5 principles to maintain and enhance quality in challenging times 

On 31 March, a blog setting out five principles to maintain and enhance quality in challenging times was published on the UUK website, co-authored by Professor Nic Beech and Professor Clare Peddie, Chair and Deputy Chair of the Quality Council.

The principles are informed by discussions held by the Quality Council over the last year in the context of UUK’s work on transformation and efficiency, and the piece includes case studies from Quality Council members. To read the blog, please visit UUK’s website: 5 Principles to Maintain and Enhance Quality in Challenging Times.  

by Lauren Harper

Student view: wider challenges impacting students’ experiences of quality in higher education

In this blog, the student representative members of the Quality Council set out some of the key factors impacting students’ experiences of quality. This blog represents the personal views of the student representatives.  

When we think of quality, it is only natural that our minds go to what institutions are providing. We consider quality to be about the academic experience that a student receives. We think of sector best practice, pedagogy, seminar and lecture quality, student-to-staff ratios, and more. This is all quality - but it is not all that impacts quality. 

What feels equally salient is how students are able to experience quality. When our notion of quality solely considers academic provision, in line with the expectations of the sector’s funders and regulators, we risk missing so much of what else impacts a student’s experience engaging, even when they are accessing the highest quality education.

Cost of living 

Many concerns around teaching standards and quality in higher education stem from issues surrounding financial stability. The same pattern appears for students; as money continues to be, and increasingly becomes, an issue for learners, the harder it is for cohorts to take advantage of high-quality teaching.  

According to research by the National Union of Students (NUS), 69% of students are now in part time work alongside full time study, with 62% of those working paycheque to paycheque in order to afford rent and bills. This puts students working in a difficult position, whereby sacrifices often have to be made when it comes to their social lives, internships and other opportunities that benefit graduate outcomes, as well as of burnout due to a lack of rest. Even when the sacrifices made are non-academic, time-poor students not only risk falling victim to a two-tier student experience, they are likely to have less time to go through readings in advance of seminars and lectures, to complete assignments, and to take advantage of additional academic support (such as office hours). They may also struggle to meet hidden course costs, such as creative materials, travel or books.  

This does little to level the playing field in higher education, and as financial support continues to fall behind the true cost of living, the exacerbation of this problem is only an inevitability. As a sector, we have a responsibility to support our students throughout their time at university and acknowledge the impact of the cost-of-living crisis on students’ ability to experience quality. This is why NUS has repeatedly called on the government to complement its focus on breaking down barriers to opportunity with adequate financial support to students in order to truly realise this ambition.  

Housing 

Connected to the cost-of-living crisis, students across the UK are facing an escalating housing crisis - one that goes beyond affordability and availability to the very core of wellbeing and academic success.  

A major concern is the poor condition of student housing. In many cases, students are paying high rents for accommodation plagued by damp, mould, pests, faulty heating, and inadequate insulation. These aren’t just minor inconveniences - they can have serious consequences for physical and mental health. Reports of students suffering from respiratory illnesses, allergies, and increased stress levels due to poor living conditions are growing. These are bad situations in and of themselves for the affected students, but they also make it harder for students to study and learn. The National Union of Students (NUS) has previously warned that bad housing is contributing to a decline in student mental health, with some even citing housing stress as a factor in dropping out of university altogether. 

The value for money equation in housing is deeply skewed. In some university cities, students are spending over £800 per month for housing that, based on the evidence above, would be unlikely to pass basic safety inspections elsewhere. And with the severe lack of purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) in many areas, more students are being pushed into an already overburdened private rental sector, often signing contracts for properties they haven’t even seen in person - sometimes with dire results. 

In some towns and cities, housing shortages have reached a tipping point, with some students forced to commute hours each day from neighbouring cities, relying on public transport which can be unreliable at the best of times. These long journeys eat into study time, increase exhaustion, and deepen feelings of disconnection from university life. 

It is important that when recruiting students to courses, consideration is given to the infrastructure needed to enable those students to access safe, appropriate, and affordable housing, which in turn enables them to commit fully to their education. Student leaders want to see the sector working with their local communities to ensure this happens. 

International student experience 

International students can have a different experience of quality to home students, even on the same course at the same institution. Whether impacted by factors such as inductions that don’t consider the adjustment to a different educational system, visa related challenges or difficulties with housing, there are a range of factors that mean we need to give specific consideration to the international student experience. Some of these relate to what institutions provide and have agency over, but external factors consistently have a significant impact on international students’ experiences.  

International students can be particularly affected by housing challenges, struggling to find housing as they arrive in the UK and trying to settle into a new place. On top of this, many private rentals require either a UK-based guarantor or a large sum upfront, usually 6 months' rent, difficult for many international students to access. Proposed amendments to the UK Renters’ Rights Bill are aiming to limit the circumstances where landlords can require a guarantor. Similarly, in the Housing (Scotland) Bill, amendments are being proposed to restrict criteria for guarantors. This includes not requiring them to reside in the UK, which would greatly benefit international students. Without and until these amendments, however, international students continue to face a greater prospect of being forced to live in unsuitable accommodation, with all the challenges this brings. 

Students can also struggle to obtain visas when first joining their course, and or often join later in the year with recruitment for international students often extending past the start of teaching. This can mean many international students join courses late, impacting their ability to benefit fully from the teaching on offer. Many international students choose to live in PBSA as this reduces the pressure on searching and applying for private rentals. However, PBSAs don’t have the same protections on notice periods and rent control, areas that NUS are campaigning to change at through Scottish and UK bills. 

Visa challenges don’t stop once a student has arrived and started their course. Typical support systems in UK universities can bump up against Home Office visa rules. For example, voluntary suspension of studies may be a sensible and supportive option for a home student, for example when managing an illness, mental health challenges or a bereavement. An international student cannot access this in the same way. There can be similar challenges with giving additional resits or reattempts to students, especially when these come close to visa deadlines.  

Universities should continue to offer support for students facing challenges but it is important that these approaches account for and consider how well they work for international students. We want to see systems that support equity of experience for students, while advocating for broader change which promotes equality. 

Inclusive learning 

As the world outside HE evolves to be more fragmented, so do students' priorities and their motivations to study, and HE needs to adapt to meet those varying needs. 

Historically, academic quality often meant applying a relatively homogenous approach to teaching and learning, with attainment linked to achieving academic standards assessed through standardised assessments. This old model of education that people previously accepted (that the only thing standing between them and succeeding is hard work) doesn’t reflect the realities students face. This misplaced expectation can be a cause of decreasing students' mental health. 

Higher education institutions need to continue to adapt to be inclusive to the many types of modern students if they want to continue to offer quality education. 

For example, it is vital that students’ needs are considered in the way assignments are designed, removing barriers to students with learning difficulties or mental health issues from progressing. Traditional assessment methods such as exams and coursework make it easy for the assessor to gauge understanding of materials, but there should also be consideration of how assessments facilitate students demonstrating their skills and abilities to apply their understanding and knowledge. 

Lack of flexibility can lead to many students feeling stuck and incompatible with success, especially for those with learning difficulties or additional support needs. Universities need to continue to diversify the design of assessments to accommodate individual needs and mental health conditions, and put agency back into students' hands to decide what style of learning and assessment meets their specific needs by allowing them to tailor their education. Inclusive, supportive, and flexible assessment is a core part of delivering high-quality education helps to ensure that students don’t just get lost in the system. 

It is also important to remember that higher education doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and national issues like financial inequality and the mental health crisis don’t get left at the door. Since students with poor mental health are more likely to miss lectures due to anxiety, depression, or burnout, it is important to improve those support systems to ensure those students don’t fall through the cracks when they need support most.  

It is vital that institutions consider the full spectrum of student needs. To achieve a great quality of education that’s inclusive to all students, it's important to identify and embed flexibility, understanding, and genuine care for the best student experience through improving teaching and supporting learners.  

Response from Professor Clare Peddie, Deputy Chair of the Quality Council:

Student partnership is integral to both the work of the Quality Council and the wider quality enhancement and assurance systems in HE. I therefore very much welcome this contribution from the student members of the Quality Council, which raises many important issues relating to students’ experiences of a high-quality education. The Quality Council is committed to continuing to work in partnership – with students, with sector bodies and with the funders and regulators from across the four nations – to further understand these issues and to act as a champion of high-quality education for all students studying in the UK. In the context of the constrained financial environment the sector is currently operating in, it is more important than ever that as a sector we consider carefully how universities can maintain high quality whilst also being mindful of the pressing need for efficiencies. 

Authored by: 

Alex Stanley, Vice-President (Higher Education), NUS 

Dominka Wilczynska, Education Officer, University College Birmingham Guild of Students 

Maisie Head, President, Wrexham Students’ Union 

Charlie Wilson, Vice President Education, Strathclyde Students’ Union 

by Lauren Harper

Mapping out the quality landscape

Anyone who has been following debates in higher education over the past few years will be familiar with the language of ‘poor quality courses’. Rumblings continue that while most higher education delivered in the UK is world leading, there are still pockets of provision missing the mark.  

As is the case with any large sector, there will be some truth to this. It would be complacent to reject these claims outright. However, the answer is not always new or more sector-wide regulation, when most courses are good. We need to assess what we already have, how it is working, and why in some individual cases it is not. 

Discussions on quality have also highlighted that to those working outside of the sector, or even simply outside of the quality assurance world, the development, delivery, and review of courses remains a mystery. 

The higher education sector is large and complex, with higher education providers delivering a wide range of courses at different levels to a very diverse student body. The quality landscape that supports this delivery is also large and complex, with many actors playing distinct but complementary roles in working towards the shared goal of safeguarding quality and standards and ensuring that all students receive a high quality education.  

From the outside, it can be difficult to understand how all of the parts of the quality system fit together, and to identify where – if needed – there further action or conversations should be happening. That is why the Quality Council for UK Higher Education has created a map of the quality landscape, which has been published today. The map is our attempt to set out visually the landscape for quality assurance in higher education across the UK.  

Of course, the complexity of the quality landscape means that it is not possible to set out everything one could ever need to know about quality in one diagram. Nor will the system always look this way. Higher education will always evolve to stay relevant and effective in a changing world. Nevertheless, our intention is for the map to act as a useful starting point for anyone new to quality in higher education in understanding the relationship between the actors and processes involved in external quality assurance, and the equivalent arrangements across the UK. It includes regulatory requirements and statutory baselines, sector-led oversight and provider-led internal quality assurance, focusing on activities that are system-wide and quality focused.  

It is designed to aid understanding of the quality system as a whole and the parts that it consists of, setting out the breadth and depth of expertise and oversight of quality assurance. We hope that it goes some way to demonstrating the deep commitment held by the UK higher education sector to ensuring students have a high-quality academic experience and protecting taxpayers’ money. For those already working in the field, it can go one further and support greater connection and collaboration in taking forward this work.  

Take a look at our map of the quality landscape

Authored by: 

Professor Nic Beech, Vice-Chancellor of University of Salford and Chair of the Quality Council for UK Higher Education 

Professor Clare Peddie, Vice Principal Education (Proctor) of University of St Andrews and Deputy Chair of the Quality Council for UK Higher Education 

by Lauren Harper

Exploring opportunities for international alignment on quality in England

As a UK-wide forum, the Quality Council for UK Higher Education’s role is to be an advocate for the whole UK, articulating and furthering shared priorities across the boundaries of the UK nations.  

One of these priorities is the international standing of the UK higher education system, including UK higher education providers’ international partnerships and collaborations.  

In this context, in December 2024, we brought together core members of the Quality Council plus the Office for Students, Department for Education and QAA for an open, generative discussion on international alignment on quality in England, specifically compliance with the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG).

This was prompted by the fact that England is now only partially compliant under the Bologna Process commitments, which is also reflected on the EQAR map, while Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland remain fully compliant. While we are in no doubt of the high quality of education accessed by students wherever they study in the UK, we are mindful of the potential confusion this judgement could create and its implications for cross-UK collaboration. We were interested in exploring if and how England might realign itself with the ESG in a way that is consistent with risk-based regulation and UK-wide priorities.  

We were also joined by speakers from ENQA (the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education) and NVAO (the Accreditation Organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders) who provided valuable insights from European perspectives.  

The roundtable was fortuitously timed as we met the day after the OfS published its consultation on its 2025-30 strategy, which includes a commitment to explore options for alignment with European standards for quality as part of the development of its new integrated approach to quality. We very much welcome this commitment, and as with this roundtable, want to support this exploration through drawing on the considerable expertise and experience of the Quality Council’s members.  

The approach to quality in England has diverged from the rest of the UK. For example, as the Tertiary Quality Enhancement Review (TQER) - the new quality assurance and enhancement review method for universities and colleges in Scotland - has been developed, ESG compliance has been a key priority.  

Elements of the current quality assessment approach in England where questions have been raised include whether it can demonstrate sufficient: 

• independent cyclical review 

• published quality reports covering all providers 

• student involvement on review panels 

• oversight by an EQAR-registered body. 

Without international recognition of compliance, national and international confidence in quality risks being undermined, irrespective of the actual high quality that can be expected. International attendees at our roundtable were able to point to emerging examples of risks to international student recruitment, student mobility and TNE partnerships predicated on compliance with ESG. 

As well as discussing the risks of non-compliance, attendees also discussed potential benefits of changes to the quality assurance system, using a new integrated approach to quality as a vehicle for facilitating compliance with ESG. For example, a stronger focus on student engagement was highlighted as something attendees would like to see, highlighting the value of the student voice in shaping the process and being part of delivery. We also discussed the potential positive impacts of ESG compliance for the whole of the UK, as the UK is often seen as a whole from an international perspective.  

We heard from NVAO (the Accreditation Organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders), who told us about their system, which is risk-based but meets the criteria for ESG compliance. This demonstrates that compliance with the ESG does not require a move away from England’s risk-based regulation but could be achieved by updating the current system.  

Of course, change cannot happen overnight, and while the OfS develops its new approach, what is required for international alignment and the implications will need to be carefully considered. The Quality Council is committed to continuing to participate in these conversations as the approach develops, utilising our UK-wide expertise and perspectives to carefully consider what could be a huge opportunity for the sector to facilitate international partnerships and student mobility. 

Authored by:

Professor Nic Beech, Vice-Chancellor of University of Salford and Chair of the Quality Council for UK Higher Education

Professor Clare Peddie, Vice Principal Education (Proctor) of University of St Andrews and Deputy Chair of the Quality Council for UK Higher Education

by Lauren Harper

What should we be learning from the international student experience?

The story of internationalisation of UK Higher Education is an undoubted success. There has been a significant growth in international students coming to the UK and the 2030 target of 600,000 has already been achieved and the work on the international education strategy 2.0 is being conducted by the International Higher Education Commission, Chaired by the rt hon. Chris Skidmore MP. Transnational education (TNE) has been expanding as has the flow of students to spend study time from overseas in the UK and visa versa. This growth in participation and movement gives us the chance to diversify the educational experience and, where this works well, students have the chance to learn from others whose background and experience can provide different perspectives and a source of insight and inspiration.

Research has always operated on an international stage as knowledge development occurs through global communities and research-led teaching has tended to introduce students to developments from around the world. Equally, developments in educational practice, including decolonisation of curricula, have helped challenge and ‘decentre’ singular national perspectives where they have previously existed. Through these changes in who is doing the learning and what is being learned, internationalisation has led to improvements in quality for all.

In addition to these sources of intrinsic value, there are extrinsic forms of value. These include the ‘soft power’ of many graduates from UK HE who go on to play significant leadership roles in government, business and other organisations around the world and as Nick Hillman, CEO of HEPI, shows over a quarter of the world’s countries are headed by someone educated in the UK . International students contribute through the fees they pay and also through their entrepreneurship to the economy of the UK.

Given these many successes, a key question for the UK Standing Committee for Quality Assessment, and for the whole UK HE community is: What should we be learning from the international student experience? In dialogue with international students from six universities we were told about a range of experiences in UK HE and the welcome they received in the UK more generally.

What are international students expecting and what do they experience?

International students are stepping outside their comfort zone and paying significant sums and their expectations are reasonable and appropriately high. In particular, they expect engaged staff, up to date and research-led curricula and a diverse student population. In addition, they are looking forward to an education that will help them develop the advanced skills, such as critical thinking, analysis and creativity, needed in productive careers. Many are hoping for the placements and experiential learning which can help them exercise and practise advanced skills and knowledge which is part of the promise of many universities.

The students who participated in our consultation were appreciative of staff and their enthusiasm and of relevant learning materials and careers support. However, for some there had been expectations set by recruitment agents and universities themselves that paid work would be more available than it is. While many had found work, it had tended to be in low wage occupations and did not reflect their knowledge and skills sufficiently, particularly at postgraduate level.

The students were also expecting to make connections and build relationships at personal, educational and career levels. They found Students’ Unions, clubs and societies were excellent for personal connections, a feeling of belonging and support. For some there was a risk of spending too much time in societies with membership predominantly from one nation and all found it beneficial to interact in multi-national groupings. Most found classroom interaction to be well managed and there was an effort to mix students in educational activities. In some universities and courses, however, there were fewer opportunities for this if a particular cohort was drawn from a small number of countries. In general, the students found that they had less chance to build connections that would help in their future careers than they had expected.

The primary area where students’ expectations were confounded was with the welcome to the UK. Arrival and pre-arrival in the UK were often less than smooth experiences. Visas were costly, guarantees needed to be provided and insurance and travel add to costs considerably. Similarly, NHS costs are high and the students’ perception was that very few of them used any NHS services. Some that had found the system difficult to navigate and not as welcoming as intended. It is also worth noting that concerns over cost are likely to be heightened for future intakes of international students given the significant increases to visa fees and the health surcharge by Government. Similarly, dealing with banks and accommodation was not straightforward. Increasingly, universities are helping with these matters and Students’ Unions are developing welcome packs on how to navigate UK systems in advance and on arrival.

The lack of good employment opportunities was significant. It is a popular misconception that all international students come from affluent backgrounds. In fact, like UK students, many need to work to fund their studies and living costs. Universities are seeking to help, but this is an area where more needs to be done. This also has, for some, implications for the classroom culture. Some of the students in our consultation reported having less technology than other students and this symbolising their otherness. Along with internationalising curricula there is also a need for staff to understand the background of international students and its economic diversity.

Some lessons from the international student experience

• International students were willing and able to play a dynamic role in student representation and university governance, and indeed many are already playing this role. We should encourage this and it is also clear that international students do not want a separate voice – the intrinsic values in education were the same for them as for UK students.
• Curricula have become more international and decolonised, but there is space for further development and cross-cultural understanding in education practice and engagement
• Academic and professional staff would benefit from greater insight into the diversity of the international student body and their economic diversity in particular. This can help challenge assumptions and ensure an inclusive approach to the classroom culture.
• Connections need to be fostered both within the classroom and the lab and with employers, businesses and organisations through visits, projects and placements.
• Student societies are crucial to fostering belonging and enjoyment and Students’ Unions and Universities can encourage more collaboration between societies with a view to enabling greater cross-cultural engagement.
• As universities, we cannot replace government agencies, the NHS and private accommodation providers, but we can help these organisations to understand how they are perceived, develop a dialogue at a national level and, crucially, work in partnership with Students’ Unions and external agencies to improve welcome and ongoing experience.

These lessons can support the work of the UKSCQA in providing a forum for collaboration across the UK on quality and international student experience and maintaining the UK HE sector’s reputation overseas.

Authored by:

Nic Beech, Chair UKSCQA and Commissioner in the International Higher Education Commission

Diana Beech, CEO London Higher and Commissioner in the International Higher Education Commission

Jess Strenk, Head of External Affairs at Middlesex University

Emily Dixon, Programmes, Communications and Research Officer at London Higher

by Lauren Harper

How AI is catalysing good pedagogical practice in higher education

The delivery of teaching and assessment in higher education has faced significant challenges over the last three years which have affected all those involved in the quality arrangements associated with the delivery of teaching, assessment, and the student experience. This blog is the first in a series which looks at how the UK sector leads on quality in higher education. For this first blog, Professor Clare Peddie, Vice Principal (Education) at the University of St Andrews and Deputy Chair of the UKSCQA, looks at the sector’s response to current challenges associated with the introduction of generative AI tools such as Chat GPT.

When looking at responses to generative AI tools I see a lot of knee-jerk reactions, from initial concerns in the media around the risks to the academic integrity of assessments to the rapid introduction of new online detection tools, as well as the return to in-person pen-and-paper examinations and changes to academic misconduct policies. Now, because of the many webinars, roundtables, and evidence-gathering conversations, thinking is developing around how we can respond positively and in a measured way. In the same way that the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated pedagogical advances in digital education, generative AI tools are, in my view, accelerators of the prevalence and quality of good pedagogical practice. These new tools will stimulate changes in pedagogy that we have been advancing throughout higher education over many years but will now quickly receive more prominence in our practice.

Developments in education which will be accelerated by the introduction of Generative AI include:

• the incorporation of experiential, personalised, and reflective learning practices;
• the advancement of activities designed to improve the metaskills of our graduates;
• developments to incorporate more authentic assessment, i.e., assessment aimed at the application of knowledge to real-life or work-based problems generating meaningful and worthwhile educational experiences; and
• the incorporation of project, group, and interdisciplinary activities.

In some institutions, including my own, the essay has been the mainstay of assessment in some of our more traditional disciplines. It would not be unusual for modules to be continuously assessed by essays and an examination asking further essay questions. Prior to Chat GPT, many educators and pedagogical researchers were already questioning the authenticity and the transferability of the skills graduates gain from these types of assignments. Now, we can predict that changes to the curriculum may involve greater involvement of the academic tutor in the development of students’ critical thinking skills, and discussion of the plans for the preparation and submission of an assignment.

Before the final summative submission, the tutor or lecturer may, for example, supervise the:

• development of a novel research question or reflective assignment;
• preparation of an outline plan;
• justification for selection of the resources that will be consulted; and/ or
• development of the argument and formative assessment of a draft document.

These measures will help preserve the academic integrity of the process while also supporting the educational purpose of assessment.
Some of our more innovative curriculum developments already in place will be largely unaffected by generative AI. For example, the Vertically Integrated Projects (VIPs) which are innovative interdisciplinary research-based projects that enable students from different year cohorts and academic staff to collaborate on long-term real-world issues which are part of the curriculum in number of institutions, including my own, and are largely immune to these risks to academic integrity.

Intensive personal supervision of the learning and assessment process may mean that the workload for academics will increase but, arguably, that the quality of the learning experience will be significantly improved. Consequently, curricula may have to change by substantially reducing the number of assessments. Again, many of us will recognise our tendency in the sector to ‘over-assess’, and we know that multiple assignments with feedback on which students have little time to reflect and learn from are less meaningful to a successful education. So, this is another way in which AI could further catalyse good pedagogical practice.

Like the digital transition catalysed by COVID, the transition to a new way of teaching will be pedagogically demanding. We find ourselves challenged, once again, to develop the support and guidance to help educators adapt, find the space in our commitments for curriculum development, and put in place the agile mechanisms by which assessment and teaching methodologies can be easily adapted. The question for me is not what we need to do to respond appropriately to the introduction of AI but how we resource that change and support the wellbeing of all those at the sharp end of curriculum delivery.

By Professor Clare Peddie, Vice Principal (Education) at the University of St Andrews and Deputy Chair of the UKSCQA.

by Lauren Harper