This blog is hosted on Ideas on EuropeIdeas on Europe Avatar

The UACES Blog

News and comment from UACES events and activities

Latest

TEF – what is it, where did it come from and how it might develop?

In the past 18 months a new acronym has been added to the higher education landscape in the UK – TEF. The TEF is the Teaching Excellence Framework, introduced by the UK Government in 2015 to “recognise and reward excellence teaching” and to balance the incentives offered to universities through the longstanding Research Excellence Framework. As is often the case with new policies, there are a range of reasons and rationales for the launch of the TEF. In part, it is the result of the rise in universities fees in England in 2012 and the need to demonstrate that students are receiving value for money. Equally, it was also a consequence of the declining real value of these higher fees to universities. They lobbied government for a further increase in tuition fees, and it came with a new quality assessment system attached. However, fees are only part of the story. There was a concern within government that universities did not consistently value teaching to the same degrees that they value research. The debate was also influenced by an academic study from the United States (Academically Adrift, Arum and Roska, 2011) that suggested that many students demonstrated little development in their critical thinking skills while at university. Translated into the question ‘how do we know if students are learning anything?’ it highlighted the problematic questions of how we can measure learning in a consistent and objective way.

So the TEF was announced by Government and after a number of rounds of consultation, is being rolled out. At the end of last year, Universities were provided with a centrally generated set of metrics, showing how they performed on a range of measures. These were compared to the expected benchmark performance for an institution with their student population characteristics and positive and negative flags indicated. Not surprisingly, this has been a controversial exercise. In part this is because of the metrics chosen. Many derive from the National Student Survey, which measures ‘student satisfaction’ rather than ‘student learning’. There are metric on employability based on students reported activities 6 months after graduation and there is a measure of student progression rates. All are presented for the whole population and presented as ‘split’ metrics to reflect differentials such as ethnicity, gender and disability. Critics argue that these are a narrow set of indicators that say little about the quality of teaching or student learning. Government accepts this, but counters that other indicators will be added in time and that there is no consensus within the sector on what alternative metrics might be preferred.

But the metrics are not the whole picture. Institutions are asked to submit a 15 page document that provides a commentary on their metrics and makes their case for excellence, which were submitted at the end of January. The question that the sector continues to ask is ‘what will be the relative balance in the evaluations between the metrics and the submissions?’ There are a range of views on this. Some point to sentences in the guidance that suggest that a set of metrics that are clearly above or below the benchmarks will determine the outcome regardless of the submission. Other suggest that the submission will have far greater significance and will be the primary basis of the decision. What we do know is that the judgements by the assessors (who are senior academics within the sector), will be go though perhaps 4 or 5 stages of moderation, before final decisions are made by the TEF panel. Institutions will be graded at three levels of excellence ‘Gold’, ‘Silver’ and ‘Bronze’. In time, the extent to which institutions will be able to raise fees will be differentiated by these rating, so they are more than just marks of esteem.

How TEF will evolve is a further question. The National Union of Students are hoping to undermine the NSS based metrics as part of their opposition to a policy that will see fees rise. Some institutions have threatened not to participate if their excellence is not recognised. But assuming that the policy survives and continues to develop, it is planned to include post-graduate assessment in due course and extend assessment from whole institution level to discipline level. As mentioned earlier, there are also a range of new metrics which might be added in time. If these can capture the quality of teaching and learning and rewards institutions where this is excellent, then the TEF will become worthy of its name and help to balance the incentives for research excellence. Indeed, if it incentivises universities to address the barriers that disadvantages many groups of students, TEF could be a tool of progressive social policy. On the other hand, if the system becomes captured by game playing tactics or outcomes are not regarded as reflecting the experiences of students on the ground, then it may just be another acronym for the historians.

Professor John Craig is Dean of Social Sciences at Leeds Beckett University and Chairs the PSA Teaching and Learning Specialist Group. He was a member of the BIS Expert Group on TEF 2015-16.

The TEF is further explored in the reflection  ’Teaching Excellence Framework: a critical response and an alternative future‘ by Mike Neary, published in the UACES open access journal JCER.

 

COMMENT

Recent Articles

Chair’s Message – February 2017

Published on by | 1 Comment

As UACES enters its 50th year, our golden anniversary celebrations are already underway.  Thanks to our ongoing European Commission funding and in conjunction with our partners at the European University Institute (EUI) in Florence, Italy, we have set the wheels in motion for a conference at the EUI on 12-13 October 2017. At that event […]

EU’s climate change and energy cooperation: moving towards mutual learning?

Published on by | No Comments
UACES Energy CRN

The second international workshop of the UACES CRN on the European Energy Policy was held at the University of Cambridge Conservation Research Initiative (UCCRI) in the David Attenborough Building. The event brought together scholars from across three continents (Europa, the Americas and Asia) in order to discuss the EU’s climate change and energy cooperation strategy […]

Chair’s message – November 2016

Published on by | Comments Off

In 2017 UACES will mark its 50th anniversary. When we began planning the celebrations we could not have known that 2017 would also see the start of negotiations between the UK and the EU27 to take the UK out of the European Union.  The UACES committee confirmed in its meeting of 7 October 2016 that the association, from its […]

Chair’s message – July 2016

Published on by | Comments Off

On Thursday 23rd June 2016 the UK will vote in a referendum to remain in or leave the European Union.  What might the vote mean for UACES and its members? The date will have come and gone by the time we go to press.  So here we look ahead by revisiting the past. We recall […]

JCMS Annual Review Lecture 2016

Published on by | Comments Off

‘How much Europe’, asked Tanja Börzel in the JCMS Annual Review lecture, ‘is necessary for effective and legitimate governance in Europe amid enduring crises?’ In her insightful and wide ranging diagnosis of the challenges facing the European Union, Tanja Börzel argued to an audience of scholars, students and policy-makers at Europe House in London that […]

Referendum Round-up

Published on by | Comments Off
UACES logo

Round-up of writing and conversation by UACES members on the UK’s vote to leave the EU. This includes pieces published before and after the referendum vote. If you are a UACES member and would like your piece featured below please email admin@uaces.org Pieces are ordered by publication date with the most recent at the top […]

JCMS Asia trip report

Published on by | Comments Off
JCMS Symposium in Tokyo

As part of their original bid to become editors of JCMS Michelle Cini and Amy Verdun set themselves a number of goals during their tenure. These included (amongst others) making JCMS into a truly interdisciplinary journal, increasing the economics ranking of the journal and turning the JCMS website into a unique resource for subscribers and […]

Crisis and Innovation in the European Union: Beyond Populism and Managerialism

Published on by | Comments Off

UACES supported the organisation of two interdisciplinary workshops on Crisis and Innovation in the European Union: Beyond Populism and Managerialism at Warwick Law School. The British Academy and the Society of Legal Scholars provided additional financial support. The workshop on the 13 May 2016 brought together experts working on institutional corruption, financial regulation, internal market […]

The Return of Spheres of Influence? Continuity and Change in Geopolitics

Published on by | Comments Off
The Return of Spheres of Influence? Continuity and Change in Geopolitics

This seminar was supported by UACES and was held at the Aleksanteri Institute, the Russian and Eastern European Studies centre of excellence at the University of Helsinki. The event was also supported with funding from the Aleksanteri Institute and The Finnish Centre of Excellence in Russian Studies. Presentations were given in two roundtables. In the […]

Subscribe to a fortnightly email featuring posts from Ideas on Europe hosted blogs

UACES and Ideas on Europe do not take responsibility for opinions expressed in articles on blogs hosted on Ideas on Europe. All opinions are those of the contributing authors.