The Office for Students (OfS) has launched a consultation on its revised approach to assessing and rating higher education quality. It builds on earlier reforms and sets out detailed proposals for assessment criteria, performance indicators, evidence requirements and regulatory consequences.
The EPC has emphasised in previous responses to the OfS strategy and TEF that quality assessment should recognise
- disciplinary differences, with engineering requiring significant investment in laboratories, workshops, equipment and specialist staff;
- professional accreditation with specific curriculum and competence requirements;
- integrated master’s degrees;
- educational innovation;
- small specialist programmes and diverse student populations;
- regional differences linked to provision and skills needs; and
- diverse student pathways including degree apprenticeships and Higher Technical Qualifications (HTQs).
The new proposals explicitly recognise PSRB findings, and enhanced use of benchmarks and contextual information. These developments are consistent with some EPC priorities, although their practical effect requires further scrutiny. The consultation provides an opportunity to examine whether the detailed design accurately reflects engineering teaching quality, makes effective use of existing accreditation evidence, and adequately considers engineering provision within a provider-level approach.
However, the implications for recruitment and admissions are potentially profound. Under Proposal 19, providers judged to require improvement would face growth restrictions, while those receiving unsatisfactory outcomes could see student recruitment reduced by up to 10% year-on-year until reassessment. Similar limits would apply to providers awarded lower-tier ratings. This represents a marked escalation in the regulatory consequences attached to quality assessments.
With proposed recruitment controls driven at provider level by a limited set of proxy indicators, there is a risk of unintended consequences for engineering. Restricting recruitment into high-cost engineering programmes at a time of persistent shortages across the workforce, and increasing demand linked to infrastructure, net zero, advanced manufacturing and defence priorities, could undermine wider government ambitions for growth and competitiveness. Member examples will be useful to examine these potential effects.
We are keen to understand the unintended consequences for engineering HE including whether:
- PSRB evidence would effectively inform quality judgements and reduce duplicated assessment.
- Recruitment restrictions could affect engineering provision, widening participation, investment or educational innovation.
- Integrated master’s degrees, HTQs, degree apprenticeships and flexible learning are appropriately distinguished.
- The indicators and benchmarks adequately reflect regional engineering employment differences.
- What additional contextual evidence would support accurate interpretation of engineering programme performance.
The EPC proposes a Representative Consultation approach, led by the EPC Education, Employability and Skills Commitee. We will post a straw man response for comment in December. Please see the EPC Consultations Policy for information about our response approaches.
Meanwhile, the OfS will hold two online briefings to introduce the proposals and answer questions.
- For provider staff: 5 November 2026, 11:00–12:15. Register here
- For students and student representatives: 9 November 2026, 14:15–15:30. Register here
Further guidance and supporting materials are scheduled for publication on 5 November. The consultation deadline is 28 January 2027.
