Explained: How the new Teaching Excellence Framework will operate

Under pressure to stamp out pockets of “poor-quality” provision in the English sector – and against a constant drumbeat of concern about the value of higher education – the Office for Students has unveiled its latest proposals for how it intends to assess whether the education universities provide is of sufficient quality.

Bringing together its periodic assessments of universities against certain benchmarks with the Teaching Excellence Framework, the OfS promises to provide students with a “clear view of the quality of teaching and learning delivered by every registered university and college”.

It is not the regulator’s first attempt to eliminate bad courses but this time it says the TEF has been given “real teeth”, with sanctions including cuts to student recruitment being threatened for those that underperform.

But what exactly is the TEF, what does it aim to do, and which institutions will come under its remit?

What will the new Teaching Excellence Framework look like?

Ruth Hannant and Polly Payne, co-chief executives of the Office for Students, said the new proposals showed that the OfS would not shy away from addressing the issues facing the sector.

They told Times Higher Education (THE) that the refreshed system is intended to address the “small” proportion of “bad courses” they believe are “tarnishing the reputation” of the sector.

Where previously a TEF rating was a single, overall award, each university and college will now receive two distinct marks on student experience and student outcomes – although, crucially, only where sufficient data allows. Those meeting the OfS’ minimum requirements will be marked bronze, while those of a higher quality will receive silver or gold.

Providers that do not meet the threshold for minimum requirements will be rated as “requires improvement”.

Who will be assessed?

It is the OfS’ intention for all universities and colleges registered with the watchdog to undergo “cyclical quality assessment” – although this doesn’t automatically mean signing up for a TEF rating.

Each year, beginning in 2027-28, a different group of providers will be selected for assessment to check whether they meet minimum quality standards.

As part of that, providers will be able to choose whether to apply for additional TEF assessment (at no chargeable cost to institutions, the OfS’ consultation confirms).

Those that decide not to opt for TEF ratings will instead receive “assessment outcomes” indicating whether they continue to meet the minimum requirements expected of them. They will receive a rating of “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory”.

It is expected that most providers will opt for a TEF rating – otherwise, they will not be eligible for benefits specifically linked to the assessment, such as any changes to tuition fee limits agreed by the Department for Education (DfE).

How will ratings be decided?

The regulator has outlined a contextual approach, beginning with a “risk assessment” that takes account of providers’ previous ratings, highlighted threats to quality, and any existing data – on graduate outcomes, for instance, or insights gleaned from the National Student Survey (NSS) results.

The risk assessment would then guide how the OfS assesses providers, with most left facing a “standard desk-based assessment” using published data and evidence the institution itself submits.

If the OfS is alarmed by any extra risks, it could look to gather additional evidence and conduct a visit to the institution under the microscope – and, if it has serious concerns, this could develop into a full quality investigation.

In situations that do not require this kind of escalation, assessment teams made up of academic, student and OfS advisers will consider published indicators, submissions and other evidence and measure how it stacks up against criteria on student experience and student outcomes.

Course content and delivery, learning resources and the quality of assessment and feedback are all factors considered under the umbrella of student experience.

The outcome rating will look at “post-study success” in terms of employment or further study, student retention and completion rates.

An oversight panel for quality assessment and the TEF will then issue final decisions to “ensure consistency across providers”, with all ratings and reports published for the public.

How problematic is a poor TEF score?

The OfS is clear that it wants to incentivise “continuous improvement”. Part of how it intends to do this is by introducing retaliatory measures for institutions that aren’t performing well.

These include potential student recruitment freezes on those rated bronze, banning them from increasing their numbers. Those that are rated unsatisfactory or receive a TEF score of “requires improvement” will face harsher sanctions of 10 per cent cuts to their student numbers.

Those judged to be doing badly will also face more regular assessment. Providers with gold ratings will “normally” be assessed after five years, the OfS says, while silver recipients will only have to wait four years, and bronze three and requires improvement two.

Whether a provider performs worse in student experience than it does in student outcomes, or vice versa, the lowest aspect rating informs when the next assessment takes place.

And what’s the benefit of a good rating? 

Higher ratings could entitle providers to a host of benefits – such as access to the Strategic Priorities Grant, which funds the cost of higher education teaching, potential eligibility for tuition fee uplifts as determined by the DfE and the chance to apply for or extend existing degree-awarding powers.

How has the sector responded?

Ahead of the launch of the latest consultation, some voiced disquiet about the importance of aspects such as NSS data – because not every provider participates in the survey – and accused the new system of being overly “punitive”.

It is likely that reactions to the OfS briefing will also focus on the extent to which the system works for both small and large providers and how new measures could put additional pressure on an already struggling sector.

georgia.luckhurst@timeshighereducation.com