Consumer Protection Law for Colleagues Working in Teaching

Consumer Protection Law for Colleagues Working in Teaching and Learning Roberta Wooldridge Smith & Jen Bowskill 29 January 2016 https: //www 2. warwick. ac. uk/services/aro/cpl

What’s it all about? • Sets out minimum standards on Ø Information Provision Ø Fairness of Terms and Conditions Ø Complaint Handling • Ø Ø Ø Covers Consumer Contract Regulations Consumer Protection Regulations Unfair Terms Regulations • Consumer Rights Act came into force October 2015

Scenario 1 • Marketing associated with the MBA offered by the University of Harpenden notes the widely-publicised idea that getting an MBA leads to a significant increase in salary. In fact, DLHE data for Harpenden show that very few of its graduates experience such a career transformation. Q: Does this constitute ‘material information’ that ought to be made available to the potential applicant pool? Q: Is it a matter of misleading omission if the University knows its employment data do not provide an empirical basis for the suggestion that Harpenden graduates will enjoy the benefits implied in its prospectus? Scenarios adapted from David Palfreyman (2015) Send for the Director of Compliance! Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 19: 1, 10 -18

Scenario 2 • At the University of Tadcaster, the Department of Physics has just been through a bruising re-accreditation process for its undergraduate courses with the Institute of Physics. The Head of Department fully expects that the shortcomings identified during the re-accreditation exercise will translate into withdrawal of formal accreditation. With Clearing and Adjustment just weeks away, and with many student places still to fill, the report confirming her suspicions arrives. Q: When should potential students and current offer-holders be told of the loss of the Department’s accreditation? Q: Does the University have to refund the fees of existing Tadcaster students who leave the course to transfer to other, accredited, HEIs? Scenarios adapted from David Palfreyman (2015) Send for the Director of Compliance! Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 19: 1, 10 -18

Scenario 3 • Jane Smith is a first year Law student at Truro University who fails Contract Law and discovers there is a discrepancy of >15% between the markers of her exam paper which spans the 40% pass mark. Her complaint about lack of consistency in marking practices takes 3 months to process and by the time it is upheld, the new academic year has started and her cohort is too far into the teaching term for her to re-join the course. Q: Does Jane have grounds for claiming that Truro has failed to deliver the examination element of its service ‘with reasonable skill and care’? Q: Could Jane also make a claim against Truro under the CRA for failing to ensure its complaints framework delivered an outcome within a reasonable timescale? Scenarios adapted from David Palfreyman (2015) Send for the Director of Compliance! Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 19: 1, 10 -18

Information Provision Four stages 1. Student research and application stage 2. Offer stage 3. Acceptance stage 4. Student enrolment and beyond Apply Offer Accept Enrol

Key information • • • Departmental handbook; archive pdf per cohort (annually) Course specifications Module descriptors Course regulations Information on assessment methods; exam conventions, prerequisites, method of mark calculation and changes to this in specific circs e. g. resit vs first sit Ensure students understand assessment practices; double marking, moderation Collaborative provision; separate handbooks etc? Oversight of production? Awareness of claims made by partners? Availability of modules; all in every year (really? ); on two-year cycle; depending on staff availability? ; assuming no timetabling clashes? Where student choice drives outcomes e. g. assessment method Additional costs Who teaches? Star researchers or doctoral students?

Managing change in provision • Easter deadline annually for approvals for minor changes to taught courses for subsequent year • Easter + 1 year for major curriculum change and course-level restructure • Student consultation/involvement is key • Reassurance to students and applicants; nature of research-led environment and ways in which change will be managed • N. B. Joint degrees!

Course transfers • Must treat as if new applications • Student Records amending online process to require departments to confirm that course-specific material information has been passed to students seeking to transfer • Likely to move to auditable-trail via use of SRLs in SITS • Work to deter frivolous/repeat requests

Complaints handling University framework compliant but improvements can still be made Stage 1 within departments for resolution Template outcome letters provided online Online reporting tool for stage 1 outcomes on the way! Complaints data likely to be integrated into Education dashboards alongside NSS and module evaluation as indicators of student satisfaction • Training in complaints handling for front-line staff • Pool of 12 professionally-trained mediators to support early resolution • Contact Lucy Taylor: L. R. Taylor@warwick. ac. uk • • •

Public information • • • Unistats KIS – contact hours DLHE NSS and other student survey data Module evaluation Student bloggers; online ‘chat’, social media activity

Actions for Academic Departments • • • Adhere to public undertakings e. g. contact hours in KIS. Engage in complaints handling training and stage 1 reporting. Review and archive cohort-specific departmental handbooks. Review course regulations; course specifications, module descriptors. Develop staff and student ambassadors involved in marketing/ recruitment/ online ‘chat’/ social media activity. Manage change in academic provision sensitively, observing Easter deadlines for minor changes and Easter + 1 year for major change/ curriculum restructure. Involve current students in curriculum change. Notify changes to provision to applicants/offer holders via SROAS through formal reporting on changes in taught provision. Treat course transfers as new applications. Consider the rights of students entering through Clearing & Adjustment.

Some questions to ponder … • How should we define major and minor course changes? • How can we encourage departmental web editors to engage in upskilling wrt CMA to ensure alignment of content? • Beyond module evaluation and SSLCs, which other forms of student consultation should we use when seeking to develop curricula? • How should we seek to minimise risks from oral undertakings made by staff or students? • How can we strike the right balance between reassuring applicants and students about the benefits of a dynamic, research-led curriculum and reassuring them that we will deliver the award for which they enrolled? • Is a first year ‘resit’ exam 9 months after a ‘first sit’ reasonable? • How should we balance module availability with a consumer’s right to repeat performance/price reduction?

Questions? https: //www 2. warwick. ac. uk/services/aro/cpl cpl@warwick. ac. uk