key
element of its recruitment, retention and support strategies. This is particularly important in
a Hall environment predominantly comprising first year students away from home for the
first time, learning to live independently and in a community. Many students struggle with
this. So, all University Halls of Residence have a team of wardens responsible for the
pastoral care of students. The ratio of wardens to students is 1:80. From Monday to
Thursday there is an open surgery available on each site for an hour in the evening, and in
addition wardens are on duty every evening and night during the week, and throughout
each weekend. The most common problems dealt with by wardens are homesickness,
loneliness, antisocial behaviour, noise, breakdown in community relationships, mental
health issues and substance abuse. As part of the University’s network of student support,
wardens are able to refer students to other agencies, either within or outside the institution.
327.
Priority is given to students with special needs. The University currently has a total of 32
specially adapted rooms for students with a variety of special needs and we are about to
provide an additional 24 rooms in our latest development in Crewe. Particular attention
is also paid to the needs of international students and the Accommodation Office works
very closely with the International Office to ensure that suitable accommodation is made
available to them.
154
155
URL 50
URL 51
Page 91 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
328.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Increasing collaboration between the Accommodation Office and other parts of the
University has resulted in significant improvement in the service offered, although it is
recognised that there are still some specialised areas of housing need yet to be met, for
example family accommodation and accommodation which is required for less than one
academic year, or the twelve-month requirements of some postgraduate students. We
are continuing together to try to find solutions for these students’ needs, and to address
issues of particular concern, for example the provision at MMU Cheshire noted in the
SWS.156
International students
329.
One of a number of categories of students which the University recognises need
particular support is the growing number of international students (currently over 1300).
Extensive support is provided by the International Office (IO).157 Where possible,
counselling and advice is provided prior to arrival through interviews in their home
country. Advice is also offered by our trained representatives abroad. In addition we
hold pre-departure briefings (this year these were held in Cyprus, Malaysia, Hong Kong,
Singapore, Kenya, and Brunei) to provide information before travel to Manchester. We
offer an airport meeting service and an overseas students' orientation programme (free
for those paying full overseas fees). The IO also provides assistance with police
registration, opening bank accounts, etc., in the first few weeks of arrival in the UK. A
special induction programme is provided for international students, and EFL provision is
available both before and during study. There is also additional faculty support from
both administrative and academic staff and via the Welfare Officer at the Students'
Union. Recognising that, with the increase of international students, our international
students welfare support needed improvement, the Vice-Chancellor has approved a
proposal for the establishment of an International Students Welfare Unit.
330.
Quality assurance procedures are in place to vet the information provided to
international students at fairs, missions or in overseas interviews. Academic staff who
travel abroad for fairs and exhibitions receive a briefing on the various programmes and
facilities offered by the University. In addition, the University endeavours to include a
member of the IO on the visit, to ensure consistency of information, to supplement the
faculty or departmental knowledge with which members of academic staff are often more
familiar. Staff are issued with a standard folder containing leaflets and information for the
most popular courses for that country as well as general information (for example,
English language requirements and support programmes, the airport meeting service,
orientation programme and accommodation details). This year the IO has commenced
an annual half day training session for these staff, to familiarise them with procedures
and to raise awareness of new developments.
156
157
AP 9 Section 6.1
URL 52
Page 92 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
331.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
IO also works with a network of representatives who operate for us. We prefer to work
with a small group of agents whom we refer to as key agents. Since 2002, in order to
ensure the accuracy of the information they provide to students, these representatives
are brought over to the UK and spend 4 days with us to give them an opportunity to find
out about the institution, its programmes and facilities. They have the opportunity to talk
to programme leaders, admissions tutors and other staff. The event's emphasis is on a
deliberately honest assessment of the University and what it can offer, to ensure that our
representatives provide realistic information. When in their home countries they have
access to a dedicated support officer here. New procedures plan to bring back our
representatives two years later, for a refresher/update session, when a more in-depth
introduction to key programmes will be provided. January 2004 will be the first event of
this type. We believe that we are one of a very small number of institutions to place
such emphasis on the quality assurance of our overseas recruitment.
Discipline or cross-institutional themes which exemplify good practice and or illustrate
claims made
332.
A number of initiatives discussed elsewhere in this SED demonstrate the progress we
have made in establishing consistent and common practice across the University.
These include:
The Regulations for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Programmes of Study, and for Research
Degree Students
333.
The most significant advance in establishing common regulations, enhancing
consistency in academic standards and academic quality across the University,
supporting the breadth of the University's provision from Foundation Year to doctorate
levels. The Academic Registrar is responsible for the production and distribution of
University regulations.
Strategic planning at faculty level
334.
The corporate planning process has always generated an institutional Strategic Plan,
covering a 5-10 year period. At regular intervals this is reviewed and submitted to
HEFCE. On an annual basis an operating statement identifies specific activities that
would contribute towards fulfilment of the institutional strategic objectives over the
ensuing twelve month period. During the last three years the University has refined its
approach by requiring faculties each to produce their own annually-updated strategic
plan that indicated the ways in which their contribution would integrate with the
University’s institution-level planning. This approach has made a very positive
contribution in linking high-level objectives concerned with learning and teaching,
research, quality and standards, etc. to programme-level activities.
Page 93 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Standard Platform and software
335.
The University has a process of selecting (after consultation) the next generation of
operating system and basic software to be adopted, then funding centrally its
implementation across the University, together with the purchase of any new PCs which
may be required. This has required a significant and sustained investment, resulting in
the provision of a uniformly high standard of hardware and software in the student IT
labs and drop-ins in the Libraries and Faculties. The software is currently based on
Windows XP, and represents the leading edge of IT provision in the HE sector. The
student to PC ratio is approximately 11:1, around the sector norm. Software to help
students with special needs is built into the standard platform, and there are processes
in place to supplement this where necessary. Student Email provision is web based, can
be accessed securely from anywhere in the world, and recognises that the vast majority
of students already have 'personal' email addresses by the time they join the University.
These facilities are supplemented by more specialist hardware and software within some
departments, more closely tailored to the needs of particular subjects.
Intranet-based developments
336.
Amongst extensive intranet activity across the University, the MMUBS Intranet is worthy
of particular note. In September 2002 MMUBS launched a dedicated intranet to support
staff and students. The system fully integrates with the University student records and
library catalogue systems and, in September 2003, a revised and upgraded version was
launched. The intranet allows students to access teaching materials, programmerelated documentation, timetables, notices and other information in a way which is userfriendly and automatically customised to meet the needs of the specific individual logging
on. A process of intensive staff training has been in place from the outset, with the
objective of ensuring that all staff are able to use the intranet to support their students.
The intranet has attracted well over one million 'hits' since the pilot started. Students
and staff may access the intranet from both within and outwith the University, which is
particularly beneficial for part-time students. It has also encouraged innovation in
leaning, teaching and assessment, where materials placed on the intranet are used to
complement and/or replace in-class teaching.
The Plagiarism Project
337.
One of many University initiatives currently under way to support learning is the two-year
Plagiarism Project funded by the Faculty of Humanities, Law and Social Science (one of
a number of initiatives to engage with this ubiquitous challenge currently under way
across the University). The project leaders are in contact with other national and
international projects addressing the issue. They are focusing on student education, the
nature of plagiarism, the reasons why students commit it, and the development of
effective assessment strategies to design it out, rather than merely mechanical or
electronic processes to detect it after the fact. One early product of the project has been
the piloting of a set of penalty tariffs for plagiarism as part of the Regulations for
Undergraduate Programmes of Study.
Page 94 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
PUBLISHED INFORMATION: THE STUDENTS’ EXPERIENCE OF PUBLISHED
INFORMATION AND OTHER INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO THEM
3
The accuracy, completeness and reliability of published information
University Information Strategy
338.
The University is aware that, although significant categories of published information
have been quality controlled (particularly programme information published for
prospective and current students, and monitoring and review documentation) its overall
management of the very large amount of information generated across the institution, in
many different forms, has had limitations, sometimes resulting in duplication and lack of
clarity about identification of those responsible for its quality control. To address this, the
Directorate has commissioned and approved an institutional Information Strategy to
ensure that there is clarity regarding the ownership and integrity of all sources of
information within and about the University.158 The strategy provides a set of principles
governing all information processed by the University, and to co-ordinate with other key
University strategies (for example Learning and Teaching, Research). Basic premises of
the strategy are:

The notion of custodianship, which will ensure that all information has a formal sponsor
with responsibility for accuracy, integrity, and availability.

The introduction of an institutional referencing system to identify the location, ownership
and currency of each information source.
The Information Strategy Steering Group
339.
It is recognised that implementation of the strategy will have profound implications for
the generation and management of information across the institution. To consider what
these implications will be and to address them, and also to fulfil the University’s
obligations under the Freedom of Information Act, The Vice-Chancellor has established
an Information Strategy Steering Group to oversee implementation of the current policy
and to advise the Directorate on future developments.
The Information Systems Structures Group
340.
Chaired by a Pro-Vice-Chancellor, this Directorate sub-group has recently been
established to provide an effective overview and corporate strategic approach to the
University’s information systems structures. The group's terms of reference are to:





Advise the Vice-Chancellor and Directorate on corporate information systems structures;
Develop an Enterprise Applications Integration (EAI) model for the University;
Prioritise corporate systems developments;
Recommend systems acquisitions based on effective evaluation
Liaise with the Information Strategy Steering Group.
158
URL 15
Page 95 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
341.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
The University recognises the benefits of systems integration as an essential strategy in
the enhancement of its Information Strategy.
The Web Development Team
342.
The Web Development Team has developed and implemented a set of Web
Development Guidelines and Requirements,159 which all material published on the
University’s websites should adhere to. The key concepts behind the guidelines are
usability and accessibility. All users, on entering mmu.ac.uk or any other domain owned
by the University, should be able to:


view the content whatever their ability (as so far is reasonably practicable)
navigate to the Division/Faculty/Department’s top-level pages (preferably the University's
home page too)
get in contact with someone concerning the content
view their legal rights concerning the content


External Relations Division
343.
One of the University's developments affecting the management of information has been
the creation of the External Relations Division (ER) in 2000. The Division has enhanced
the University's engagement with the wider community by improved co-ordination of
existing policies, launching a series of new initiatives, improving publicity materials, and
liaison with external stakeholders. Its aims and objectives are outlined in the ER
Division Plan.160 The Division has established a Steering and Operational Group to
develop improved procedures to ensure the quality and accuracy of information in
University material for student recruitment. The Division includes the following offices:
Marketing, International, Educational Liaison, Regional, and Business Partnerships.
344.
The most important source of information for potential entrants and other interested
parties are the University’s prospectuses, published by the Marketing Office.
345.
The printed prospectuses (undergraduate and postgraduate) and the web-based
prospectus information are produced from the same data source – an Access 2000
database which reflects the structure of the printed prospectuses and also allows the
“dynamic” updating of the web prospectus. Any information that appears in the public
domain undergoes a series of stringent verification processes.
Printed prospectus161
346.
The bi-annual request for updated printed prospectus information is carried out 2 years
ahead of the year of entry for the undergraduate prospectus and a year ahead of entry
for the postgraduate prospectus (so production in 2003/4 is for postgraduate entry
2004/5 and undergraduate entry 2005). As a result of this “lead-in” period, programme
proposals are included that have not as yet been put through the approval process, and
do not necessarily conform with current programme specifications.
159
URL 14
URL 53
161 AD 11, AD 24
160
Page 96 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
347.
The copy is, therefore, sent to the following sources for the checks indicated:

Legal check: to ensure integrity of information.
The copy is sent to the Secretary’s Department for the University Secretary to read the
text for possible misleading statements about the University or its course/research
provision.

Registry check: to ensure accuracy and completeness of information.
The copy is sent to the Applications Manager in the Registry, and also to the Academic
Registrar, for a more general check of application related matters.

Validation check: to ensure the quality of information.
The copy is sent to the Academic Standards Unit for a check of the status of each
programme entry. Programmes are not marked as “approved” until the approval or
review event has been held and approval confirmed (plus any outstanding conditions to
that approval have been met). The database has a number of “status” tags for
programme entries – such as the title, structure, content of the programme are subject to
review/approval – each is checked and the progress monitored – as printed production
for the undergraduate prospectus can span up to a nine month period when programme
development will be constantly changing and evolving.

Language check: to ensure ease of use of information.
The Marketing Office ensures that language used is as concise, consistent and as userfriendly as possible.
348.
As indicated above, the printed prospectus is produced to a set timescale during which
every effort is made to accept amendments through design and, if time and cost allows,
through print stages – this ensures the most accurate information at a point in time is
presented to the public.
Online prospectus162
349.
The information that is shown in the on-line prospectus is updated by an “exporting”
process from the database on a weekly basis. The information can be existing (for the
present year of entry), plus projected for the following year (postgraduate), or the year
after that (undergraduate). The database allows information to be included in the web
prospectus but not the printed prospectus, for example, where a programme is to be
phased out).
350.
Again, any change to web prospectus information that is received in the Marketing Office
undergoes the stringent legal/admissions/validations checking procedures outlined in
relation to the printed prospectus.
162
URL 54
Page 97 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
351.
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Information provided for international students (in publications, websites and CD Rom) is
checked internally through the Marketing office where appropriate or the relevant dept
and central units. Information from external agencies is checked against materials
provided to us by those agencies as well as those agencies themselves for example we
liaise with the Greater Manchester Police with regard to police registration, UKCOSA
with regard to immigration information, the British Banking Association with regard to
information on opening bank accounts).
Student support information
352.
As noted above (300), on initial enrolment all undergraduate and postgraduate
programme students are issued with a comprehensive Faculty Student Handbook,
providing a wide range of information supplied by the Academic Registrar, (much of
which is also available online). The Faculty Secretary is responsible for the accuracy
and reliability of the Handbook, the Academic Registrar is responsible for the accuracy
and reliability of information concerning University regulations and procedures.
353.
Research degree students are issued with information approved by the University's
Research Degrees Committee (as noted above, 285). The Research Degree Student
Handbook has been cited by the National Postgraduate Committee as a model of good
practice.
354.
All faculties publish student information online, in addition to the main University website.
Several also have their own intranet sites, restricted to the use of their own staff and
students. Faculty Secretaries are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of
this infomation.
Programme information
355.
All programmes are required to produce a handbook following the template in the Quality
Assurance Manual, providing details of programme content and organisation, learning
and teaching methods, assessment and student support systems, admissions criteria
and programme management. Much of this information is drawn from the Definitive
Document, which is examined as part of the programme approval and review process.
Although the student handbook is not, currently, included in the documentation for
approval or review, it will be included in the programme log, and subject to regular audit,
under the revised AME procedures currently being selectively piloted. In addition, most
programmes provide online support for students. Heads of Department (or equivalent)
are responsible for all materials published in support of any academic provision within
their area of responsibility.
Page 98 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
University websites
The main University website
356.
The Internet manager is responsible for the design and maintenance of the University
website, together with faculty-based internet officers who comprise the University’s Web
Development Team. Recently the team has undertaken considerable work developing
and improving our websites. The main University site in particular has been transformed
in terms of design and information architecture. All material published by the team
complies with the University’s Web Guidelines and Requirements helping to ensure
standards of material published.163 In January 2004 the University’s website won the
Digital Accessibility Award, sponsored by the RNIB.
357.
The content of the Information Systems Unit website is reviewed every fortnight.
358.
The Library website is used both to provide information on services, but also as a
gateway to both free and published quality electronic information resources. Information
on the website is regularly updated, with old news systematically archived; electronic
links are checked automatically, and investigated where these are shown to be missing.
Hard copy publications are also checked and updated as necessary on an annual basis.
359.
The Academic Division website, which provides online support for quality procedures, is
currently being comprehensively revised.
Faculty websites
360.
Faculty websites and intranets are maintained by faculty-based web staff. The accuracy
of information is the responsibility of the Faculty Secretary (see 160).
The accuracy, completeness and reliability of published information: TQI preparations
361.
The University fully complies with Part A of HEFCE 02/15, ‘Information which should be
available in all HEIs,’ although it is currently developing ways to improve the quality of a
number of categories, particularly programme progression and completion data, and the
polling, analysis and response to student opinion.
362.
Progress to comply with Part B ‘Information for publication’164 is well under way. A subgroup of the Institutional Audit Working Group was given the task of co-ordinating
preparations, and reports regularly to the Directorate and to ASC. The University has
taken note of the Final Guidance published by HEFCE, responded to the HESA
Consultation Document on TQI Quantitative Data, submitted a list of TQI contacts to
HERO, appointed a HERO officer to supervise the uploading of TQI information to the
HERO website, and noted the progress reported in the Interim Report of the National
Student Survey Pilot.
163
164
URL 14
URL 55, para 12
Page 99 of 100
Manchester Metropolitan University
Institutional Audit 2004
Self Evaluation Document
Quantitative information for publication
363.
This will be provided by HESA. The University is aware that there are currently some
inconsistencies in the coverage of the quantitative and qualitative data, for example in
the case of NHS and TTA programmes, which will be included in the published
quantitative information but not, at this time, in the published qualitative information.
Qualitative information for publication
364.
Summaries of the findings of external examiners: the University is currently completing
an exercise to map all academic programmes, and their external examiners, against
JACS principal codes. The external examiner report pro-forma has been amended to
include the TQI template as an appendix, and we are intending to publish summaries of
all external examiner reports, together with an explanation of how these summaries
relate to programmes, once the relevant programme teams have had the opportunity to
respond.
365.
The Head of Learning and Teaching will provide a summary of the University’s revised
Learning and Teaching Strategy.
366.
The pro-forma for programme approval and review reports has been amended to include
a summary section conforming to the TQI template, permitting this information to be
uploaded once the judgements of the confirmed reports have been approved.
367.
The External Relations Division and the Careers Service will liaise to submit a summary
of links with employers, with specific examples. The University is currently reviewing its
use of programme specifications. This includes consultation on revising the current proforma to include employer links and discussion of employability features, and whether to
publish programme specifications, and how to revise the format to make it more user
friendly for website users.
368.
Although no longer required to be published, the University is currently piloting new
feedback arrangements, to strengthen, systematise and make more consistent the
polling, analysis, use and response to student opinion.
369.
The University is fully committed to meeting its TQI requirements according to the
published timetable in the HEFCE Final Guidance165.
165
URL 56
Page 100 of 100