Section 9.4 Monitoring and review
1. The department/school proposing the collaborative arrangement is responsible for the on-going management of the partnership including the quality management of the provision, whether it is delivered by Durham staff or by staff within the partner organisation.
Taught programmes - validated provision
2. Quality management procedures must include:
a. use of external examiners, appointed by the University in accordance with its code of practice;
b. use of the a University Liaison Officer, appointed by the University in accordance with its policy on such Officers;
c. student feedback via questionnaires, and a Staff-Student Consultative Committee;
d. an annual review that culminates in the submission of a completed annual review report form (available at Appendix A4.06). This should be submitted to the relevant Faculty Support Officer, for consideration at the appropriate Faculty Collaborative Provision Panel;
e. a Management Committee, which will normally meet once per term, and will be chaired by the University and supported by the Academic Support Office.
Taught programmes - all other types of collaborative provision
3. Quality management procedures must include:
a. use of external examiners. Where appropriate these should be the same as those overseeing programmes delivered at Durham so that they can ensure comparability of standards. External examiners must have access to work assessed by partner organisations. Any costs of travel and translation must be borne by the Durham department/school or by the partner if agreed when the partnership is established;
b. student feedback on all modules and on the programme as a whole via questionnaires and a staff-student consultative committee in line with Durham guidelines;
c. a Management Committee which must meet in person at least once per year to review the programme and the partnership. The requirements for the annual review will be specified in the memorandum of association, and the minutes of the relevant Partnership Approval Panel. The review must make a commentary on the agreed performance indicators identifying positive and negative issues and stating action points where relevant. The review by the Management Committee must be fully minuted and include comment on all the items required by the memorandum of agreement and/or Partnership Approval Panel. The minutes should feed into the department/school annual review of teaching and be forwarded to the Faculty Collaborative Provision Panel (see below). The Management Committee may meet at other times in the year either in person or by video-conferencing.
Research degree programmes
4. The usual procedures for monitoring the progress of research students should be followed. It is also necessary to monitor the operation of the partnership itself as an agreement. The requirements for the annual review will be specified in the memorandum of association, and the minutes of the relevant Partnership Approval Panel.
a. For research students who are primarily registered at Durham, monitoring and support procedures will normally include:
- the usual monitoring of students by the academic department/school as laid out in the University's code of practice, whether they are studying here or abroad;
- an annual report each year using the normal Graduate School procedures, whether they are studying here or abroad;
- opportunities for feedback to the Durham department/school through the usual channels (e.g. staff-student committee, informally to the supervisor or Director of Postgraduate Research). While a student is abroad there must be means of providing this feedback through email or by other means and this must be made explicit to the students involved;
- agreed support, with a named supervisor, for the student while studying in a partner department/school;
- contact arrangements between the Durham department/school and the partner department/school(s) to ensure that students are appropriately supported while abroad and that concerns can be discussed with the main supervisor in Durham.
b. For students who are primarily registered with a partner organisation but spend time at Durham, the usual monitoring processes should be applied by the Durham department/school during their time with us: i.e. department/school monitoring in line with the University's code of practice (depending how long they stay with us), the Graduate School annual report process and access to all the usual feedback processes (as above). In addition, as part of the process of agreeing the partnership, the Durham department/school must be satisfied (and provide evidence to the Partnership Approval Panel) that the partner department/school(s) have appropriate and robust procedures in place for monitoring and supporting the progress of students registered primarily with them. These do not have to be the same as Durham procedures but we must be satisfied that they are appropriate and effective. It is important to note that completion rates will cover all students receiving a Durham award irrespective of where their primary supervision is located.
c. It is the responsibility of the student's 'home' department/school to provide out-going students with information about the partner to which they are going (this includes academic issues and non-academic issues such as accommodation), to ensure that they have appropriate language skills, and that they understand the feedback mechanisms and points of contact (in the partner organisation and in Durham) for students while they are abroad.
d. The Durham department/school must liaise with the Procurement Office to ensure that insurance is provided for out-going and in-coming students. The department/school should ensure that out-going students understand the terms of the insurance and the need to take out any personal insurance which may be needed for supplementary activities such as holidays.
e. The partnership itself must be reviewed each year by representatives of the departments/schools concerned. This Review Committee must meet in person at least once per year. It is envisaged that this Review could take place at the same time as other meetings of the research team. The Review Committee must complete an Annual Review of Collaborative Agreements for Research Programmes Monitoring Form (available as Appendix A9.09). The completed report should be sent to the relevant Faculty Support Officer for consideration by the Faculty Collaborative Provision Panel. The Review Committee may meet at other times in the year either in person or by video-conferencing.
Faculty Collaborative Provision Panels
5. An annual report to a Faculty Collaborative Provision Panel shall be made on each approved collaborative partnership. The Panel will usually meet in November/December and shall consider collaborative partnerships relating to both taught and research degrees, to allow departments/schools and faculties to review holistically the full range of their collaborative partnerships. The Panel's remit shall include considering annual review reports from the University's partners.
6. Annual reports will be considered by a Faculty Collaborative Provision Panel consisting of:
- the Chair of the relevant Faculty Education Committee(s) (chair);
- another member of the faculty, appointed by Education Committee;
- a member of Education Committee or Quality and Standards Sub-Committee;
- the Director of the International Office or nominee;
- the Faculty Accountant;
- the Head of the Academic Support Office;
- the Faculty Support Officer (Secretary).
7. The Panel shall report to Education Committee (through Quality and Standards Sub-Committee). If the Panel identifies what it perceives to be threats to quality and standards that are not being addressed, it should highlight these in its report. In such cases Education Committee is responsible for investigating this matter and requiring that appropriate action is taken.
8. The documentation to be submitted to the Panel in respect of taught programmes shall be confirmed by the Partnership Approval Panel at the time the partnership is approved.
9. In respect of research degree programmes, the minutes of the annual review committee considering the issues detailed in paragraph 3e above shall be submitted to the Panel.
10. All collaborative partnerships shall be considered within the periodic review of the department/school involved in the partnership. Special arrangements may need to be made to obtain feedback from students off-site (e.g. a duo-based 'chat-room').