Section two should be written using the appropriate evidence from the range of information and departmental monitoring systems in place, including Key Performance Indicators, NSS, DLHE/Graduate Outcomes, UKES, Student Module Feedback, SVGs (formerly SSLCs) or equivalent, student entry profile, progression, retention and achievement data, equality, diversity and inclusion data, and External Examiner reports. Triangulating this evidence 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.
The first part of this section asks for an overview of strengths and areas where enhancements are, or might be, needed. Please indicate where identified good practice could be shared, and where good practice has been adopted from other departments.
A course’s failure to recruit should be considered under Section 2 of the ARC. Departments should include a few paragraphs about the course under ‘what issues have arisen this year’ and in the action plan. The department may wish to change the course’s title, modify its content or withdraw the course from the department’s portfolio.
External engagement provides an opportunity to show the level of external engagement and influence on course changes and developments, and how external feedback has been acted upon. This could, for example, be linked to liaison with External Examiners over proposed course changes, or consultation through the Employer Advisory Boards (EABs). Changes could also have been made in response to the requirements of a professional body. The answers are not intended to go into great detail, but to summarise the action taken. For example, a mapping exercise might have been carried out to ensure a course aligns with a professional body’s new requirements. Or a skill identified as being important by the EAB might have been included in a module.
Departments are asked to highlight how they have responded to changes in the QAA subject or qualification benchmarks.
Departments should consider their employability data in comparison with other centres or schools elsewhere, and how initiatives which have been introduced or planned have, or might in the future, affect the results. This data is available on the Planning Information Portal (password restricted) and for further information, please contact the Planning and Data Insight Office by email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
The complete form should provide assurance that there are effective arrangements for managing, supervising, monitoring and reviewing work-based learning, and highlight improvements made or planned. An evaluation should also be made as to how effectively work-based learning (WBL) has contributed to student learning opportunities.
Where departments have undergone periodic reviews or validations in the last 12 months, the ARC should always include an update on action taken in response to conditions, recommendations and other issues that may have been raised during periodic reviews or course validations. In the first year after a review, the department 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.