Collaborative Provision – Annual Programme Review Guidance

General tips for completion of Annual Programme Review forms:

 It should be noted that not all those reading the form will be familiar with the programme, so contextual detail should be given where appropriate and acronyms should be explained.

Please engage constructively with the process. The tone of the form should be:

• self-evaluative and honest: please acknowledge where there are key issues (and suggest key actions to address those issues), but also cover strengths and celebrate positive achievements.
• developmental: offering thoughts on how to improve what you do and promote forward planning;
• focussed: a succinct summary and analysis of key issues is preferable to the provision of a too large amount of detail.
• action points: they should be clear, detailed, strategic and targeted, with a clear identification of what key issues they address, by when and how (the ‘how’ is particularly important as it distinguish a simple goal from a proper action, for example, ‘improve number of female entrants’ is a goal but by describing ‘how’ this will be achieved it becomes an action).

Please note that only key action points to address significant issues should be indicated in the form. It is expected that some sections in the form will not have any actions attached.     

•  The CPO should review the form in conjunction with the collaborative organisation and should provide advice, when relevant, on its completion and on actions set for the following year. 
•  If additions and/or clarifications to the form are required following its submission, e.g. clarifications required by the School and/or College, please ensure that these are clearly distinguishable in the form.
•  Please remember that the outcome of the review should be appropriately shared with students.

Tips relating to specific sections of the Annual Programme Review form

• In Section 1, indicate which actions from the previous annual review have been completed. A reason for not completing any actions should be provided, together with a new deadline and the name/role of the person who will be responsible for completing the actions. Such actions will be reported again in the next AR report.
•  In Sections 2, comment on all aspects of the statistical data in an action-focussed way (e.g. where statistics show a positive trend, indicate what action is thought to have led to the improvement and/or how the School might improve further; where statistics show a negative trend, indicate what action might be taken to address this). It may be sometimes helpful to explain any data peculiarity in the context of the programme (e.g. no female entrants on the BA Fundamental Catholic Theology). Information and comments on employability are also valued, even when not accompanied by confirmed figures.
•  For UG programmes and as a consequence of the timing of the annual review process, please note that for the First year and Second year non-continuation data you will be asked to provide the number of students who have already permanently withdrawn from the programme and the number of students who will be taking supplementary exams at the end of the summer. Should the figure for the latter be relatively high, following the supplementary exam period, you may be asked to submit the confirmed overall non-continuation numbers.
•  For UoB programmes, the data can be found in Tableau Server (https://tableau.bham.ac.uk/).
•  In Sections 3, summarise and comment on feedback provided by the External Examiners (e.g. formal report, informal feedback). If the programme is accredited and a review by the accreditation body has been carried out in the last 12 months, please also summarise the findings of the review and any recommendations made. Details of action(s) taken or to be taken in response to the recommendations should also be provided.
•  In Sections 4, summarise and comment on feedback obtained via Staff Student Committees, module evaluation, student survey results, etc. Information on the quality of the support provided to students and their level of engagement should also be provided together with details of action(s) taken or to be taken.

• It is important, in particular for collaborative programmes, that the quality assurance of placements is carefully monitored. Feedback from students on placement and from placement providers should be regularly sought and a summary and comment of the feedback should be reported in the Annual Programme Review form.

• In Section 5, provide examples of staff development and educational enhancement implemented in the last 12 months and indicate what further improvements are planned for next year. Collaborative organisations should be working with the relevant School to continuously identify opportunities to enhance their educational provision and student learning experience.

• In Sections 6, discuss any changes to the learning, physical and human resources over the reporting period relating to the delivery of the collaborative module(s)/programme(s).

• In Section 7, the CPO is asked to provide evidence and comment regarding the maintenance and enhancement of academic quality and standards, as well as the quality of the students’ experience. This may be a summary of activities/observations that have already been discussed with the collaborative organisations and, where issues had been identified, appropriate actions might already been put in place or included in the action plan for the following year.

If new elements of good practice or new areas for enhancement/concern are identified at the time of the annual review, the CPO should comment upon these and at the same time discuss them with the collaborative organisation to ensure that actions are included in the appropriate sections of the form.

Examples of areas that may be considered are (the list is not exhaustive): admissions decisions, teaching and learning, assessment methods, marking criteria, moderation of student work, staff development, peer review, quality and currency of learning resources, adherence to PSRB’s requirements, student support, available resources and staffing etc.

This section also offers the opportunity to comment on how the collaboration is working.

Useful definitions

Entrants: Students in their first academic year of engagement with their programme. This excludes students repeating the year or returning from a leave of absence.

First year non-continuation: the proportion of entrants who left the programme within 12 months (if full-time), or within 24 months (if part-time), as a proportion of all entrants. This excludes students repeating the year or on a leave of absence.

Second year non-continuation: as above but measures entrants who left within 24 months (if full-time), or within 48 months (if part-time) of starting year 1. This is not cumulative, it only considers students who started but did not complete their second year of the programme.

Non-completion: the proportion of the student population, across all years of study, who left the programme without successfully completing it in the given academic year. Non-completion excludes repeating years or students on a leave of absence. The student must have left altogether in order to count as a non-completion.