Quality Handbook Supplement 7A - Periodic Review: School Review Operational Guidance
On this page
Please note: Periodic Review has ceased for the 2026-27 academic year and will be re-developed ready for the 27-28 academic year.
1. Introduction
1.1 The purpose of School Review is to provide University oversight of the efficacy of a School’s approach in: (a) managing the standards and quality of its courses and (b) implementing measures agreed at UET in relation to student experience and student outcomes. This supplement sets out how the School Review works in practice.
1.2 Members of the panel for School Review engage with a range of evidence to support the School in reflecting on how it provides assurance to the University that the OfS B Conditions of Registration continue to be met . In summary this means that assurance of the following areas is considered:
- The academic experience (B1)
- Resources, student support and student engagement (B2)
- Assessment (B4)
- Standards (B5)
Further information
- Until 2027-28, the B3 student outcomes condition will be addressed through the revised Course Review and Re-approval process.
1.3 The panel draws on evidence from (a) outcomes of an Education, Quality and Partnerships (EQP) desk-based review of School and course processes, (b) a presentation provided by the School and (c) discussions with staff and students.
1.4 The documentation which is considered at the desk-based review is standard documentation that currently exists. Only documentation relating to the previous 12 months will be examined (unless a policy requires action to take place within a longer time period, in which case the most recent evidence relating to this area will be considered). There is no requirement for the School to produce anything solely for the purpose of the review event other than the presentation.
2. Criteria and evidence
Please use the following link to download a PDF setting out the key questions that are used for the focus for review and how these are mapped to the OfS B Condition of evidence:
3. Desk based review
3.1 The purpose of the desk-based review is to provide the review panel with information about how the School’s quality management processes assure the University that the B conditions of registration continue to be met. This is achieved by a set of reports:
- A report that considers School level oversight of those activities considered to be necessary for assuring quality and standards (see table above).
- Reports for each of the courses selected for deep dive review. These course reports reflect on course-level activity.
3.2 The number of courses in the deep dive sample is commensurate with the size of the School and the outcome of the latest UET review. The courses are selected on the basis that they are broadly representative of the School’s provision. They may also include a course highlighted by UET as requiring specific action, or a course put forward by the School as one that could potentially benefit from external scrutiny. At a minimum, the deep dive sample will include one undergraduate, one postgraduate, and a collaborative course where appropriate.
4. Review panel
4.1 Prior to the Review, each panel member is asked to focus on one or more of the OfS’ B conditions, but this does not preclude any panel member from engaging with the other conditions.
4.2 In order to prepare for the review event itself, the panel will receive the desk-based review reports and the School’s S4A and GOS plans. They will not routinely have access to other source evidence, unless in a specific case and agreed by the Chair.
4.3 Panel members need to have undertaken their consideration of the documentation before the agenda setting meeting which usually takes place one week before the review event.
5. Timeframe
5.1 EQP and the School confirm the term for the review in the year preceding the review. A panel is convened.
5.2 The timeframe is as follows:
14 weeks prior to review event: EQP confirms courses selected for ‘deep dives’
10 weeks prior to review event: School makes documentation available to EQP
10 weeks prior to review event: EQP start desk-based review
3 weeks prior to review event: Panel receive outcomes of desk-based review
1 week prior to review event: Agenda setting meeting for panel
1 week prior to review event: Confirmation of required attendance of specific colleagues at review event
REVIEW EVENT
Approx. 15 working days after review event: Draft report of observations shared with School to complete. This timeframe is subject to the working pattern of the Review Manager and any University closure days.
Date agreed with Chair and School: Where required, action plan agreed
Next available ASQC: Final report and action plan submitted to ASQC
6. Agenda setting meeting
6.1 EQP will arrange an agenda setting meeting for all panel members, usually one week before the review event takes place. Attendance is important and panel members are asked to prioritise this meeting in their diaries. The meeting is chaired by the Review Chair.
6.2 Panel members need to have undertaken their consideration of the documentation before this meeting. Based on individual members’ reading of the documentation, the panel will begin to set out the broad areas that appear to require further exploration at the review event. Panel members should read all documentation and focus their particular attention on the areas for which they are responsible (see above 4.1).
6.3 In the period between the agenda setting meeting and the review event, panel members should begin to draft questions for the event based on the broad discussion areas agreed at the agenda setting meeting. These questions will then be confirmed at the private meetings of the panel during the review event itself.
7. Review Event
7.1 There are two key features of the review event: the School presentation and meetings with staff and students.
School presentation
7.2 The purpose of the School presentation is to provide an overview of the School’s approach, and the challenges associated with ensuring good outcomes for all students. This is an opportunity for the School to reflect on their Success for All action plan and their priorities with respect to improving student continuation, completion and progression.
7.3 Reference should be made to the outcomes of the most recent UET Autumn Review.
7.4 The presentation should be no longer than 20 minutes.
Meetings with staff and students
7.5 The purpose of these meetings is to triangulate outcomes from the desk-based review with evidence provided by staff and students. Areas of discussion will have been identified at the panel’s agenda setting meeting.
7.6 The School is responsible for ensuring that appropriate students and staff are invited to the afternoon meetings of the review event day. The selection of students and staff will be first made by the School and then confirmed by the Panel during the agenda-setting meeting. Changes may be required after this point. The Review Day meetings should include:
- School Senior Colleagues – Executive Dean, Deputy Dean, School Quality Manager, Learning and Teaching Manager, Head of School Operations, School Employability Manager, Head of Department for courses chosen for deep dive, any other colleagues identified by the Review Manager and/or the School.
- Student meeting(s) – A student from L4, 5 and 6 from each of the courses chosen for deep dive to include a mixture of entry qualification e.g. BTEC, A levels. Where possible, the student attendees should also include a mixture of demographics, a course representative, international and mature students.
- Staff meeting – Course leaders (from each deep dive course), Principal lecturers (where appropriate and from a selection of the deep dive courses), Senior lecturers (from a selection of the deep dive courses). It may be useful to have a colleague who has personal tutoring as part of their role. Module leaders (from a selection of the deep dive courses), 1 Hourly Paid Lecturer (HPL) and 1 Technician (where appropriate).
7.7 If there are any issues with regards to identifying who from the above can attend on the day of the review, please reach out to the Review Manager at your earliest convenience.
7.8 The role of the School Lead is a significant one and allows for consistent communication between the School and EQP throughout the 6-9 month Periodic Review process. It is anticipated that the School Lead be present at all milestones and discussions. This includes the Senior Colleague meeting on the day of the review. The attendance of the School Lead means that at least one colleague has engaged with each touchpoint, which benefits the post-review day School response and action plan, through ASQC to operationalising and monitoring within the School.
7.9 An indicative timetable for the event is provided below:
9.00 – 9.55: Panel meeting
10.00 – 10.30: School presentation
10.30 – 11.30: Discussion with senior School colleagues
11.30 – 12.25: Panel meeting
3.30 – 5.00: The panel meet with School staff
5.05 – 5.50: Panel meeting
5.50 – 6.00: Informal meeting with the School PR contact usually the School Standards and Quality Manager and the EQP Review Manager
8. Outcome of the review
8.1 The outcome of the review is articulated in a report drafted by EQP and agreed by the panel. This report will be prepared within approximately 15 working days of the event taking place, this is subject to the Review Manager’s working pattern and University closure days. The writing of the report will require contributions from the panel; therefore, panel members need to ensure that they set aside time to contribute to the preparation of the report in the weeks after the event.
8.2 The report summarises the main observations made by the panel about the efficacy of the School’s approach to assuring that the B Conditions continue to be met. It will also provide a commentary on the panel’s reflections on the efficacy of the actions being taken to ensure good outcomes (academic and professional) for all students.
8.3 The report will also set out actions that the School is required to address, and a timeframe for these actions.
8.4 The draft report is sent to the School, and key School colleagues are asked to respond to observations and complete the report with a) their reflections on having been through the process and what may have changed as a result and, b) how they plan to meet any required actions.
8.5 The School is expected to report on these actions at a meeting with the Review Chair and Review Manager at a mutually agreed date. The final report and action plan is considered at the next Academic Standards and Quality Committee meeting.
Change History
Approval date:
10.05.2022
Nature of revisions:
New policy
Implementation date:
10.05.2022
Approval date:
07.03.2023
Nature of revisions:
Timeframe amended
Implementation date:
07.03.2023
Approval date:
26.04.2023
Nature of revisions:
Further details about Review Day meeting attendees added. Removal of references to stakeholders.
Implementation date:
26.04.2023
Approval date:
14.09.2023
Nature of revisions:
Minor refinements including addition of second internal panel member and minor update to timings. Guidance for the School regarding the report.
Implementation date:
01.10.2023
Approval date:
25.09.2025
Nature of revisions:
Removal of references to stakeholder questionnaire as evidence. Removal of prescriptive allocation of B conditions to panel members.
Implementation date:
01.10.2025
Approval date:
01.09.2026
Nature of revisions:
PCR references replaced with Course Review and Re-approval Policy.
Implementation date:
01.09.2026