2.quality assurance

22
Quality Assurance in European Higher Education Bologna Promoters’ Presentation Material (to be adapted as needed)

Upload: youth-agora

Post on 18-Dec-2014

1.662 views

Category:

Education


0 download

DESCRIPTION

 

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: 2.Quality Assurance

Quality Assurance in European Higher Education

Bologna Promoters’ Presentation Material

(to be adapted as needed)

Page 2: 2.Quality Assurance

2 2

Quality assurance – why?From Industry to a Knowledge SocietyFunctions of QAInstitutional QAExternal QADeveloping a QA ProcessPolicy ContextEuropean Standards and GuidelinesPotential OutcomesTools for SuccessProjects and initiatives in European QA

Content of the Presentation

Page 3: 2.Quality Assurance

3 3

A tool for addressing the complexities of European higher education

A relative concept, based on institutional mission and goals

Closely related to questions of ideology and power (who defines quality in which way, accountability aspects etc.)

In the best interest of students, employers and society in general, who should also be involved in the QA process

A dynamic, ongoing process

Potentially a bureaucratic burden, to be kept to a minimum

Orientation towards the future

What is QA?

Page 4: 2.Quality Assurance

4 4

Fitness for purposeCompliance (zero error or deviation)Satisfaction of students and parentsExcellenceValue for moneyTransformation (process of changing the student)Enhancement (process of changing the university)Control (punitive/rewarding process of QA)Public information, reassurance, confidenceRankingAccountabilityInternational acceptabilityResource allocation

Why QA? A Multitude of Purposes

Page 5: 2.Quality Assurance

5 5

Pre-1980s: Teaching, learning, research and

services are hardly measures or assessed in formal processes.

Quality notion in HE based on reputation of individual professors and departments of universities.

Post-1980s: International discussions affirming

the importance of safeguarding quality of higher education: UNESCO, OECD, INQAAHE…

Based on similar principles, many unique national and institutional QA approaches were developed.

Short History of QA in European Higher Education

Today:Europe-wide efforts to enhance QA transparency, consistency and

commonality to meet the needs of student mobility and cross-border cooperation of universities generated by internationalisation trends.

Joint European Standards and Guidelines, peer review process for legitimating QA agencies, and establishment of a Register of QA agencies.

General: Quality in HE and Research has always been an issue.

Page 6: 2.Quality Assurance

6 6

Peer approval and national authorities felt to no longer be enough to assure quality of growing mass education.

Led to formalised processes for assessing the quality of higher education, particularly the teaching and learning aspects.

First quality assurance concepts were borrowed from industrial production processes, focusing on assessment of “products”, measurable outcomes by employing bottom-line standards.

HE institutions develop QA processes and enhance awareness for the need of more institutionalised ways of quality assessment

But: QA processes not fully geared towards1. specific nature & mission of HE institutions (social

interaction in learning and research, resulting not necessarily in “products” or a clear-cut assessable outcomes)

2. social and economic change (increasingly knowledge-based)

From product assessment…

Page 7: 2.Quality Assurance

7 7

Good QA of higher education needs to consider not only outcomes but also the context and the interaction of players

Specifically relationships between: The mission goals of the university; • Researcher, teachers, students and administrative staff;

• The framework of the conditions set by the university environment in its unique political, social and economic situation.

• Quality assurance as a joint shared effort of all members of the institution = Quality Culture

…to institutional Quality Culture in a Knowledge-based Society

Page 8: 2.Quality Assurance

8 8

A shared culture that values quality, not only managerial processes.

Not just a task of the QA specialist or the QA unit, but the collective attitude directing the actions of all stakeholders.

Includes internal reviews that are coherent with its own mission, objectives, and academic and organisational values.

An important aspect of maintaining a balance between autonomy and uniqueness with accountability.

Quality Culture

Page 9: 2.Quality Assurance

9 9

QA has two main functions:

• Quality enhancement: the maintenance and continual enhancement of teaching, learning and research, and of the entire institutional framework Internal QA

• ..with regards to the outside world External QA

• Accountability: the demonstration of quality to external stakeholders (governments, students, parents, employers, society) for different reasons, including legal requirements and promotion of the university. External QA

Functions of QA

Page 10: 2.Quality Assurance

10 10

• Internal: What: review processes and implementation of new strategies fit

to the mission goals, profile and context of a university Why: for the enhancement of the overall performance of the

institution and all its parts and elements, and the promotion of creativity and innovation

How: activated by a dynamic quality culture – shared values and attitudes, staff identification with the university as a community of learning, etc.

External: What: either voluntary or compulsory review/evaluation/audit by

an external QA review body Why: accountability and validation, and trust building between

the institution and the outside world How: often motivated by laws or requirements of funding

agencies

Aspects of Institutional QA

Page 11: 2.Quality Assurance

11 11

Output: Examine the outcomes of the institution’s activities: teaching, research, goal achievement etc. Associated with excellence, fitness-for-purpose,

effectiveness.Input: Tallying of factors like equipment, staffing, funding etc. Needs to be related to output.

Process: The activities that lead to the desired outcomes, such as governance structures, decision-making processes or administrative procedures.

Developing a QA process

In order to achieve a sensible concept of quality, a QA process may need to consider all three

aspects

Quality Perspectives: A QA process can focus on

Page 12: 2.Quality Assurance

12 12

Developing a QA Process cont’d

Selecting an approach:

Accreditation Evaluation Audit Review Benchmarking Assessment

Selecting a focus: Institutional Programme Smaller units like

research, services, faculty

Process, i.e. the institutional QA system itself

A combination of the above

Accreditation and Evaluation are the most commonly used methods for external QA at the level of institutions and programmes.

Caution: 1) These processes are not usually employed in their pure

forms anymore, but in combination.

2) The terms can mean different things in different places.

Page 13: 2.Quality Assurance

13 13

Accreditation and Evaluation:

Different in process and purpose

Accreditation formalised decision by an

recognised authority (accreditation agency) as to whether an institution of higher education or a programme conforms to certain defined minimum standards.

Predefined consequences of a formal nature: authorisation to run a programme or institution, or: no accreditation/ closure

Yes/No decision – in some cases conditional “Yes”

Evaluation Evaluation aims at supporting the

institution’s or programme’s efforts towards development and improvement

Aims at increasing strategic capacity for change and internal quality culture

Fitness-for-purpose rationale

Recommendations for enhancement, change, reorientation

Shared features:self-evaluation/documentation submitted by institution or programme

external assessment by peers

Page 14: 2.Quality Assurance

14 14

Accreditation and Evaluation:

Examples for mixed procedures

Increasingly, a methodological mix can be observed:

A fitness-for-purpose approach would consider – probably intrinsically - a minimum “standard”, i.e. what is appropriate of an institution of this mission and standing.

a standard-based approach would have to consider fitness-for-purpose, i.e. in addition to national standards, the specific situation and mission of the institute

Evaluation can be linked to a formalized decision and concrete obligations and sanctions

Accreditation can recommend improvement, …

Page 15: 2.Quality Assurance

15 15

Programme

Based on the ability of the institute to saveguard the quality of its parts

Easier to facilitate

Benefits all parts of the institution

Can not guarantee the quality of all programmes and services

Programme, institution or process?

A QA process may need to combine these approaches according to national and institutional requirements

appear as the more thorough approach, as it delivers a judgment or recommendations on the quality of the one specific programme.

in practice, it implies considerable costs and workload (periodicity, preparation of self-assessment report etc.)

Institutional quality may limit programme performance

Institution, Process

Page 16: 2.Quality Assurance

16 16

• Internationalisation/globalisation: Increased competition, growing global higher education

market, debate on trade in educational services (GATS)

• Bologna Process: 46 European Countries looking for convergence through common

structures and tools - focus on teaching and learning

• Lisbon Strategy: 27 European Union Member States with ambitious

economic and social goals – focus on research and wider societal transformation process

Demand for quality enhancement, and more convergence, cooperation and exchange in QA processes

Policy context

Page 17: 2.Quality Assurance

17 17

European Union Council Recommendation 24 September, 1998 Evaluation and improvement is a good thing

Bologna Declaration, 1999 More European cooperation in QA

Prague Communiqué, 2001 Quality is key to the success of the EHEA

Berlin Communiqué, 2003 Quality moves to the top of the agenda The responsibilities of HEIs are acknowledged

Bergen Communiqué, 2005 Systematic introduction of internal QA directly correlation to

external QA European Standards and Guidelines

London Communiqué, 2007 Register of European Higher Education Quality Assurance Agencies

Policy context: Increasing importance of QAat European level

Bologna Process – Ministerial Meetings

Page 18: 2.Quality Assurance

18 18

European Standards and Guidelines for QA• To be understood as joint principles to be considered during the

development of national and institutional QA procedures.

Peer revies of QA agencies• All QA agencies must be recognised by a competent public

authority in the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), as well as be independent in operation and decision from third parties.

European Register of QA agencies (tbc 2007)• Instrument to assure and improve quality of QA agencies, and to

promote mutual trust between them, as well as provide a list of reliable agencies institutions and governments can choose from.

European Forum for QA• European-level discussions about QA involving all constituencies and

stakeholders.

Tools for Success: Post-Bergen 2005

Page 19: 2.Quality Assurance

19 19

Bergen 2005: European Standards and Guidelines

What they are: Generic, not specific,

principles of what should be done

A process-neutral source of assistance and guidance

What they are not: Prescriptive

Detailed procedures

A European quality assurance system

Why they are important: Agreed through the Bologna Process

Stocktaking through the Bologna Process

Inter-relationship between internal, external QA and QA agency

Potential for more transparency, cooperation and exchange at European level

international visibility of European HE

Page 20: 2.Quality Assurance

20 20

London 2007: European Quality Register

Register of European and also international QA agencies

Promote the European Standards and Guidelines, in particular regarding QA agencies (peer review of agencies, impartiality etc.)

Purpose: to allow stakeholders and the general public open access to objective information about trustworthy QA agencies that are working in line with the ESG.

It will enhance confidence in HE in the EHEA and beyond, and facilitate the mutual recognition of QA and accreditation decisions.

Voluntary, self-financing, independent and transparent.

The register will be the responsibility of the main stakeholders: HEIs, students, QA agencies and social partners.

Page 21: 2.Quality Assurance

21 21

London 2007: Who does the Register?

The E4 Group

ENQA

EUA

EURASHE

ESU

European University Association (EUA)

European Student Union (ESU - formerly ESIB)

European University Colleges (EURASHE)

European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA)

Tasked by the European Ministers to develop and implement the Register

Page 22: 2.Quality Assurance

22 22

• The Institutional Evaluation Programme• Quality Culture Project • Creativity Project • Transnational European Evaluation Project I and II

(TEEP)• Quality Procedures in European Higher Education• Quality Convergence Study Project• European Masters New Evaluation Methodolgy (EMNEM)• Tuning European Higher Education• European Quality Labels• E-xcellence

Projects and Initiatives in European QA