ATU ENGAGE Assessment Handbook

Fellowship Support Programme Aligned to Advance HE’s Professional Standards Framework for Teaching and Supporting Learning in Higher Education (2023)

Assessment Handbook

ATU ENGAGE - Advance HE Fellowship Support Programme Assessment Handbook ENGAGE’s assessment procedures are designed to ensure and enhance fairness, transparency and quality.

Professional Standards Framework 2023 (PSF)

While this handbook is primarily for ATU ENGAGE assessors as it sets out the processes to be followed in reviewing applications for Associate Fellow (Descriptor 1), Fellow (Descriptor 2) and Senior Fellow (Descriptor 3), it will be useful for applicants, mentors and Supporting Statement authors. Along with the Professional Standards Framework for Teaching and Supporting Learning in Higher Education 2023 (PSF), It should be used by all parties in conjunction with the following ENGAGE documents:

All assessing will be conducted in the context of the PSF 2023. Mandatory induction will be supplemented by annual ENGAGE training so that assessors remain up-todate in knowledge and understanding of how Advance HE interprets the Dimensions and Descriptors of the Framework. This training is subject to oversight by the ENGAGE Oversight Committee.

Fellowship Categories The three Fellowship categories offered by ENGAGE are Associate Fellowship, Fellowship and Senior Fellowship. ENGAGE training and guides to interpreting the Dimensions and Descriptors of the PSF at each of Associate, Fellow and Senior Fellow categories will support assessment.

• Applicant guidance and draft application templates D1-D3 • Guides to the PSF Dimensions and D1-D3 • Supporting Statement guidance and templates D1-D3 • Review Grids D1-D3 • Panel Outcome and Feedback Forms D1-D3 2

Associate Fellow (AFHEA)

At a minimum, then, in terms of Areas of Activity, Professional Values and Core Knowledge –

To become an Associate Fellow, applicants are required to submit an application to ENGAGE that meets the requirements for Descriptor 1:

In at least two of the Areas of Activity In your context, demonstrate that you: • Design and plan learning activities and/ or programmes (A1) • Teach and/or support learning through appropriate approaches and environments (A2) • Assess and give feedback for learning (A3) • Support and guide learners (A4) • Enhance practice through own Continuing Professional Development (A5) Professional Values In your context, show how you: • Respect individual learners and diverse groups of learners (V1) • Use scholarship, or research, or professional learning, or other evidence-informed approaches as a basis for effective practice (V3)

Descriptor 1 is suitable for individuals whose practice enables them to evidence certain Dimensions of the PSF.

Core Knowledge In your context, apply knowledge of:

Effective practice in teaching and/or supporting highquality learning is evidenced through a reflective account of practice in two of the Areas of Activity that demonstrates alignment to D1, that is informed by at least Professional Values V1 and V3, and that applies core knowledge of at least K1, K2 and K3.

• How learners learn, generally and within specific subjects (K1) • Approaches to teaching and/ or supporting learning, appropriate for subjects and levels of study (K2) • Critical evaluation as a basis for effective practice (K3)

AFHEA Documentary Application FHEA Documentary Template:

Authentication of Practice

• Context statement (max 300 words)

• 1 Supporting Statement

• ‘Reflective account of practice’

Recency of Evidence

• 2 Areas of Activity: demonstrate alignment to D1 (max 1400 words); practice informed by Professional Values (at least V1, V3); application of core knowledge (at least K1, K2, K3)

• Focus on last 2-3 years

• References (max 200 words)

3

Fellow (FHEA)

learning, or other evidence-informed approaches as a basis for effective practice

To become a Fellow, applicants are required to submit an application to ENGAGE that meets the requirements for Descriptor 2:

4. Respond to the wider context in which HE operates, recognising implications for practice 5. Collaborate with others to enhance practice.

Core Knowledge (K1 – K5) In your context, apply knowledge of: 1.

How learners learn, generally and within specific subjects

2. Approaches to teaching and/ or supporting learning, appropriate for subjects and levels of study 3. Critical evaluation as a basis for effective practice 4. Appropriate use of digital and/ or other technologies, and resources for learning 5. Requirements for quality assurance and enhancement, and their implications for practice.

Areas of Activity (A1-A5) In your context, demonstrate that you:

Descriptor 2 is suitable for individuals whose practice with learners has breadth and depth, enabling them to evidence all Dimensions of the PSF.

1.

Professional Values (V1-V5) In your context, show how you: 1.

Design and plan learning activities and/ or programmes

2. Teach and/or support learning through appropriate approaches and environments 3. Assess and give feedback for learning

Respect individual learners and diverse groups of learners

4. Support and guide learners 5. Enhance practice through own Continuing Professional Development.

2. Promote engagement in learning and equity of opportunity for all to reach their potential 3. Use scholarship, or research, or professional

FHEA Documentary Application FHEA Documentary Template:

Authentication of Practice

• Context statement (max 300 words)

• 2 Supporting Statements

• ‘Reflective account of practice’

Recency of Evidence

• All PSF Dimensions; demonstrate alignment to D2 (max 3000 words)

• Focus on last 3 years

• References (max 500 words)

4

3. Use scholarship, or research, or professional learning, or other evidence-informed approaches as a basis for effective practice

Senior Fellow (SFHEA) To become a Senior Fellow, applicants are required to submit an application to ENGAGE that meets the requirements for Descriptor 3:

4. Respond to the wider context in which HE operates, recognising implications for practice 5. Collaborate with others to enhance practice.

Core Knowledge (K1 – K5) In your context, apply knowledge of: 1.

How learners learn, generally and within specific subjects

2. Approaches to teaching and/ or supporting learning, appropriate for subjects and levels of study 3. Critical evaluation as a basis for effective practice 4. Appropriate use of digital and/ or other technologies, and resources for learning 5. Requirements for quality assurance and enhancement, and their implications for practice.

Areas of Activity (A1-A5) In your context, demonstrate that you:

Descriptor 3 is suitable for individuals whose expertise, experience and effective practice allows them to lead or influence those who teach and/or support high quality learning.

1.

2. Teach and/or support learning through appropriate approaches and environments

To evidence all Dimensions, applicants must:

3. Assess and give feedback for learning

Professional Values (V1-V5) In your context, show how you: 1.

Design and plan learning activities and/ or programmes

4. Support and guide learners 5. Enhance practice through own Continuing Professional Development.

Respect individual learners and diverse groups of learners

2. Promote engagement in learning and equity of opportunity for all to reach their potential

SFHEA Documentary Application SFHEA Documentary Template:

• References (max 500 words)

• Context statement (max 300 words)

Authentication of Practice

• ‘Reflective account of practice’ (max 6000 words)

• 2 Supporting Statements

• Demonstrate sustained influence / impact (mapped to D3)

Recency of Evidence • Last 5 years

• 2 case studies demonstrating leadership / management achievements 5

Category

Word limits

D1 Associate Fellowship

1400-word limit for the reflective narrative plus citations (200 words); overall maximum 1600 words (plus Context Statement 300 words)

D2 Fellowship

3000-word limit for the reflective narrative plus citations (500 words); overall maximum 3500 words (plus Context Statement 300 words)

D3 Senior Fellowship

6000-word limit for reflective narrative and two Case Studies plus citations (500 words); overall maximum 6500 words (plus Context Statement 300 words)

Context Statements

Assessing Compilation And Presentation Of Evidence

Context statements are intended to provide factual information necessary for assessors to understand the nature, scope and impact of the applicant’s practice in higher education and are not ‘reviewed’ against the PSF. Applicants should briefly outline the context of their work in teaching and/or supporting learning, focussing on roles and responsibilities, and any other contextual aspects which affect the practice discussed in the application.

Campus / faculty / department should be identified if appropriate.

Examples must be drawn from recent practice (Associate Fellow/Fellow usually within the last 3 years, Senior Fellow usually within the last 3-5 years). If an applicant reflects on historic professional practice beyond this timeframe, they should explain how this has ongoing impact on current practice. Please use your professional judgement in determining the appropriateness of the currency of practice and seek advice from ENGAGE if unsure.

Application templates for each Fellowship category provide a structure for applicants to demonstrate the developmental and experiential activities they have undertaken, and how these support the claim of effective practice aligned to the appropriate Descriptor requirements. Critically, the evidence must demonstrate robust examples of good and contemporary practice aligned to all dimensions of the PSF commensurate with the category of Fellowship being sought. The bespoke ENGAGE guides to interpreting the Dimensions and Descriptors of the PSF, as well as the nature and types of evidence that are appropriate, support assessment.

Review grids (assessment pro-formas) will likewise assist assessors.

Applicants should identify the learners/colleagues that they work with, for example, level of study/professional practice (e.g. year of study, undergraduate, postgraduate, HE work-based/industry/service learning, etc.), programme(s)/unit(s) of study, expert/specialist area, number and types of learners, etc. For Senior Fellowship, the applicant’s work with learners will be more indirect; their impact on high quality student learning will be via influence and leading the enhancement of colleagues’ practice; they will work more closely with colleagues / teams / departments / Faculty / external organisations/ professional bodies/services, etc.

The Context Statement should not be used to provide supplementary information that would add extra evidence of effective and inclusive practice; i.e. not be used to extend the word limit for the application.

Supporting Statements Applications for Associate Fellowship must include one Supporting Statement.

Applications for Fellowship and Senior Fellowship must include two Supporting Statements.

6

In submitting your statement, you are confirming that the applicant’s submission reflects their Higher Education professional practice and that you have written this statement specifically for this applicant.

• AFHEA: One Supporting Statement • FHEA: Two Supporting Statements • SFHEA: Two Supporting Statements Supporting Statements are distinct from references. They should confirm the claims made in the application. This verification and endorsement should be in the context of personal experience of working with the applicant and witnessing their practice as effective and inclusive across all relevant dimensions (values, knowledge, areas of activity). So, those writing statements must be well placed to expand on the applicant’s teaching and learning support practice and/or leadership of high-quality learning and teaching and provide perspective on how the applicant has influenced the practice of peers / the institution. They must have an opportunity to read and discuss the application. Normally, but not necessarily, they will hold a category of Fellowship.

I have read and understood the declaration Signature:

Date:

Statements should not be dated more than one moth prior to the application submission date.

Submission Process There will be two submission cycles and review panels per year. At each submission deadline, the ENGAGE team will progress completed applications through the assessment process.

Submission Template – Professional Integrity Statement

Assessors should review the Supporting Statements to confirm that the applicant has represented their practice accurately and that the referees have provided their unique opinion that the applicant has demonstrated the requirements of the relevant PSF Descriptor. Assessors’ options in reviewing the Supporting Statements are ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. If ‘No’, or there is any issue with the Supporting Statements, please refer to Appendix 1 to determine the action to take. The Supporting Statements cannot be used to compensate for significant issues with an application or to contribute to an assessor’s overall Award or Refer decision. It is the applicant’s responsibility to make a sufficient claim against the relevant Descriptor criteria. They cannot be judged to have met the requirements for the relevant category of Fellowship unless they have done so themselves through their Account of Professional Practice.

Applicants are asked to confirm that they have written the case for recognition themselves and that the information provided accurately reflects their own practice. If the professional integrity of any application is in question, it will not be accepted.

On submitting their application template, applicants will be required to indicate that they have read and agreed to the following statement: In submitting my case for Fellowship, I am confirming that my application accurately reflects my higher education professional practice and is my own work.

Engage Assessment Process – The Role Of The Assessor

ENGAGE will not chase Supporting Statements and will not accept applications without them. If the professional integrity of any Supporting Statement is in question, assessors must not accept it. Supporting Statement guidance notes and templates are provided for each category of Fellowship. Statements must be unique (not the same as for someone else, not recycled from another purpose, not a generic reference letter) and the template requires the following confirmation:

ENGAGE assessors are ATU staff members and Fellows, Senior Fellows or Principal Fellows with a track record of sustained engagement and influence in high-quality teaching and learning. Assessors undergo mandatory initial training and then undertake an annual cycle of professional development and regular standardisation activities with ENGAGE to ensure up-to-date knowledge and understanding of the requirements of the PSF23 and Fellowship. This training means assessors are competent and confident in assessing claims for recognition in multiple contexts relating to discipline and professional role.

7

Conflict of Interest: before you assess any application, please check for and notify ENGAGE of any possible conflicts of interest that may affect your objective professional judgement or impartiality so that if necessary the application(s) in question may be re-allocated to another Assessor as soon as possible. Conflicts of interest may include, for example, if you:

The two assessors of applications for AFHEA will be Fellows, Senior Fellows or Principal Fellows.

The two assessors of applications for FHEA will be Fellows, Senior Fellows or Principal Fellows.

The three assessors of applications for SFHEA will be Senior Fellows or Principal Fellows.

• are a personal friend or a relative of the applicant

If an assessor has supported a case for recognition, through mentoring or as a Supporting Statement author, that assessor cannot be involved in assessing that claim.

• work closely with the applicant Anyone who has supported a case for recognition as a mentor cannot be involved in assessing that claim.

The applicant does not know the identity of the assessors.

Chart 1

ENGAGE Assessment Process Flowchart Application reviewed by 2 / 3 assessors

Consensus judgement reached

Descriptor met

Descriptor not met

Fellowship awarded

Resubmission assessed as per original

End of review process

8

Applicant has 4 weeks to resubmit

Assessing Applications – Roles and Responsibilities Stage by Stage

and Feedback Form. This feedback will indicate which criteria the application has met (if any) and explain how it needs to be enhanced to provide evidence of the remaining Descriptor criteria, listing key action points requesting, for instance, revisions such as clarification of information or the provision of additional detail to address a gap or deficiency in evidence.

For Descriptor 1 AFHEA and Descriptor 2 FHEA applications, ‘Assessor 1’ and ‘Assessor 2’ are appointed by the ENGAGE team. You will be given access to the application, informed of your role as Assessor 1 or 2, and informed of the identity of the other assessor. ENGAGE’s schedule and recommended communication method for the two-week assessment process is outlined below.

Before you are called on to participate in an assessment, your training will have familiarised you with the timeline, Review Grid, and Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form for referred candidates. Each assessor uses a shared Review Grid to enter their individual judgement and feedback before Assessor 1 instigates a discussion on an agreed outcome. If consensus cannot be reached, Assessor 1 notifies the ENGAGE team who then appoint a third assessor to join the process, which culminates in a majority decision. Assessor 1 then details that outcome in the Review Grid. All AFHEA and FHEA applications involving a third assessor are seen by the External Assessor.

The applicant will be offered one opportunity to resubmit within four weeks and be asked to highlight any changes made to the original application. The ENGAGE team will ensure that mentoring support is available to referred candidates during this resubmission window. The review panel who completed the first review will judge each resubmission on the basis of the feedback provided on the original submission, considering whether key actions identified have been addressed.

There are two possible outcomes following a second review of an application – Award or Unsuccessful.

Award If the reviewers’ consensus judgement on a resubmission is that the revised application meets the requirements of the relevant Descriptor, then the relevant Fellowship is awarded.

For Descriptor 3 SFHEA applications, the same process applies but the External is automatically one of three assessors working to the two-week timeline. There is no requirement for consensus. A majority decision suffices.

Assessor 1 is one of the two ATU assessors.

Unsuccessful If the reviewers judge that despite revisions, the resubmission still does not fully meet the requirements of the relevant Descriptor, then the final judgement is ‘unsuccessful’. In this instance, further feedback in section 4 of the Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form will explain the unsuccessful judgement.

The written evidence, along with Supporting Statements, will be triangulated against the descriptor of the PSF commensurate with the category of Fellowship for which the claim is being made. Is there evidence that the applicant’s practice meets the requirements of Descriptor 1, 2 or 3 as pertinent? Do(es) the Supporting Statement(s) provide appropriate endorsement for the application?

Please note that Section 1 of the Panel Outcome and Feedback document will be updated to show where the relevant Descriptor criteria are met in the resubmission.

The original reviewer feedback from the first review will remain unaltered in Sections 2 and 3 of the form; Section 4 will draw on the feedback in Sections 2 and 3 to explain the final outcome.’

There are two possible outcomes following first review of an application – Award or Refer.

Award If the reviewers’ consensus judgement is that the application meets the requirements of the relevant Descriptor, then the relevant Fellowship is awarded.

A sample of Descriptor 1 AFHEA and Descriptor 2 FHEA submissions and resubmissions will be moderated for QA purposes by the External Assessor before ratification by the Oversight Committee. The External will be one of the assessors of all Descriptor 3 SFHEA submissions and resubmissions.

Refer Should the application be judged as providing insufficient evidence for meeting the relevant Descriptor, then the applicant will be provided with precise and prescriptive feedback from the reviewers in an Assessment Outcome

9

Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form completion step-by-step procedure

In the event of an Unsuccessful resubmission, the applicant must rejoin ENGAGE if they wish to submit a full new application at the deadline of the next submission cycle.

• Complete Section 1 of the shared Review Grid noting whether the Descriptor criteria have been Met or Not Met, providing comments in support of the judgement.

Assessing Applications

• If you are unsure as to whether one or more of the Descriptor criteria are Met or Not Met, use Section 1 of the Review Grid to flag your concerns and indicate to the other assessor(s) that you wish to discuss this further. Should discussions take place, please record brief details in Section 2: Record of Assessors’ Discussion. Add initials to indicate who has commented.

Stage 1: Week 1 – mid-week 2 • Complete Section 1 of the shared Review Grid, noting whether the Descriptor criteria have been Met or Not Met, providing comments in support of the judgement.

• If any criteria are Not Met, provide feedback for the applicant in Section 3 of the Review Grid.

• If resolution is not achieved, Assessor 1 informs ENGAGE team, who appoint third assessor, leading to majority decision.

• Discuss and resolve any individual differences in judgements to reach agreed consensus judgement [If agreement cannot be reached between the two AFHEA / FHEA reviewers, Assessor 1 informs ENGAGE and a third assessor joins the process at the invitation of the ENGAGE team. All AFHEA and FHEA applications involving a third assessor are seen by the External Assessor].

• Assessor 1 ensures all Review Grids are fully completed with the final outcome judgement clearly recorded.

• If any criteria are Not Met, the outcome is ‘Refer’. In this case, provide feedback for the applicant in Section 3 of the relevant Review Grid.

• For any referred application(s), Assessor 1 draws on all feedback to complete the relevant Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form.

• If your individual judgement is that all the Descriptor criteria have been sufficiently evidenced, record your individual judgement in Section 3 of the Review Grid as ‘Award’ (note the combined outcome could be Refer).

Stage 2: Mid-week 2 – end week 2 • Discuss individual differences in judgements to reach agreed consensus judgement.

Stage 3: End Week 2

• For any referred application(s) [that do not meet the relevant criteria], Assessor 1 completes the table at the top of the grid that indicates Award / Refer and draws on the feedback provided by each assessor to complete the relevant Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form.

• Successful applicants, after moderation by the Extern and ratification by the Oversight Committee, will be notified of the outcome by email.

• Referred applicants will be sent the Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form as an email attachment.

• Assessment and Outcome Feedback Forms come first to the ENGAGE team before moderation by the Extern and ratification by the Oversight Committee.

Successful applicants are then notified by email.

Referred applicants will be sent their Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form as an email attachment.

Stage 4: Resubmission process • Applicants have one opportunity to revise and resubmit their application within four weeks.

• The same assessors review any resubmissions according to the same timeline and process. If resubmissions are unsuccessful, Assessor 1 completes Section 4 of the relevant Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form.

• Please note that an applicant can access their completed Review Grid by request to ENGAGE. In this instance, the ENGAGE team would redact assessor identities and provide the grid in full without other revision.

10

Assessor 1 role in co-ordinating outcome and writing referred applicant feedback

feedback to the applicant using the relevant Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form and based on feedback provided by all assessors in the completed Review Grid.

The ENGAGE team will then complete the introductory page of the Assessment and Outcome Feedback form appropriately.

It is the responsibility of Assessor 1 to ensure that the Review Grid for each application is fully completed. This includes:

Reviewing Resubmissions

• Recording the applicant and assessor details in the top section of the grid;

Assessors judge each resubmission on the basis of the feedback provided in the original Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form only; i.e. assessors should use this feedback to consider whether the key actions identified have been addressed and should not complete a new review of the whole application.

• Recording the date of the outcome; • Checking all assessors have fully completed their judgements against Descriptor criteria in the Review Grid Section 1: Review of application and Section 3: Initial individual assessor judgement and feedback to referred applicants;

The assessors will review the resubmission using the copy of the original Review Grid. Each assessor records their independent decisions and feedback for the resubmission on the same Review Grid for that applicant.

To provide a clear audit trail for that application, please distinguish your response to the resubmission from the original decision and feedback [by using, for instance, a different colour font].

• Recording the final overall decision (Award or Refer) in the top of the grid. The ENGAGE team will take this as the final outcome.

If the final outcome is to Award, Assessor 1 ensures that the grid is finalised and sent to engage@atu.ie If the final outcome is to Refer, in addition to finalising and sending the grid to engage@atu.ie, Assessor 1 writes the

There are two possible outcomes:

Award

The evidence is sufficient to award Fellowship at the relevant category.

Unsuccessful

The evidence is insufficient and the award cannot be made. The applicant will be provided with feedback to explain the outcome. This is written by Assessor 1 in Section 4 of the Panel Outcome and Feedback form. This is the end of the review cycle for the application.

Assessor 1 role in co-ordinating outcome and writing unsuccessful applicant feedback

• If the outcome is unsuccessful, Assessor 1 will record ‘Unsuccessful’ in the top part of the Review Grid and use the Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form containing the original Sections 1-3 feedback. The ENGAGE team will have added some standard text at the top of the form and in Section 4 of this version of the template so that there is a consistent formal introduction to all final feedback. Use of the same form for first and re-submissions should ensure that this final feedback is consistent with the original feedback on the first referred application.

• If the outcome is successful, Assessor 1 records ‘Award’ in the top part of the Review Grid, finalises and completes the grid. After the Quality Assurance process (moderation by the Extern plus ratification by the Oversight Committee), applicants are awarded and receive a congratulatory email from ENGAGE; no feedback will be provided to successful applicants (i.e. you do not need to use the Assessment Outcome and Feedback template).

• Assessor 1 should update the table in Section 1 to ensure that the final decision against the Descriptor criteria is available to the applicant.

11

• To provide final feedback to the applicant to explain the ‘Unsuccessful’ outcome, Assessor 1 will complete Section 4 of the Assessment Outcome and Feedback Form, drawing on the final review feedback from all assessors. Feedback should comment on how far the applicant has addressed the actions identified in the feedback they received after their first submission.

Please ensure that the feedback on this second unsuccessful submission relates closely to the previous feedback and does not provide contradictory guidance. The role of mentors has concluded at this point, but unsuccessful applicants will have the support of the ENGAGE team and the Senior Fellows based in the Academic Writing Centre. They will have the option of rejoining the next cohort of the ENGAGE programme.

oversight role, and additional training or resources may be put in place if appropriate. Recognition decisions may be revisited if that is deemed appropriate. The External Assessor monitors the quality assurance element of ENGAGE and will initiate further investigation if the integrity of the accreditation process has been compromised. Such an investigation will be held in accordance with Advance HE Accreditation Policy.

Quality Assurance And Enhancement

ENGAGE Oversight Committee

All recognition decisions will be made by trained assessors who hold Fellowships and undertake continual training. A sample of submissions (a minimum of 1 in 4 applications in each Fellowship category) will be moderated by the External Assessor. In the case of unsuccessful applications, feedback will be provided to support future development and any subsequent submissions. Reports from the External Assessor will feed into annual review of ENGAGE and be discussed by the Oversight Committee, which will issue recommendations as it sees fit.

• Chair: Registrar and Vice President for Students, Teaching & Learning

ENGAGE Programme Team ATU ENGAGE comes under the remit of the Teaching and Learning Centre and is managed by Dr Niamh Plunkett, Head of Teaching and Learning. Dr John O’Callaghan SFHEA leads the operation and development of the programme.

Decisions made by the team of internal assessors are moderated by the External Assessor before they are ratified by the ENGAGE Oversight Committee. The composition of the committee is designed to ensure diverse representation across academic, professional services, and leadership roles within ATU. Membership is appointed by the university’s senior leadership team and includes:

• Manager, Responsibility for ENGAGE: Dr Niamh Plunkett, Head of Teaching & Learning.

Appeals / Complaints

• ENGAGE Programme Lead: Dr John O’Callaghan oversees the programme, ensuring alignment with institutional goals.

A procedural appeals process will be operated. Given that ENGAGE is not an academic programme of study, ATU’s academic decisions appeals process does not apply. ENGAGE provides recognition and verification of professional practice and follows consistent, fair and robust assessment and moderation methods that are validated by trained internal and external assessors. If an applicant is not satisfied with the level or quality of support provided during preparation of their case for recognition or the decision which is made regarding their claim, they should in the first place contact the ENGAGE programme leader to discuss their concerns.

• Representative from the Quality Office: To ensure alignment with institutional quality assurance processes and support accreditation.

• Teaching & Learning Centre: Heads of Teaching & Learning.

• Human Resources (professional development): To ensure the alignment of the fellowship programme with career development pathways and professional development initiatives.

They will be invited to submit a statement to engage@ atu.ie or if this is not appropriate to the ENGAGE Oversight Committee. This statement should detail any irregularity relating to the support process or the decisionmaking process that the applicant has experienced.

Any concerns raised will be addressed by the ENGAGE Oversight Committee as part of its quality assurance

• Representatives from Advance HE Awardees: Associate, Fellow & Senior Fellow nominees: Experienced in the ENGAGE programme and Fellowship application process.

• Head of Department Nominee:

12

• Student Engagement Representative: Student Union Vice President Education or nominee

External Assessor The External Assessor provides oversight, quality assurance and quality enhancement for ENGAGE. While the External Assessor is automatically involved in all judgements at D3 Senior Fellowship category, he/she moderates a sample of all submissions. As per wider ATU sampling policy, a minimum of 1 in 4 applications for D1 Associate Fellowship and D2 Fellowship will be reviewed by the External Assessor (2 in 7, 3 in 11 and so on). He/she will also see samples of awards, referrals, borderline cases and new assessor decisions.

• Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Representative: To ensure the programme promotes diversity and inclusivity in professional development.

• Additional Members (as required): Representatives from relevant schools, departments, or professional units (e.g., finance, academic development) may be co-opted as needed.

And because ENGAGE comes under the remit of the Teaching and Learning Centre, a report on the programme is a standing item on the monthly meeting agenda of ATU’s Teaching and Learning Executive, members of which include the Vice President Students, Teaching and Learning, the heads of Teaching and Learning, and the head of Academic Integrity.

13

Appendix 1: Protocol for issues with Supporting Statements (D1-3) There are several scenarios which could result in the Panel querying Supporting Statements and different approaches in the action that ENGAGE will take.

will be investigated for originality; ENGAGE will ask the applicant to provide new Supporting Statements within four weeks. If it is not possible for ENGAGE to identify or confirm which referee has provided the original content, both will be asked to provide new statements. When the new statement(s) are available these will be provided to the original Panel for review. If no revised/new Statements are received, then the review process is closed and the application withdrawn.

• When to use the Panel Outcome and Feedback Form for revised or new Supporting Statements.

If the Panel has agreed that one or more of the Supporting Statements does not verify and endorse the application, the Panel should provide their comments and specific action point(s) at the end of Section 1 in the Review Grid. In the case of referred applications, it can be appropriate to request revised or new Supporting Statement(s) through the Panel Outcome and Feedback Form.

• Supporting Statement Content is not linked to the Applicant’s Practice.

ENGAGE will contact the applicant to ask for revised/ new statements which are in line with the Supporting Statement Guidance.

If the Panel has considered the application to have met all the Descriptor criteria for the category of fellowship applied for, though are unable to Award until receipt of revised/new statements, this should be recorded in Section 1 of the relevant Review Grid. Assessor 1 should then communicate this outcome to ENGAGE and record the outcome at first attempt as “Award, pending revised/ new statements”. Applicants will be given four weeks to provide revised or new statements. Once revised/new statements have been received, the Fellowship Team will notify the Panel that the statements are available, and the Panel will be able to complete their review of the application.

• The Supporting Statement is dated more than one month earlier than the application submission date.

If ENGAGE is unable to find a reason for a delay in the application, they will contact the applicant to ask for a more current statement(s).

• Supporting Statement content is not linked to the PSF 2023.

In the guidance to referees they are asked to verify and endorse the applicant’s practice in relation to the Descriptor for they are applying. In terms of the relevant Descriptor, it could be that the referee discusses the applicant’s practice in relation to the types of activities and experiences expected of those applying for that category of Fellowship. There is no requirement to include direct associations with the PSF 2023 and therefore applications should not be referred on the basis that this is not included.

• Content in Supporting Statements is very similar.

If you find the statements share a high proportion of similarity in content, please contact engage@atu.ie If the the opinion content is very similar (i.e. using the same phraseology, structure and/or wording) or there is not sufficient unique opinion content to balance factual content which is very similar, between statements, this

14