July's Quality Quick Win
Author
Quality Quick Wins are practical, topical, bite-sized insights that quality teams can use immediately in their day to day work.
Want faster, more consistent technical scrutiny of programme and module proposals? Cardiff Met is using GenAI to check compliance with curriculum parameters and learning outcome coherence before proposals reach approval panels for review.
What to do
Use GenAI to carry out first-pass technical scrutiny of programme specifications and module descriptors - checking for deviation from curriculum parameters, verifying learning outcome levelling, and identifying where programme design may create barriers to fair and transparent assessment. Quality professionals define the parameters; GenAI does the checking.
What this looks like in practice
A programme or module proposal is submitted in the standard way.
- A quality professional runs the proposal through a GenAI tool configured to check against defined curriculum parameters - including learning outcome levelling against the relevant framework, internal consistency across the specification, and whether the learning outcomes are likely to lead to fair and transparent assessment practices.
- The tool returns a structured report flagging deviations, inconsistencies, and potential barriers to fair assessment.
- The quality officer reviews the output and flags any pertinent issues before the proposal progresses to panel - embedding assessment fairness and transparency into the design stage rather than retrofitting it after approval.
- The approval panel receives a proposal that has already cleared a consistent technical baseline, freeing panel time for substantive academic judgement
Why this works
Technical scrutiny is time-consuming and detail-intensive - exactly the kind of task where human reviewers are prone to inconsistency under volume or time pressure. GenAI applies the same parameters to every proposal, every time. It:
- Catches levelling mismatches and curriculum parameter deviations before they reach panel.
- Identifies assessment and delivery design that may create barriers for fair and transparent assessment.
- Produces a consistent, referenceable record of what was checked and what was found.
- Reduces the burden on quality teams during peak submission periods without reducing scrutiny.
- Shifts accessibility review upstream - into design, not just approval - supporting a proactive rather than reactive approach to inclusive curriculum.
- Builds institutional knowledge about where proposals most commonly fall short, informing guidance, staff development, and future design.
Example impact
Cardiff Met's quality team uses GenAI to scrutinise programme specifications and module proposals for deviation from curriculum parameters, learning outcome levelling, and identifying where programme design may create barriers to fair and transparent assessment.
Technical and assessibility issues are identified and resolved earlier in the process - meaning panels spend less time on compliance and more time on quality, and students are less likely to encounter barriers that should never have reached them.