Quality Assurance Agency (QAA): The UK Quality Code for Higher Education

The 12-page document outlines a set of principles for securing academic standards and assuring and enhancing quality. This is the fourth version of the Quality Code since it was first developed in the late 1990s and is an update to the 2018 code. The new version has 12 principles, each with key practices, which cover, among other things, student engagement, partnerships, review processes, enhancement activities and alignment with international standards. 

At-a-glance:

• A strategic approach should be taken to manage quality and standards, with regular evaluation. The approach will align with policies and practices on equity, equality, diversity and inclusion, and environmental sustainability. It should be published and communicated clearly and supported by a governance framework (p4)
• Deliberate steps should be taken to engage students as partners in assuring and enhancing the quality of the student learning experience. This engagement will influence decision making. Any groups or panels need to reflect the diversity of the student body. Students are enabled and encouraged to actively engage in governance (p4)
• Resources for the delivery of a high-quality learning experience should be planned, secured and maintained, including staffing, and digital and physical resources. Resources are reviewed and updated in alignment with strategic developments and changes in provision and staff and student recruitment. The effectiveness and impact of learning environments are monitored and evaluated on a systematic basis (p5)
• Data is used to inform and evaluate quality. Providers should make explicit, including to staff and students, the type and level of data and the policies and processes that underpin its use (p6)
• Academic standards and quality should be monitored and evaluation activity documented to clarify aims, objectives, intended actions and targets. The actions and outcomes from this are communicated to staff, students, the governing body and, where required, external stakeholders. Any enhancements implemented as a result of monitoring are, in turn, monitored and evaluated (p6)
• Providers should engage in external review and accreditation, whether commissioned or linked to professional accreditation. Outcomes from external review and accreditation can be used as a catalyst for ongoing improvement (p7)
• Design, development, approval and modification of programmes and modules should ensure the quality of provision and that academic standards of awards are consistent with the relevant qualifications framework (p8)
• Providers and their partners should agree arrangements for effective governance to secure academic standards and quality of programmes and modules that are delivered in partnerships. Partnerships will involve different levels of risk and require due diligence processes. Students should have information about the responsibilities of each partner and where to go for support throughout their studies. Partnerships should be subject to ongoing scrutiny that includes periodic monitoring, evaluation and review to assure quality (p9)
• Recruitment, selection and admissions processes should be transparent, fair and inclusive. Prospective students should have accessible information to allow them to make informed choices (p9)
• A framework of support for students that scaffolds the academic, personal and professional learning journey promotes belonging. Information should be provided on wider opportunities for development and the availability of support services. Students are supported at key transition points (p10)
• All students should be supported to develop and demonstrate academic and professional skills and competencies. Assessment employs a variety of methods and produces outcomes that are comparable across the UK and recognised globally. Students need clear information about learning outcomes and the purpose of assessment. Ongoing advice and guidance about academic integrity is provided to ensure that students and staff understand what is expected of them (p10)
• Processes for complaints and appeals should be robust, fair, transparent and accessible, and clearly articulated to staff and students. These are regularly reviewed and the outcomes considered. Early resolution and proportionate actions are the aim (p11)

Implications for governance:

The QAA Quality Code outlines 12 starting-point principles for securing academic standards and assuring and enhancing quality: a key responsibility for governing boards and an area that has come under increased scrutiny in recent years.

Because of the generality of the sector-agreed principles, the framework applies regardless of regulatory approach, precise educational setting or level or mode of study and can be useful as a tool for evaluation and review of policy and practice.

The updated version aims to put student experience and voice at the centre of the framework. Equity, equality, inclusion, diversity and sustainability are highlighted frequently throughout the document as important considerations to be embedded in institutional culture, policy and practice, and in measures taken to enhance quality.

Engaging students as partners goes further than representation on boards and committees and includes input into course design and assessment, regular opportunities for students’ views to be heard, and mechanisms to feed back to students where their views have been taken on board. This can be a driver for an improved student experience and an enhanced sense of belonging. It can also support the wider aims of inclusivity and enable institutions to develop equitable approaches.

Representations and student voice should reflect the diversity of the student body, requiring engagement beyond the student union for instance, and governors may want to consider how closely their institution aligns with the ‘students as partners’ principle.

Governing bodies will need to be aware as to when the 2024 Quality Code be used in a regulatory context depending on where their institution is located. In Scotland the Quality Code will be used from the start of Academic Year 2024-25; in Wales from 2025-26, following an implementation period; in Northern Ireland the Department for Economy is planning an enhancement-led review where the Quality Code will be a reference point; and in England there is no regulatory requirement to use the Quality Code (unless subject to Educational Oversight Review), but providers are advised to check with collaborative partners which quality frameworks they are aligned to. 

Governing boards will be aware of the importance of good data as a tool for quality assurance. Principle 4 highlights that collecting, analysing and utilising qualitative and quantitative data from departmental, programme and module levels is crucial to good decision making and enhancing teaching, learning and the wider student experience. The new code underlines the importance of making explicit to staff and students what data is collected and how it is used.

The 2024 version of the code provides greater detail of practices around university partnerships: an addition that will be of interest to governors given the recent high-profile attention on franchise arrangements. A National Audit Office report published earlier this year found that governance and oversight of franchised provision needs to be strengthened following instances of fraud and abuse in the sector. Meanwhile the Office for Students is investigating specific provision.

The code recommends that universities involved in partnership arrangements agree and communicate mutual and specific responsibilities in delivering, monitoring, evaluating, assuring and enhancing the learning experience. All partners should “agree, understand, communicate and take responsibility for the maintenance of academic standards and enhancement of quality”. 

Partnership arrangements carry risk and due diligence is important here. Written agreements, including details about closing a partnership, should be signed before commencement. Students should have information about the responsibilities of each partner and where to go for support. Accurate, up-to-date records should be kept and ongoing scrutiny including periodic monitoring, evaluation and review should all be in place.

Updates in the code on securing academic integrity are also timely as universities grapple with the advent and implications of generative AI, while the principle relating to complaints and appeals is a useful reminder of the importance of clear, fair and speedy procedures.

A general takeaway from the new iteration of the code is the importance of monitoring, evaluation and reviewing processes and policies to ensure they have the desired effect, and as circumstances change. As it suggests, any action prompted by such monitoring then needs itself to be monitored, in what should be an ongoing, systematic process.