Transcript Slide 0 - Office of the Independent Adjudicator

Handling Complaints in Small
and Specialist Institutions:
the Role and Remit of the OIA
Susanna Reece
Deputy Adjudicator
29 June 2010
Establishment of the OIA
• Higher Education Act 2004
• Transitional scheme: March - December 2004
• Designated operator of student complaints scheme in
England and Wales from 1 January 2005
• Replaced existing Visitor arrangements
• Provided for independent review across the sector
• Common system for all HEIs in England and Wales
1
Structure and Operation of the OIA
• OIA Board has 6 Directors nominated from the HE sector:
AHUA, CUC, GuildHE, Higher Education Wales, NUS and
UUK
• Remaining 8 Directors are independents, including the Chair,
Ram Gidoomal, who replaced Prof. Norman Gowar in 2009
• Board has duty to preserve the independence of the Scheme
and does not get involved in individual complaints
• Ruth Deech was the first Independent Adjudicator. Rob
Behrens was appointed in May 2008 upon her retirement.
• Current Organogram is in the OIA’s 2009 Annual Report
• Pathway Review of the Scheme – report published Feb. 2009
2
Some Statistics (Annual Report 2009)
• 1007 complaints in 2009, a 12% increase on 2008 and a 37%
increase on 2007. (537 cases in 2005, 586 in 2006, 734 in 2007
and 900 in 2008). 811 of these were found to be eligible.
• A tiny percentage of the student body but a capacity
challenge for the OIA at a time of public sector financial
constraints when complaint numbers are likely to rise
• Pathway Report Implementation Groups are looking at
processes, remedies, publication and funding
3
Some Statistics continued
• Vast majority of cases (64%) relate to academic status
• Most common subject areas are medicine-related and law
(240)
• 39% of complainants are postgraduates, compared to 23% of
the student body as a whole
• 65% of complainants are over 25
• 75% of cases found not justified in 2009
• 5% Justified and 13% Partly Justified
• 24 cases from GuildHE institutions – small number of other
cases where another HEI is the awarding body
4
OIA Scheme and Remit
• The OIA can look at any act or omission of an HEI (not AJ)
• The OIA Scheme Rules set out the approach the OIA takes to
its role and remit. The current version is dated May 2008.
• The OIA is a review body - students must first have
completed an HEI’s internal procedures (COP Letter
Guidance May 2010)
• The approach taken is two-fold:
• has the University correctly applied its regulations and followed
its procedures?
• Was the University’s decision fair in all the circumstances?
• Court of Appeal ruling in the case of Siborurema (2007)
5
Academic Judgment/Professional judgment
• The OIA cannot interfere with the operation of an
institution’s academic judgment:
• Part 2 of the Higher Education Act 2004
• Our Rule 3.2 states that we do not cover a complaint to
the extent that it relates to a matter of academic judgment
• Academic judgment is a decision about scholarship that only
an experienced academic can make
• Professional judgment is a decision about professional
standards that only an experienced professional can make
• Plagiarism and fitness to practise: we look at procedural
issues and fairness not the underlying academic or
professional decisions
6
OIA approach and process 1
• The OIA’s approach is not the same as a court’s. We don’t
make legal findings, although we have regard to law and
guidance (see disability)
• Our normal approach is to conduct a paper review of the
complaint based on what has been considered within the
HEI’s procedures
• We have not found it necessary to hold oral hearings,
although we have the power to do so (Budd JR 2010)
• 50% of cases are resolved through our Fast Track procedure
(without full review). A Preliminary Decision is made, upon
which comments may be made by either party. This is
followed by a Formal Decision Letter unless the
representations made lead us to conduct a full review.
7
OIA approach and process 2
• After full review, a Draft Decision is issued, followed by a
Formal Decision. At Draft Decision stage the parties may
comment on:
•
Factual or material inaccuracies
•
Practicality of any recommendations made
• Recommendations may be made where a complaint has
been upheld in whole or in part
• In other cases we may make Suggestions or Observations
• Compliance with our recommendations is strongly
encouraged – all HEIs have complied so far. We monitor
compliance and will ask for evidence.
• Higher Education Advisory Panel
8
Some general issues that have led to Justified or
Partly Justified outcomes after an OIA review
• Unreasonable delay
• Failure to follow procedures/regulations
• Failure to have regard for principles of natural justice (duty
to act fairly)
• Student not made aware of all evidence to be considered.
• No proper records kept
• Guidance and regulations/procedures not clear
• Not having proper regard to student’s disability
9
Common Issues: Procedural Fairness
•
Natural Justice – duty to act fairly
• Nobody shall be a judge in his/her own cause
• Hear the other side
• Reasons for decisions
•
Requirement of reasonableness
10
Common issues: disability
• OIA approach: not the same as a court’s. Looking to see that
an HEI has an understanding of its obligations and can
demonstrate that it has considered and applied them
appropriately and fairly.
• Some helpful questions:
•
•
•
•
•
Is the student disabled?
If so, what provisions are we now applying to him?
Do those provisions place him at a substantial disadvantage?
What could be done to prevent that disadvantage?
Would it be reasonable for us to take those steps?
11
Common issues: disability disclosure
• HEIs must encourage disclosure
• Responsibility on student to disclose
• Late disclosure
• Dyslexia
• Mental health issues
• QAA Code:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/secti
on3/Section3Disabilities2010.pdf
12
Current Issues: Placements
• Placement arrangements – what will the OIA look at?
• Memorandum of agreement
• Complaints handling arrangements
• Clarity about responsibilities and procedures
• What happens when things go wrong on a placement?
• Disability arrangements
• Mentoring and learning outcomes
• Fitness to practise
13
Current Issues: Informal Resolution
• Preference for earliest possible resolution at local level
• Local resolution encouraged
• Is it compulsory
• When is it inappropriate?
• Recognise when informal approaches are not working
• Who decides?
• Time scales?
• Informal does not mean unrecorded
• Potential to use mediation or other means of resolution
• Capturing complaints information – good practice and QAA
code
14
Current Issues: Complaints Handling
• Relationship between complaints handling and disciplinary
processes – staff/students
• Anonymity – of complaints/complainants
• Concluding remarks on good practice:
• Encourage students to raise issues constructively and at
the appropriate time
• Signpost processes and have clear pathways
• Deal with issues in a timely manner
• Accept that some cases will go all the way
15