You are at:
Home
Forms
Changes to the quality assurance of osteopathic education

Print this page Email this page to a friend

Changes to the quality assurance of osteopathic education

Please read the consultation document before completing this form.

We are asking some specific questions that we would like responses to, but you are welcome to offer any comments you wish. All feedback will be taken into consideration.

We will publish a report about the consultation and the responses we have received. If you would prefer your response not to be made public, please indicate this when sending us your views.

The deadline for responses to this consultation is 17 May 2018.

We look forward to receiving your comments; thank you.

Questions about you

We would also like to ask some questions about you. Completing the diversity questionnaire is optional, but we would welcome information about our respondents. The information you provide will only be used for the purposes of analysing the consultation responses.

Consultation questions

1. Your name or your organisation if replying on behalf of an organisation (optional)

Optional.

2. Are you happy for the GOsC to publish your response to this consultation?

Removal of RQ expiry dates

3. Do you agree with the proposal to remove RQ expiry dates and to award RQs which are not subject to specific conditions for an indefinite period?

Yes
No

Optional.

4. Do you agree that expiry dates should be retained for new institutions or for those institutions which may not be delivering the Osteopathic Practice Standards?

Yes
No

Optional.

5. What is the most appropriate way forward to introduce the removal of expiry dates from RQs?

Optional.

Publication of conditions or requirements

6. Do you agree that it would be appropriate to treat all types of conditions, requirements and recommendations as having the same status and using the same term?

Yes
No

Optional.

7. Do you agree that there should be greater transparency in terms of publishing these conditions?

Yes
No

Optional.

8. Are there any types of conditions/information that it would not be appropriate to put in the public domain?

Optional.

9. What would be the most appropriate mechanism for publishing conditions and updating their status in order to provide accurate and timely information?

Optional.

10. If expiry dates and conditions were removed, what are the important matters to consider in terms of its implementation?

Optional.

11. Do you have any further suggestions?

Optional.

Procedure for dealing with concerns about osteopathic education

12. Is the draft Procedure for dealing with concerns about osteopathic education at Appendix 2 clear and accessible?

Yes
No

Optional.

13. Do you have any suggestions about how the process might be more fair, effective or comprehensive?

Yes
No

Optional.

14. Would it be appropriate to publish information about concerns if findings were upheld and conditions were imposed?

Yes
No

Optional.

If so, what form would this take? For instance, could this include a condition which could then be incorporated in the publication of other conditions attached to the provider?

Optional.

15. Please give any other comments.

Optional.

Quality enhancement

16. What are the best mechanisms for identifying, sharing and sustaining good practice?

Optional.

17. How can quality assurance review help to sustain good practice?

Optional.

18. Do you think it would be appropriate to publish good practice alongside conditions?

Yes
No

Optional.

Risk-based quality assurance

19. Do you agree that it would be appropriate for the GOsC to move to a more risk-based approach for its quality assurance of osteopathic education?

Yes
No

Optional.

20. What are the risks particular to osteopathic education that the GOsC should take into account when designing a risk-based approach?

Optional.

21. What are the particular risks for the recognition of new osteopathic programmes/providers versus to the renewal of existing programmes?

Optional.

22. How should the GOsC’s approach to quality assurance of undergraduate and pre-registration education and training be adapted for a risk-based approach?

How should the components of the GOsC’s approach to quality assurance (on-going dialogue, concerns, general conditions/triggers, annual reports and Visits) be adapted? Are there any missing elements?

Optional.

23. Do you agree that the period of GOsC/QAA RQ review visits should be varied to take account of the risk standing of RQ programmes? If so, how (please include thoughts about the nature, frequency and content of Visits?)

Optional.

24. Any other comments?

Optional.

Last step