Towards Excellence in Higher Education through Quality Awareness

1. Theme 2: Different approaches to QA and their impact on efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability Towards Excellence in Higher Education through Quality Awareness Dr. Dawid Wosik Quality Assurance CoordinatorHigher Colleges of Technology, Fujairah Colleges e-mail: dawid.wosik@hct.ac.ae

2. Agenda • Quality as a result of being aware • Integration of the “quality models” • Spreading quality awareness • Conclusion

3. 1. Quality as a result of being aware • Quality in higher education is a very broad concept. The multi-dimensional, multi-level and dynamic nature of this concept consists of many aspects, i.e. the contextual settings of an educational model, an institutional strategy, and the specific standards within a given system, program or discipline (Vlãsceanu, L., Grünberg, L., Pârlea, D.) • There is a need to strike a balance between accountability for quality and quality improvement (Stensaker, 2003)

4. 1. Quality as a result of being aware Therefore: • Quality is a result – the result of being aware. Being aware of reality but what’s more important – being aware of the future • Spreading awareness of the requirements is the first and necessary step to see a horizon of opportunities for quality improvement • There is a need to be knowledgeable not only of the specific requirements (accreditation standards), but also those reflected in different quality models (e.g. ISO 9001)

5. 2. Integration of the “quality models” Is there any space for integrating accreditation and ISO 9001? • Accreditation as a “guarantee of quality” means: • Recognition • Conformance to standards which are “tailored” for higher education • Reference point – extremely needed for quality to be enhanced • Accountability for quality… …which still needs to be linked to a dynamic quality management system

6. 2. Integration of the “quality models” Is there any space for integrating accreditation and ISO 9001? • ISO 9001 as a “guarantee of improvement” means: • Quality management system • Continuous focus on quality management principles • Linking quality requirements and strategy • Conformance to general quality management system requirements and therefore… …ongoing problems with an interpretation of the standard

7. 2. Integration of the “quality models” • Accreditation seen as an input to quality improvement process Quality level (QL) Quality improvement Output Quality management process Input Acceptable QL = accreditation Time

8. 3. Spreading quality awareness Internal audit (ISO 9001) as a self-assessment tool (accreditation) • A self-assessment, being an initial stage of the accreditation procedure, aims at evaluating the degree to which the accreditation standards are met • An internal audit, the requirement included in the ISO 9001 standard, is a systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining audit evidence and evaluating it objectively to determine the extent to which audit criteria are fulfilled (ISO 9000)

9. 3. Spreading quality awareness “Accreditation audit” as a self-assessment tool • Possible integration of the self-assessment with the internal audit leads to the following recommendations: • Accreditation standards to be included in the auditing criteria • Staff from each level of an organization to be involved in the auditing process • Auditing interview to be focused on the accreditation requirements • Conclusions from the audits to be formulated based on the above (Poznań University of Economics, Faculty of Commodity Science, Poland)

10. 3. Spreading quality awareness Internal communication • Top management shall ensure that appropriate communication processes are established within the organization and that communication takes place regarding the effectiveness of the quality management system • Management representative’s responsibility is to: • Report to top management on the performance of the quality management system and any need for improvement • Guarantee the promotion of awareness of customer requirements throughout the organization (ISO 9001)

11. 3. Spreading quality awareness Spreading quality awareness in Higher Colleges of Technology • Academic, Advancement and Accreditation – AAA (a unit at the central level of the organization) • Quality Assurance Coordinators – QAC’s (appointed at campuses) • Quality Improvement Advisory Committee (consisting of the Dean, the Supervisor of the AAA and all the QAC’s) • Quality Improvement System (a web-based application)

12. 3. Spreading quality awareness

13. 3. Spreading quality awareness Promotion of quality awareness via the QIS • Stakeholder Satisfaction (e.g. employer/industry satisfaction with program) • Program Accreditation (e.g. external accreditation of programs) • Course Delivery and Assessment (e.g. evaluation of courses by faculty) • Student Academic Success (e.g. pass rate) • Resource Utilization (e.g. teaching workload)

14. 4. Conclusion • Although an integration of different requirements (increasing of quality awareness) may be achieved by institutions themselves, much can still be done by national and international quality assurance agencies. • “Core knowledge”, rules, and examples of good practice as a basis of quality assurance in higher education should be extrapolated as widely as possible to better serve the pursuit of quality in higher education (London Communiqué)

15. 4. Conclusion • “(…) The point is that quality assurance agencies around the world, through their evaluations, institutional visits and close contact with higher education institutions, sit on a substantive amount of knowledge about quality that seldom finds its way into formal, written evaluation reports. Most likely, this is information that is left out of the knowledge acquired, due to formal requirements with respect to a given evaluation or anxiety that the role as ’independent agency’ may be questioned; however, by not addressing these issues, quality assurance agencies also miss an opportunity to influence the accountability debate in higher education (…)” (Stensaker, 2008)

16. Thank you for your attention!

17. References • Bologna Process Stocktaking, Report from a working group appointed by the Bologna Follow-up Group to the Ministerial Conference in London, May 2007 • ISO 9000:2005 Quality management systems – Fundamentals and vocabulary, International Organization for Standardization • ISO 9001:2008 Quality management systems – Requirements, International Organization for Standardization • Stensaker B., Trance, transparency, transformation: the impact of external quality monitoring in higher education, „Quality in Higher Education”, 2003, Vol. 9, No. 2, Carfax Publishing, p. 151-159 • Stensaker B., Outcomes of Quality Assurance: A discussion of Knowledge, Methodology and Validity, „Quality in Higher Education”, 2008, Vol. 14, No. 1, Carfax Publishing, p. 3-13

18. References • The HCT Quality Improvement System – An Overview, How Can We Make HCT Even Better, Academic Advancement and Accreditation, Higher Colleges of Technology, 2008 • Vlãsceanu, L., Grünberg, L., and Pârlea, D., 2007, Quality Assurance and Accreditation: A Glossary of Basic Terms and Definitions (Bucharest, UNESCO-CEPES) Papers on Higher Education • Wosik D., Quality strategy in managing university in the light of the Bologna Process and criteria of university accreditation – experiences of Faculty of Commodity Science, [in:] K. Leja (ed.), “Management problems at the knowledge-based university”, published by Division of Knowledge and Information Management, Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdańsk University of Technology, Gdańsk 2006, p. 131-145