University of Strathclyde - TQFE Programme: consultation analysis

Analysis of responses to our consultation on “University of Strathclyde – Further Education Teaching Programme” which ran from 4 April 2022 to 16 May 2022.

Overview of Responses


  • Many comments were received relating to the wider context of the Teaching Qualification (TQFE) as opposed focused on the specific purpose of this consultation. The Scottish Government will consider these wider comments as part of ongoing work to review the TQFE landscape. This analysis report focusses on analysing comments specifically in relation to the University of Strathclyde's Programme.
  • Respondents were generally supportive of the programme proposed.
  • The key areas of comment and concern related to assessment arrangements for the programme (in particular queries surrounding the viva/virtual assessment approach) and the content, nature and duration of the programme.

Programme Admission Arrangements

  • Some respondents sought clarity on the application of Annex C (entry requirements) whilst some others noted that the entry requirements set out within the programme were in line with other TQFE programmes in Scotland.
  • Some respondents raised concerns that some lecturers are being strongly advised to obtain the level 8 unit "Teaching in Colleges Today" and that this creates a potential additional barrier for lecturers seeking to access TQFE.
  • One respondent raised concerns around ensuring part-time lecturers are not disadvantaged in accessing TQFE.
  • One respondent asked if the PDA "Teaching Practice in Scotland's Colleges" would be acceptable for entry where the applicant has no other relevant HNC or HND.

Content, nature and duration of the programme

  • Respondents sought additional detailed information on the content of the programme, including the inclusion of specific topics within the programme. One respondent welcomed the variety of important topics covered but questioned if this would enable students to gain a deep understanding of concepts.
  • Respondents were supportive of the duration of the programme, commenting that the extended route meets the varying needs of lecturers within the college sector.
  • Some respondents raised concerns about the time commitment for both students and mentors as set out within the programme being applied in practice.

Programme Assessment Arrangements

  • Respondents raised concerns around the assessment methods, noting these were new to TQFE programmes and that the virtual approach adopted may present issues.
  • Whilst many respondents supported the alternative approach outlined, it did prompt requests for additional information on how assessments would work in practice from respondents.

Functions of the governing bodies, principals and members of staff

  • The majority of respondents agreed that the functions of the governing bodies, principals and members of staff of institutions providing the TQFE course were suitable, with two respondents commenting that they were consistent with other TQFE providers.
  • One respondent commented that it would have been helpful to have details on the university's quality assurance processes given the assessment tasks and methods adopted are innovative.
  • One respondent considered the delivery schedule to require reconsideration to bring it into line with the college academic year.

University of Strathclyde as programme provider

  • All respondents agreed that the University of Strathclyde would be an appropriate provider of the TQFE programme.



Back to top