What can be learnt from subject review?
| Date | 01 September 2005 |
| Published date | 01 September 2005 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880510607954 |
| Pages | 219-226 |
| Author | Roger Ottewill |
| Subject Matter | Education |
What can be learned from
subject review?
Roger Ottewill
Centre for Learning and Teaching, University of Southampton,
Southampton, UK
Abstract
Purpose – To consider the shortcomings and strengths of the subject review process with a view to
identifying criteria that might be used to assess the value of externally administered quality assurance
processes in higher education.
Design/methodology/approach – Use is made of material from a variety of secondary sources
blended with personal reflections on the experience gained from undertaking aproject for LTSN BEST
(Business Education Support Team), the aim of which was to establish what could be learned from the
content of the 164 subject review reports for business and management issued during 2000/2001.
Findings – Much of the evidence indicates that subject review generated strong negative feelings on
the part of many in higher education. However, while critics tended to make the running, there was an
alternative point of view that was expressed a little more circumspectly.
Practical implications – In shaping the quality assurance processes of the future, due account
should be taken not only of the concerns of those who criticised subject review but also of the stance of
its defenders.
Originality/value – With the issue of quality remaining high on the higher education agenda,
appraisals of past practice have an important part to play in guiding the way forward.
Keywords Quality assurance,Quality assessment, Teaching, Highereducation
Paper type General review
Introduction
Subject review was one of a number of externally administered quality assurance
processes to which institutions of higher education in England have been subject at
different times since the early 1990s. An important catalyst for these processes was the
creation of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) in 1993.
Significantly, the legislation under which HEFCE was established, the Further and
Higher Education Act 1992, placed upon it responsibility for assessing the quality of
education in the institutions it funded. Initially, it did this through a process known as
Teaching Quality Assessment (TQA), which was overseen by HEFCE’s Quality
Assurance Division. TQA required institutions to complete self-assessment reports in
which they had to claim and justify whether the quality of their teaching in each
subject area was excellent, satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Reports were considered by
scrutineers who judged whether or not the claims made were substantiated. On the
basis of these judgements, HEFCE decided which institutions should be visited by a
team of assessors for the purpose of gathering direct evidence of teaching quality. The
outcome of the visit was the issue of a quality assessment report covering
commendations of good practice, recommendations for improvement and the verdict in
terms of whether provision was deemed to be excellent, satisfactory or unsatisfactory.
In 1997 the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) was set up, in
the wake of the Dearing Report (1997), and HEFCE contracted this new body to act on
The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available at The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/researchregister www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
Subject review
219
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 13 No. 3, 2005
pp. 219-226
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684880510607954
To continue reading
Request your trial