Search

The Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF), originally proposed in the UK government's Higher Education White Paper, now the Higher Education and Research Act 2017, is a national mechanism to assess teaching quality in universities. This article provides a critical account of the TEF, underpinned by an overview of the policy context and marketisation and employability agendas exploring the rationale for implementing TEF within universities. We argue, first, that the White Paper's narrative, the rhetoric of the TEF, seems positive but its implementation appears to be conceptually flawed. Second, its complex quality metrics system demands yet another layer of bureaucracy in an already micro-managed system of higher education. Third, claims made by the White Paper must be supported by evidence-based research to ensure that the objectives are clear. We conclude by questioning whether the quality of the student experience can be improved by the TEF reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across the Higher Education sector, there is growing interest regarding the 'value for money' of a university education, and in response to this, universities may need to consider how to evaluate the perceived learning of students alongside their actual learning. Learning Gain maybe helpful in this regard, but there is currently no agreed method for evaluating the Learning Gain achieved, or perceived, by any particular student. This paper discusses a new model that can be used for evaluating such student perceptions. The model itself considers both the Distance Travelled (explicit knowledge) and the Journey Travelled (tacit knowledge) reported by students. The model employs a self-certified reflective survey method. A study, using a cohort of final year undergraduate dissertation students is undertaken to evaluate the potential usefulness of this model. The primary results obtained from this study provide an interesting perspective on how students perceive their own learning, which in turn has implications for understanding how our own teaching is viewed by students. The outcome of this research is that further testing is recommended using a wider variety of courses, and larger cohorts of students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]