Trends in Quality Assurance in Europe QBBG meeting, Dubai, UAE, 5-7 December 2015 Achim Hopbach

1. Trends in Quality Assurance in Europe QBBG meeting, Dubai, UAE, 5-7 December 2015 Achim Hopbach Managing Director www.aq.ac.at, achim.hopbach@aq.ac.at

2. Quality Assurance in the EHEA: Milestones 2003 (Berlin): HEI have the primary responsibility for quality and quality assurance; self commitment to set up national QA systems 2005 (Bergen): “Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area” (ESG) 2008: European Quality Assurance Register (EQAR) Since 2009: QA part of the Bologna stock-taking 2015 (Yerewan): Revised ESG, European Approach for QA of Joint Programmes

3. The Basis: • Standards and Guidelines • for Quality Assurance • in the European Higher Education Area • (ESG)

4. ESG 2015: Purposes • They set a common framework for quality assurance systems for learning and teaching at European, national and institutional level; • They enable the assurance and improvement of quality of higher education in the European higher education area; • They support mutual trust, thus facilitating recognition and mobility within and across national borders; • They provide information on quality assurance in the EHEA.

5. ESG 2015: Scope “The focus of the ESG is on quality assurance processes related to teaching and learning in higher education, including the learning environment and relevant links to research. The ESG apply to all higher education offered in the EHEA regardless of the mode of study or place of delivery. While some of the standards refer to programmes of study that lead to a formal qualification, the ESG are also applicable to higher education provision in its broadest sense and to transnational, cross-border provision.”

6. ESG 2015: Structure 3 chapters: Internal QA, external QA, QA of QA-Agencies “The standards set out agreed and accepted practice for QA in HE in the EHEA and should, therefore, be taken account of and adhered to by those concerned, in all types of HE provision. The guidelines explain why the standard is important and describe how standards might be implemented. They set out good practice in the relevant area for consideration by the actors involved in quality assurance. Implementation will vary depending on different contexts.”

7. Quality Assurance: State of play

8. Byand large national externalqualityassuranceregimesandtheagenciesare in compliancewith ESG. • The mostcommonexternalqualityassuranceproceduresareaccreditationandevaluationofprogrammes, followed at a significantdistancebyevaluationandaccreditationofinstitutionsandbyaudits.

9. Varietyandcontinuouschangearekeyfeaturesofexternal QA in the EHEA • Most agenciesapplymorethanoneapproach • Agenciesfrequentlychangetheirapproach(es) • Isthere a trendtowardsaudits? • The emergenceof a unified European qualityassurancesystemisunlikely. National agendas matter!

10. New: • European Approach for Quality Assurance of Joint Programmes

11. QA: Current Situation Three main approaches to external QA of joint programmes: Several (“fragmented”) national reviews Joint review by several QA agencies Single review by one QA agency Fragmented reviews are simple (though double), but do not reflect the “jointness” of the programme Frameworks for joint and single reviews have been tested, but have to combine many national criteria, thus cumbersome and complicated

12. QA: Current Situation (2) National criteria (for approval/accreditation) applied to joint programmes can be contradictory (e.g. # of ECTS Master thesis) Are not always quality-related make sense nationally, but are difficult to understand to foreign peers and agencies Joint degrees are more difficult than other joint programmes, in some countries even virtually impossible Should QA enforce national legal provisions?

13. Applicability “Joint programmes that are subject to compulsory programme accreditation at national level.” (BFUG work programme 2012-2015) “The joint programme should be offered jointly, involving all cooperating institutions in the design and delivery of the programme.” (Standard 1.1)

14. Core Elements: Standards In general: the ‘regular’ standards Plus: based on QF-EHEA, ECTS and ESG (part 1 mainly) applied for specific nature of joint programmes (“jointness”: joint responsibility, joint development and joint provision) Minus: Additional national criteria!

15. Core Elements: Standards (2) Example: 3. Study Programme [ESG 1.2] 3.2 Credits:The European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) should be applied properly and the distribution ofCreditsisclear. 3.3 Workload: A joint bachelor programme will typically amount to a total student workload of 180-240 ECTS-credits; a joint master programme will typically amount to 90-120 ECTS-credits and should not be less than 60 ECTS-credits at second cycle level (credit ranges according to the FQ-EHEA); for joint doctorates there is no credit range specified.

16. The European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR)

17. EQAR at a glance • List of quality assurance agencies that comply with European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG) • The Register has been established to: • promote student mobility by providing a basis for the increase of trust among higher education institutions; • reduce opportunities for “accreditation mills” to gain credibility; • serve as an instrument to improve the quality of agencies and to promote mutual trust among them.

18. EQAR at a glance (2) • The Register has been established to: • provide a basis for governments to authorize higher education institutions to choose any agency from the Register, if that is compatible with national arrangements; • provide a means for higher education institutions to choose between different agencies, if that is compatible with national arrangements; • Bucharest Communiqué 2012: • “Allow EQAR-registered quality assurance agencies to perform their activities across the EHEA, while complying with national requirements.”

19. EQAR at a glance (3) • Established by E4 (stakeholder organisations ENQA, EUA, EURASHE, ESU) at Ministers' request • Jointly governed by stakeholders (E4, social partners) and EHEA governments • Independent Register Committee • Composed of 11 quality assurance experts • Nominated by E4, but not representatives • Takes all decisions related to registration

20. EQAR registered agencies(June 2015) • 40 agencies from 21 countries • (8 from Germany, 7 from Spain, 3 from the Netherlands 2 from Switzerland, UK and France) • Inclusion on the register based on an external review against ESG

21. Cross-borderreviews in the EHEA (June 2015) • 9 countries recognize EQAR-registered agencies to operate as part of the national requirements for external QA • 1 country partly, 2 countries only for Joint Degrees • 20 listed agencies have carried out cross-border reviews (2009-2013)

22. Implementation of a register in a regional setting • What’s the purpose? • A list is not a regulator! • What are the legal implications? • What’s the legal basis? • Question of ownership is key!

23. Links • https://www.eqar.eu/fileadmin/documents/bologna/02_European_Approach_QA_of_Joint_Programmes_v1_0.pdf • www.eqar.eu • https://www.eqar.eu/fileadmin/documents/eqar/riqaa/WP5_RIQAA_Report_final.pdf • http://www.enqa.eu/indirme/enqa_oc_22.pdf • www.ehea.info

24. Dr. Achim Hopbach achim.hopbach@aq.ac.at www.aq.ac.at