Consultation on the future approach to quality regulation

Providers in scope

Mandatory for providers with:

• at least 500 undergraduate students
• at least two TEF indicators based on a denominator of at least 500 students.

Voluntary for other providers.

All registered providers.

Provision in scope

Undergraduate only (Levels 4 and 5, first degree, undergraduate with postgraduate components).

Optional: transnational education courses, validated-only provision, modular provision, apprenticeships at undergraduate level.

Undergraduate only for the first cycle – no change to levels of qualification. Validated-only provision would be in scope.

Inclusion of apprenticeships remains under consideration.

Postgraduate taught provision and measures for modular provision would be added from the second cycle.

Transnational education courses would not be included, but we would design the scheme so that there is scope to include this in later assessment cycles.

Aspects of assessment

Two aspects: Student experience and student outcomes.

Each aspect was assessed through a combination of indicators, provider and (optional) student submissions.

Two aspects: Student experience and student outcomes.

Student experience to be assessed through a combination of NSS indicators, provider and student submissions (or alternative student input where needed). Assessment criteria to be closely aligned with conditions B1, B2 and B4.

Assessment of student outcomes to be based on a broader set of benchmarked indicators and relevant contextual information. Consideration of whether each provider meets the minimum required student outcomes to be integrated into the TEF assessments.

Ratings

A rating for each aspect, and an overall provider rating.

Bronze ratings signified some excellence above the minimum quality requirements. Requires improvement outcomes may, but need not, have indicated concerns about meeting them.

Overall ratings based on a ‘best fit’ judgement weighing up all of the evidence.

A rating for each aspect, and an overall provider rating.

Requires improvement and Bronze ratings to align with not meeting or meeting the minimum quality requirements.

Silver and Gold ratings to require more consistency across student groups, subjects and areas of provision.

Overall rating to be based on the lower of the two aspect ratings.

Incentives for providers

Reputational effect of the rating.

Fee uplift for providers with Gold, Silver or Bronze ratings (determined by DfE).

A strengthened set of incentives and interventions that varies by rating:

• additional rewards and less frequent assessments for Gold and Silver rated providers
• stronger incentives to push Bronze rated providers to improve, and limits to their growth or eligibility for DAPs
• regulatory interventions to ensure improvements by those with a rating of Requires improvement.

OfS indicators

Student experience aspect (based on NSS data):

• Teaching on my course
• Assessment and feedback
• Academic support
• Learning resources
• Student voice.

Student outcomes aspect:

• Continuation
• Completion
• Progression.

Student experience aspect (based on NSS data):

• Teaching on my course
• Assessment and feedback
• Academic support
• Learning resources
• Student voice
• plus Learning opportunities

Student outcomes aspect:

• Continuation
• Completion
• Rounded set of post-study or employment measures, based on progression, use of skills, and earnings.

Provider submissions

Provider-determined evidence covering both aspects.

Under both aspects, the provider’s own alternative evidence to cover gaps in the indicators.

Under student outcomes, each provider included the ‘educational gains’ it identified for its students.

Provider-determined evidence covering the student experience aspect.

Under student outcomes, only contextual information relating directly to the indicators, not alternative evidence of positive outcomes to supplement the indicators.

Student evidence

Optional student submissions covering both aspects.

Optional student submission to focus on student experience aspect. Alternative ways of capturing student input where submissions are impractical.

Expert review and decision making

Expert review by the TEF panel, consisting of academics and student representatives with expertise of learning and teaching.

All providers could make representations about their ratings, before they were finalised.

Expert review as before, although to accommodate the rolling cycle of assessment the OfS would probably appoint an evolving pool of TEF assessors.

OfS staff involved, to assess minimum student outcomes.

Only providers with provisional Requires improvement or Bronze ratings able to make representations about their ratings.

Assessment cycle

Four years, with all participating providers assessed in the same year.

Rolling cycle with up to 150 assessments conducted each year. First cycle (assessing all providers) over three years. Timing of subsequent assessments dependent on rating – five years for providers rated Gold, four years for providers rated Silver, three years for providers rated Bronze.