Southampton University has successfully appealed against rulings made by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) concerning an institutional review.
Due to be published in January this year, after being submitted for review in September 2012, the University has raised an issue on the review, winning the appeal four months later, the Times Higher Education reports.
The QAA is the agency which regulates British universities, usually every six years, to make sure quality and standards are being met.
Southampton has been the first ever university to successfully appeal a QAA review.
A complaint by the University against the QAA reviewers is believed to be responsible for the successful appeal, although no reasons have been given for it. The contents of the review will not be made public until the next review is published.
Southampton is now entitled to a fresh review by a new team. Currently, the date of this review is unknown.
In the previous audit of 2008, the agency positively said this about the Uni:
Confidence can reasonably be placed in the soundness of the institution’s present and likely future management of the academic standards of its awards.
The University released this joint statement with the QAA:
The University of Southampton’s appeal against the findings of its QAA Institutional Review has been upheld. In accordance with QAA’s published procedures, the review and judgements will be set aside and a new review carried out by a new review team.The scope, nature and date of the new review have yet to be determined. The findings of the appeal panel will be published when the new review report is available.
What was the original complaint of the QAA? If it was to do with the lack of organisation within faculties they should sit up and listen
Reply
no smoke without fire – yeah I agree
Reply
I think it is likely that the organisational restructuring of Schools to Faculties, which was only ‘completed’ (if you could call it that) fell too close to the Institional Review (which is a very elaborate and exhaustive exercise) may have played a key factor in the end result. I can imagine the University were ‘bricking’ themselves when they discovered the results. It must have been pretty damaging for them to take this action. I am not sure they would have done themselves any favours in the long run.
Reply
A review in September 2012… faculties existed when I joined the uni in September 2011. Close? Not really…
Also – there is definitely no smoke without fire. I hope the next review shows the same.
Reply
When you joined in 2011, it had only been done a month or so before. Close? Yes, really. But still not excusable.
I want my degree to be worth the paper it’s printed on. That’s all.
Reply
Maybe faculties were new when I joined, but this review took place a year later ergo they had a year to figure it out
Reply
Next time don’t bother writing your own “article”, just skip straight to the link to a proper one. The THE article actually contains some interesting information.
Reply