Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. Monitoring of the targets and milestones identified within this Access Agreement is incorporated within the University’s operational and strategic reporting, which ensures that this important area of work is considered appropriately within our decision-making. As a result, performance data on progress against these targets are used by the University Board, Academic Board and its sub- committees, the Senior Leadership Team, Colleges, Schools and Services, as well as by the University’s Access Agreement Working Group. Our Access Agreements are monitored through reports to the university’s Student Experience Committee, which is a sub-committee of Academic Board and is chaired by the Deputy Vice- Chancellor (Academic). The Students’ Union is represented on this Committee. Overall responsibility for the Access Agreement resides with our Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic). The detailed work to develop our Access Agreements and coordinate evaluation of the impact of work in this area is undertaken by a working group, which is chaired by our Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic). This group includes representatives of university services responsible for the operational delivery of the activities described and the Students’ Union. We are continuing to enhance our ability to monitor impacts at the more detailed level, through arrangements to track the progress of students involved in specific initiatives or in receipt of financial support and overall monitoring of any differentials in levels of access, retention, attainment and progression by equality characteristics and other factors known to impact on these aspects of the student lifecycle. As part of this, we are committed to using the ‘closing the gap’ methodology recently developed for OFFA, to ensure that we understand the impact of our financial support arrangements on the success of those of our students who benefit. To date, we have already undertaken significant evaluation of the impact of our financial support and this has led to a complete change in our approach. As referred to in the Financial Support section, above, we have now focused all our financial support on incentivising progression and we require all students in receipt of additional payments to identify how this funding has benefitted them – overwhelmingly these case studies report that such funding makes it possible for them to continue their studies. The primary group of students applying for additional support are parents and others with caring ...
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. 3.1 Progression, Achievement and Employability are monitored routinely in relation to the KPIs identified at University level. The Strategic objectives set at School and subject level are monitored annually as part of the planning cycle. The performance of the academic portfolio is monitored in parallel with the performance of students. Internal statistics are benchmarked with Unistats data at course level. Outreach activities are informed by analysis of applicant and student data by feeder institution and borough.
3.2 The Director of Higher Education Policy is the senior postholder with responsibility for the University‟s policy on Access and Widening Participation, reporting directly to the Vice-Chancellor.
3.3 The Learning, Teaching and Student Support Committee is the lead body on behalf of the University‟s Academic Council with responsibility for monitoring and evaluating the Access Agreements and the Widening Participation Strategic Statements. The annual Student Equality and Diversity reports are based on multivariate analysis of student characteristics and these reports inform University policy and strategy on Access and Widening Participation. Annual monitoring reports are considered by the Quality Assurance and Enhancement Committee (QAEC) which reports directly to Academic Council. Papers are also prepared for the University Executive Board (UEB) both for discussion and debate, and for information on the resource allocations which support this core area of the University‟s activities.
3.4 Monitoring data is rigorously analysed and interpreted through the processes described. Yet the difficulty of demonstrating causality can hamper demonstration of the success of specific interventions. Changes in applicant and student behaviour during transitional periods between funding regimes inevitably pose greater challenges in terms of forecasting. The incompleteness of some data sets arising from students electing not to declare certain types of personal information, and the weaknesses of older data such as POLAR, can also limit the applicability of some reports. For these reasons the University is working closely with peer institutions, both individually and within sectors groups such as AccessHE , Linking London and Supporting Professionalism in Admissions (SPA) to share findings and case studies, and to set collaborative milestones and targets which can be contextualised by reference to broader studies of admissions, retention, achievement and graduate...
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. 8.1 Evaluation of outreach activities and the impact of scholarship provision are essential to monitoring success. Enhanced evaluation of activities will be undertaken by increasing the breadth of evaluation. Currently, evaluation largely centres on activities undertaken within UCL. This will change to encompass all activities, both internal and external. Additional staffing resource will be recruited to take forward enhanced evaluation work.
8.2 360-degree evaluation will be utilised whereby Outreach staff, student ambassadors, targeted students/groups and teachers from schools and colleges are asked to provide both quantitative and qualitative evaluation of activities. Currently, focus groups are carried out with student ambassadors. These focus groups will be expanded to cover targeted students as well as teaching staff from schools and colleges.
8.3 Data gathered will be analysed and activities will be critically reviewed and, if this is found to be necessary, reshaped and improved. Outreach staff will work closely with colleagues in Student Funding to evaluate the impact on the student body of the UCL scholarship offering. The scholarship provision will be reviewed and, if necessary, retargeted to maximise impact.
8.4 These evaluation activities will be supported by the development of an integrated database that holds all evaluation data. This will allow for improved data interrogation and analysis across activities, enabling easier identification of successful activities and those where changes and improvements should be made.
8.5 UCL‟s performance and compliance with this Access Agreement, including the contribution to the National Scholarship Programme, its own bursary schemes, outreach activities, performance against targets and progress towards milestones, will be monitored by UCL‟s Academic Committee, on which there is student and external representation. The Academic Committee will report annually to UCL‟s Council on all matters relating to the Access Agreement. This framework is supported by regular monitoring by senior management within UCL‟s Registry and Academic Services and overseen by the Vice-Xxxxxxx (Operations) and Vice- Xxxxxxx (Academic and International).
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The University will seek to embed the monitoring of these measures within our existing governance, executive and deliberative structures, as well as developing specialised mechanisms for evaluating the success of certain core activities (such as project delivery). The Board of Governors is already kept regularly informed regarding progress against the University’s key performance indicators (both at main Board meetings, and within Policy and Resources Committee). The Audit Committee has oversight of monitoring mechanisms, in their totality, and will approve (and maintain) any such that are put into place for these measures. We aim to introduce additional performance measures (or to adapt existing ones) to ensure that the Board has oversight of our performance in achieving the commitments made within this Agreement, as well as reporting the outcomes of the various projects that we implement each year (the Board already receives an Annual Report, from Academic Board, which covers performance against HESA performance indicators as well as reporting on developmental activity in the spheres of quality assurance and enhancement, and learning and teaching development, across the University). Within the executive, operational and deliberative spheres of the University, our existing management and committee structures allow for appropriate monitoring of individual activities, with the University Executive, and the Academic Board, maintaining strategic oversight. The University has developed regular faculty and departmental planning meetings, which scrutinise budgetary expenditure as well as operational goals, and which use the same forms of performance measure against which we evaluate ourselves institutionally. We also have a developed, and uniform, process of project development and delivery, which includes the operation of a project board and the regular reporting of progress up to Executive level. Students are an important part of our committee structure, with student membership of the Board of Governors (and its key sub-committees), Academic Board, Quality and Standards Committee and Learning and Teaching Committee. Students are also actively involved at faculty and course level, and within some project groups. In line with our proposal to maintain current participation levels (within benchmark) whilst improving student progression and retention (above and beyond benchmark) the emphasis of our monitoring processes is on tracking and improving retention. The Un...
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The Pro Director (Learning and Teaching) is the senior manager with ultimate responsibility for access and widening participation. SOAS’ commitment to access is further supported by faculties and departments through the planning, implementation and monitoring of various measures, particularly in relation to retention, progression and collaboration. Performance in widening participation and access are monitored by the Academic Development Committee chaired by the Pro-Director (Learning and Teaching) and are also considered by the External Relations Committee (chaired by the Registrar and Secretary) and the Student Experience Committee (chaired by the Xxxx (Languages and Cultures) and, at the highest level, discussed at Academic Board and Governing Body. All areas of SOAS have a responsibility to support widening participation and fair access. The core SOAS Widening Participation Team is based in the Academic Development Directorate (ADD). The team works extensively with the Student Recruitment and Admissions Office, Faculty Offices (Languages and Culture, Law and Social Sciences, and Arts and Humanities), Registry and Student Services and the Students’ Union on issues of access, admissions’ criteria, student support and retention. The implementation of this access agreement will be supported by all these areas. The body responsible for the delivery of the Access Agreement is the OFFA Steering Group comprised of; Pro- Director (Learning and Teaching), Registrar and Secretary, Xxxx of Law and Social Sciences, Director of Finance and Planning, Director of Academic Development and Head of Widening Participation. This group reports to the Director of SOAS. An action plan will be developed, in collaboration with the Students Union, to support the implementation of the Access Agreement and this will be monitored by the Steering Group. The Director of Academic Development will be responsible for delivering the action plan reporting to the Pro Director (Learning and Teaching). A Working Group comprises of key staff working on areas relating to access, student success and finance will provide advice and feedback on the progress of implementation.
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. 7.1 Annually, the University reports to the Office for Fair Access, OFFA, in its Annual Monitoring Report. This includes all expenditure from additional fee income on financial support for lower income students and other under-represented groups and reports progress against objectives and milestones. We look forward to the development of the national evaluation framework to inform our evaluation of access and student success activities effectively.
7.2 An independent review of the Arts University Bournemouth Access Agreement by the Learning and Development Unit from Cardiff University was very positive. The reviewers found that the Agreement provided a good statement of the approaches to be taken, and a strong evaluation of the university’s progress in promoting fair access and identified clear objectives, targets and milestones.
7.3 The University receives an annual report on its Widening Participation activity which reports on activity, and outcomes. The report is considered in detail by the Equalities Committee, which makes direct report to Academic Board. The milestones and targets outlined in this Access Agreement enable an evaluative consideration of progress, and a regular review of success.
7.4 The University further intends to build upon the current self-assessment process by developing an integrated Targeting, Monitoring and Evaluation Strategy that focuses both on the OFFA National Strategy for Access and Student Success and the OFFA Strategic Plan. The strategy, based on HEFCE guidance, will have four levels: Level 1: Basic monitoring – progress against targets and milestones, outputs and volumes Level 2: Targeting – proportions of the target groups benefitting from WP activities Level 3: Measurement of outcomes – impacts and unintended consequences, short-, medium- and long-term Level 4: Value for money – cost-effectiveness.
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The University is employing the services of its School of Applied Social Sciences and its Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring (CEM) to undertake evaluation and monitoring. The Centre, which works with schools nationally, has access to very large quantities of relevant background data against which to evaluate the University’s access measures. The University is also collaborating in a research project to evaluate the retention benefits of bursaries.
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The University will be monitoring annually the composition of its full-time home undergraduate population, using a range of internal and external WP indicators. Monitoring will be undertaken by the University Planning Office, and data will be regularly viewed by the appropriate individuals and committees across the University.
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. 7.1 The plans in this Access Agreement have been considered and agreed by the University’s Executive Board, University Teaching, Learning and Student Experience Committee (UTLSEC), Senate and Council.
7.2 The University’s performance against targets will be monitored annually on receipt of UCAS data.
7.3 Monitoring of performance against HESA benchmarks will be undertaken on publication of the annual Performance Indicators.
7.4 The University will report to HEFCE and OFFA each year as required by the respective annual monitoring processes for the Widening Participation Strategic Assessment and Access Agreement.
7.5 Within the University, the effectiveness of the outreach and financial support schemes included in the Access Agreement will be reviewed and evaluated annually by UTLSEC and reported to Executive Board, Senate and Council as appropriate. Recommendations for any revisions to the Access Agreement will be considered and agreed by UTLSEC (or its Chair) and by Executive Board (if appropriate), and then submitted to OFFA for approval.
7.6 Independent external evaluation of particular initiatives or new developments may be commissioned, and the outcomes will be reported to OFFA as part of the annual monitoring processes.
Monitoring and evaluation arrangements. The University will employ the services of its Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring (CEM) to undertake evaluation and monitoring. The Centre, which works with schools nationally, has access to very large quantities of relevant background data against which to evaluate the University’s access measures. Policy in respect of widening access is developed by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Education) through the University Executive Committee, the Education Committee and Senate, the latter two having student membership. Operational performance in respect of widening access is monitored by the same governance structures. The Student Recruitment and Admissions Office has institutional responsibility for the implementation and delivery of measures to promote access to the University.
