Why was the QAA Approach to Teaching Quality Assessment Rejected by Academics in UK HE?

This article will review and evaluate the response of academics working in higher education institutions (HEIs) in the UK to the experience of teaching quality review. It will do so by gathering the viewpoints and opinions of academics from a particular source over a specific time period: the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) between January and August of 2001. Before presenting and then evaluating these viewpoints, the paper will discuss the development of teaching quality assessment methodologies in UK HE within the context of the increasing importance and embededness of quality assurance and enhancement values and processes within the practices of HEIs. It is argued that this is both a recent and contested phenomenon. The article finds that the concerns of academics with the teaching quality review exercise fall under a number of headings: (1) administrative/cost burden; (2) grade inflation/gamesmanship/ organisational learning; (3) elitist bias within the system; (4) system impact of quality review; (5) reliability of the system; and (6) philosophical objections to the system. The implications of these concerns are discussed. The article's conclusion is that if academics are not convinced of, or do not actively support, the values and methodologies associated with teaching quality review, then there is little chance that these will either produce accurate or meaningful assessments of teaching quality, or act as a spur to the quality enhancement of this aspect of individual and institutional activity. This is an important point within the context of the recent review of the Quality Assurance Agency's Subject Review methodology, and the new institutional audit methodology.