QAA publishes Evaluation of International Pathway Programmes

QAA has published the report of its Evaluation of International Pathway Programmes. This evaluation was commissioned by Universities UK (UUK).

About the evaluation

The report outlines the findings of the evaluation which QAA undertook between 28 February 2024 and 3 July 2024 into International Pathway Programmes that are designed to support the entry of international students into UK higher education courses. The evaluation considered both International Foundation Programmes (IFPs) and International Year One Programmes (IYOs).

The evaluation was non-statutory, meaning providers participated on a voluntary basis. Thirty-four providers took part in the evaluation exercise. QAA appointed 36 reviewers to undertake the evaluation activity.

In total, QAA selected 185 programmes for evaluation that covered 20 different subject areas. The evaluation examined 2,731 individual student admissions records and 2,063 pieces of assessed student work (of which 1,427 were for International Foundation Programmes, and 636 for International Year One Programmes) as well as other documentary evidence related to these programmes.

Evaluation findings

The evaluation answers the questions set out in a scoping document, agreed between QAA and Universities UK, that was published on 28 February 2024. The report includes the following findings:

Entry requirements

• Out of 32 providers that delivered International Foundation Programmes, 18 declared they had equivalent domestic programmes. The equivalent programmes that were identified by providers were mainly foundation year provision.
• Out of 20 providers that delivered International Year One Programmes, 10 declared they had equivalent domestic programmes. The equivalent programmes that were identified were the first year of full undergraduate programmes.
• As not all International Pathway Programmes had equivalent domestic programmes there appear to be a greater number of programmes across the sector to facilitate entry for international students.
• Using these domestic equivalent programmes as a comparison, QAA found that there was broad equivalence between the entry requirements for both the International Foundation Programmes and their domestic equivalents, and International Year One Programmes and their domestic equivalents.

Standards of International Foundation Programmes

• QAA found that the academic standards of International Foundation Programmes were being set in line with the expectations of a course at that level in the vast majority of cases. QAA also found that students on International Foundation Programmes were achieving at an appropriate level and that marking and assessment were effective in the vast majority of cases.
• QAA also considered whether students were offered similar opportunities to complete and achieve the intended outcome of the courses, compared with domestic students that had studied A Level or Scottish Higher qualifications. QAA found that International Foundation Programme students generally had more opportunities under more varied conditions to achieve successful progression through, for example, having multiple attempts at assessments, than the opportunities available to A Level/Scottish Higher students.

Standards of International Year One Programmes

• QAA found that the academic standards of International Year One Programmes were being set in line with the expectations of a course at that level in the vast majority of cases. QAA also found that students on International Year One Programmes were achieving at an appropriate level and marking and assessment were effective in the vast majority of cases.
• QAA noted that a number of providers were applying the same academic regulations to both International Year One Programmes and their other programmes at Level 4, but not in all cases. In some cases where the International Year One Programme was offered through a partner, there were differences in the regulations. This was evidenced in particular in varying approaches to the opportunities provided to students to attempt assessments multiple times.

Progression of students on international pathway programmes

• QAA found notable differences in the rates of progression to the next level of study between International Foundation Programmes and International Year One Programmes and their identified domestic equivalent programmes within providers, but there was no clear observable pattern within these differences. These matters are likely worthy of further investigation by providers.

The evaluation report contains a number of recommendations for the higher education sector to consider.