[Annual Review of courses home page]
The frequently asked questions page also contains guidance on what to include in the various sections of the ARC.
The ARC report should be an evaluative document, reflecting on the previous academic year and identifying actions for the current and future years which will contribute to the enhancement of quality and standards. This report should be written after the department has considered all the different pieces of evidence set out below, and the content of this report form should be discussed at a meeting of all academic staff. Ideally this meeting should take place before the end of October, to allow the department to have prepared a draft prior to its November review meeting with the Faculty Executive Dean as part of the annual strategic planning process.
At least one student representative for each course should be included in the constituency of the departmental meeting and should be given an opportunity to submit comments by correspondence if the meeting is held at a time of year which makes it inconvenient for him/her to attend. The student representative(s) should normally be the Students' Union Departmental Representative(s) and the total number of student representatives should not outnumber academic staff representatives.
The lead department should, in negotiation with the other departments involved, determine how the ARC report is produced. As with single honours courses, the content of this report form should be discussed at a meeting of all academic staff. Ideally this meeting should take place before the end of October, to allow the department to have prepared a draft prior to its November review meeting with the Faculty Executive Dean as part of the annual strategic planning process. Alternatively, an individual Course Director may be asked to take responsibility for preparing an ARC report in discussion with academics on the courses for which he/she is responsible. At least one student representative should have the opportunity to comment on the report.
Where there are 10 or more students registered on a joint course, a meeting of the course leaders must consider the ARC report. Where there are fewer than 10 students a meeting of the course leaders is not compulsory although it would represent good practice.
As far as is practicably possible, at least one student representative for each course should be included in the constituency of the course leaders meeting, or in the Course Director’s preparation of the report. The Student representative(s) should be given an opportunity to submit comments by correspondence if the meeting is held at a time of year which makes it inconvenient for him/her to attend. The student representative(s) should normally be the Students' Union Departmental Representative(s) and the total number of student representatives should not outnumber academic staff representatives.
Use the previous action plan as a starting point. The ARC should indicate clearly what progress has been made on the action identified in the last report, and indicate any further action that is still required. The questions on the form guide departments through the areas and supporting data and evidence that should be considered.
Section one requires an update on progress from the previous action plan, this should include who is responsible for the action being completed. The measure of whether an action has been completed should provide evidence of the impact of steps taken to address areas identified for enhancement.
Section two of the document should be written using the appropriate evidence from the NSS/PTES, SSS, DLHE, SAMT, SSLC, student entry profile, progression, retention and achievement data, and External Examiner reports. By triangulating this evidence it should present a clear overview of the course strengths, and the departments’ awareness and response to areas to improve or which need to be monitored. This data can be found in the Strategic Planning and Change Report Library (password restricted)
Section three of the document is a check-list to ensure the department continues to comply with the University’s expectation for quality assurance and enhancement. This check list requires a brief explanation of the process and the evidence to show that this process is taking place, for example dates of meetings, minute references and web links. Audits will be undertaken, to ensure that the information provided is correct. Please do not attach the meeting minutes.
Section four is to be completed by departments that have undergone periodic reviews/validations in the last 12 months. In subsequent years updates should be integrated into section two and five.
Section five requires an action plan. The action plan should
summarise all the things the department needs to do over the coming year to
address areas identified in the report as being in need of enhancement.
There needs to be an effective means of measuring the impact of actions, and
each action needs to have a time scale and someone responsible for overseeing
that the action will be completed. The action plan should also detail how
good practice will be built upon and disseminated.
Some departments have found it helpful to create a file for ARC, into which
relevant information is placed during the year. This means that when the report
comes to be written, most of the information needed to complete it is readily to
hand.
The ARC should always include an update on action taken in response to periodic
review. In the first year after a review the departments should provide a
comprehensive update on action taken to address any issues and/or disseminate
good practice. In subsequent years, an update on ongoing action should be
provided. It should be noted that the department is responsible for actioning
all recommendations arising from periodic review and detailing the outcome of
these actions as part of ARC, including University level recommendations. In the
case of University level recommendations, the department/school should raise
these with their Executive Dean and include the outcome of these discussions in
the next ARC (for more detail about responding to periodic review conditions and
recommendations see the guidance on responding to
validation or periodic review
conditions and
recommendations).
The ARC reports are considered by the appropriate Executive Dean or Deputy.
The Executive Dean completes a
coversheet for each report. This
coversheet allows the Executive Dean to give specific feedback, to ask for
additional information and to refer issues or good practice to the Faculty
Education Committee or other University Committees as appropriate.
In addition the ARC report is received by the appropriate Faculty Education
Committee for consideration.
The ARC report must be received by the appropriate student-staff liaison
committees and the other committees responsible for the academic standards and
quality of degree courses. For joint courses, this applies to all contributing
departments.
Throughout the year the action plan generated by the ARC reports should be
revisited by the appropriate departmental committees and progress on the action
recorded. Where appropriate the student-staff liaison committee should also be
advised of progress made on ARC report action. Action taken should be reported
on and evaluated in the following year’s ARC report.
The department should keep a copy of all the papers forming part of the ARC report, together with records of follow-up action taken. ARC documentation should be available for consultations by the Executive Dean, Deputy Dean Education, Education Managers, Academic Standards and Partnerships Office and external reviewers on request.
Copies of the ARC report and follow up action should be kept by the department
for 6 years.
In the case of courses involving more than one department it is the
responsibility of the Head of the lead department/school to ensure that these
records are kept, and that the archive is transferred if there is a change of
lead.
Page last updated: 16 September 2013