Quality Assurance (HE) in Europe: what next?

1. Quality Assurance (HE) in Europe: what next? Fiona Crozier Assistant Director, Development & Enhancement Group, QAA f.crozier@qaa.ac.uk

2. Introduction • Bologna Process 2010-2020 • General impressions, the Leuven communique, ENQA position paper… • Try to define some of the trends and… • …then try to predict their impact on… • Stakeholders and policies • Some examples

3. Bologna up to 2010: success or failure? • Coherence, compatibility, harmonisation • Three-cycle degree structure • Development of reference points such as the qualifications framework for the EHEA and the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG) • Promotion of student mobility etc. • All of which has been (subtly or obviously) changing the nature of HE in Europe

4. So what next? Trends… • Globalisation/internationalisation (includes mobility and transnational education) • Changing nature of the student body • Lifelong learning/widening access (maintenance of quality & standards?) • Links with employers/employer-responsive provision • Accreditation of Prior (Experiential) Learning (AP(E)L) • Development of learning outcomes • QA of student assessment • The (continuing) development/refinement of reference points (e.g QFs, ESG, Tuning) • Increasing demand for useful and relevant public information • “Multi-dimensional transparency tools” (rankings! Or league tables)

5. Impact on…stakeholders HE viewed from different perspectives: • Students (ESU) • Higher Education Institutions (EUA/EURASHE) • QA agencies (ENQA) • Public/parents • Employers • National contexts (governments, ministries etc).

6. Impact on policies/the work that we do • Need for changing curricula? (E.g. knowledge v. skills?) • Need for changes to student support systems? • Needs for changes to student assessment • Need to take on board rapidly changing technologies? • Need to revise existing reference points to make them more fit for purpose? And/or devise new ones? • How do we “quality assure all the above?” (Question to self: When does the associated bureaucracy defeat the purpose?! Accountability/assurance versus enhancement/improvement)

7. To conclude… • The big themes: - Globalisation/internationalisation - changing nature of the student body - the growing need for more targeted information about higher education…leading to rankings/league tables?

8. Quality Assurance has somehow to cover it all ..!!?? But HOW ? • programme accreditation ? • what is the programme? • there may not even be a programme ! (at the start) • accredit the provider/the provision? • there may be / will be many different providers • the Learning Outcomes …? And/or the credit • and their assessment ? • just the award/the degree? • (its level and coherence)

9. Internationalised criteria (and their assessment) • designed and meant as ‘reference points’ • can easily become compliance requirements from harmonisation to homogenisation and the loss of cultural identity

10. To conclude • The impact of stakeholder views and trends on… - all our work - QA is and will continue to be a partnership activity - harmonisation and convergence; recognition and celebration of diversity; not compliance

11. To conclude • Higher education in Europe has demonstrated its capacity to adapt in the face of rapid change … • Quality Assurance should be proportionateto ‘risk’ and carried out with • shared international principles • similar internationalised procedures • relevant national / international criteria The method used may be less important than adherence to the above principles?

12. Finally… • Is there evidence to suggest that we’re on the right road?