Academic quality and standards committee - terms of reference

Purpose

1. To ensure development and review of an appropriate framework and methodologies for the approval of well-designed, high quality courses and their monitoring and review in line with the Office for Students Regulatory Framework and the UK Quality Code for Higher Education. 
2. To ensure an appropriate regulations and quality assurance framework to ensure that the standards of awards granted by the University maintain their comparability and value over time. 

Terms of reference

1. Develop and recommend to the Academic Board appropriate processes for the approval, monitoring and review of courses leading to University of West London awards. 
2. To oversee the development and review of the University’s academic regulations through the work of the Academic Regulations Review Committee. 
3. To ensure that the University’s qualifications and procedures are mapped to national frameworks and codes, as required. 
4. To ensure that the assessment frameworks and policy are reliable, fair and transparent 
5. To ensure appropriate arrangements for the maintenance of degree standards and their comparability including the framework for the appointment, induction and review of external examiners  
6. To review the appropriate accreditation of University awards and the use of Professional, Statutory and Regulatory bodies within awards. 
7. Receive and review reports on the outcomes and action plans on: 
   1. the Education Review in relation to quality and standards and associated action plans;  
   2. external examiners reports; 
   3. annual reports from key stakeholders to ensure they support a high quality student experience 
8. Receive and review overview reports on the outcomes of approvals, re-approvals and periodic reviews 
9. Receive reports from Schools/Colleges on quality assurance activities and action plans, including School/College Quality Committees 
10. Receive and review reports from external bodies (including reviews, audits, inspections and accreditation visits) and to monitor any actions arising from these events. 
11. Approve an annual report to Academic Board to enable the assurance of the Board of Governors on the quality and standards of University Awards. 

Membership - current incumbent; ex-officio members

• Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education and Student Experience) (Chair) - Sara Raybould  
• Provost and Senior Deputy Vice-Chancellor - Professor Anthony Woodman 
• Chief Compliance Officer - Lynn Robinson
• Pro Vice-Chancellor, People and Digital - Adrian Ellison 
• University Secretary and Registrar - Joshua Heming  
• Head of CELT - Jessica Frye 
• Director of Academic Quality and Standards and Head of the Global Partnerships Office - Stephen Scott 
• Associate Pro-Vice Chancellor Student Affairs - Tracy McAuliffe 

Nominated teaching staff (one per School/College)

• London College of Music - Dr Remy Martin
• London School of Film, Media and Design - Dr Deirdre Robson
• College of Nursing, Midwifery and Healthcare - Charlotte Bramanis 
• School of Human and Social Sciences - Dr Tricia Tikasingh
• The Claude Littner Business School - Dr Amelia Au-Yeung
• School of Law - Khalid Butt
• London Geller College of Hospitality and Tourism - Louise Gill 
• School of Computing and Engineering - Thomas Madsen - Engineering, Ali Gheitasy – Computing 
• School of Medicine and Biosciences - Dr Antony Aleksiev
• Institute for Policing Studies - Andrew Rose
• Drama Studio London - Emma Hands

Student representatives

• Vice-President Education, Students’ Union - Paul Hutchings 

In attendance

• Head of Membership - Jamal El-Kalawy
• Representation and Advocacy Manager - Jessica Smith

Quorum

50% plus one of appointed (i.e. nominated and ex-officio) members excluding vacancies. Where division of the total number of appointed members by two - plus one - results in a fraction, quorum is to be met by rounding-up the fraction to the nearest whole number. 

Where a committee member fulfils more than one role within a particular committee, they are only counted once for the purposes of quorum.

Where a meeting is not quorate, it can proceed, and the agenda items can be discussed and recommendations can be made on these, which are then to be put to the whole committee, either in writing afterwards or at a following meeting. Any decisions/approvals would have to be ratified at the next quorate meeting or approved by Chair’s action if it is urgent. 

Reporting lines

The Academic Quality and Standards Committee is a committee of and reports to the Academic Board.

Supporting information

Committees / Groups feeding into the Academic Quality and Standards Committee

The following report to the Academic Quality and Standards Committee: 

• Academic Regulations Review Committee 
• School/College Quality Committees 
• Education Review   
• Quality and Standards Review Working Group 
• Assessment Working Group 

Effectiveness and lifespan

Lifespan ongoing. Effectiveness reviewed five-yearly as part of the review of the effectiveness of the Academic Board. 

Actions that may be taken by the Committee

The Academic Quality and Standards Committee may: 

• Note 
• Receive 
• Consider 
• Support  
• Approve 
• Recommend 
• Review 
• Reject 

Most appropriate minuting style

Formal minutes

Resources

• Lead - Academic Registrar and Director of Academic Quality and Standards 
• Secretary - Academic Quality and Standards Manager 
• Meetings - Normally six times per year