Outline of the presentation

Outline of the presentation • Historic development • Main principles • Standards and guidelines • Areas • Stakeholders • Internal QA, external QA, QA agencies • Trends and challenges • Conclusions • Useful links

Bologna Process • Bologna Declaration signed in June 1999 by 29 countries • Three overreaching objectives of the Bologna process: • introduction of the three cycle system (bachelor/master/doctorate) • quality assurance • recognition of qualifications and periods of study -> mobility • European Higher Education Area (EHEA) – 47 member states

Bologna Process and QA approved • Establishment of the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) in 2000 • Agreed set of standards, procedures and guidelines on QA • Explore ways of ensuring an adequate peer review system on QA and accreditation agencies/bodies • EUA • EURASHE • ESIB • and EC

Main Principles • Stakeholders -> the interests of students, employers and society more generally in good quality higher education • Institutional autonomy -> the primary responsibility for QA in HE lies with each institution itself and this provides the basis for real accountability of the academic system within the national quality framework • External QA -> it needs to be fit to perform its duties and place only appropriate and necessary burden on institutions for achievement of its objectives External QA as matter of „consumer protection“ or guidance and advice for the purpose of improvement? Creation of QUALITY CULTURE

Standards and Guidelines • Generic principle to the specific requirement • Less focus on procedural matters • Standards -> statements of basic good practice; short and general (do not imply standardisation or requirement) • Guidelines -> illustrations of the standards in action; provide additional information and elaboration and explain why standards are important • Goal: • applicable to all institutions in Europe regardless of structure, function, size, national system; • to promote mutual trust and to improve transparency while respecting diversity • providing guidance, contribution to common frame of reference; not prescriptive or unchangeable

Objectives of Standards and Guidelines • Improve education available to students • Provide source of assistance to HEI and agencies in developing their quality culture assurance • Inform and raise expectations of students, employers and other stakeholders about processes and outcomes of HE • Contribute to a common frame of reference for the provision of HE and QA in EHEA

Areas • Teaching (three cycles of HE) • Research • Institutional management (finances, administration, services)

Stakeholders • University staff • Students • Business community • Society

Internal QA within HEI (1) • Policy and procedures for QA Standards • Strategy for continuous enhancement of quality • Policies (formal and publically available) and procedures for QA • Commitment to development of quality culture Guidelines • Policies and procedures provide a framework -> development of QA system and monitoring of its effectiveness and provision of public confidence in institutional autonomy • Policies contain statement of intentions and principal means by which these will be achieved • Procedural guidance -> provide detailed info about ways to implement the policy and are a reference point

Internal QA within HEI (2) • Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards Standards • Formal mechanisms for approval, periodic review and monitoring of programmes and awards Guidelines • Programmes must be well-designed, regularly monitored, and periodically reviewed in order to assure their continuing relevance and currency -> confidence of students and other stakeholders • Learning outcomes, competence based teaching, modes of delivery (teaching methods), availability of learning resources, etc…

Internal QA within HEI (3) • Assessment of students Standards • Use of published criteria, regulations and procedures which are applied consistently Guidelines • It should be done professionally at all times and it should take into account the existing knowledge about testing and examination processes • Measure achievement of intended learning outcomes, appropriate for its purpose, have clear and published criteria for marking, if possible not rely only on single examiner, have clear regulation covering absence, illness and other mitigating circumstances, in accordance with institution’s stated procedures

Internal QA within HEI (4) • QA of teaching staff Standards • Ways to assure that involved staff is qualified and competent to teach • Teaching staff should be available to external reviewer and should be included in the reports Guidelines • Most important learning resource available to students • They should have full knowledge and understanding of the subject matter, skills and experience to transmit their knowledge effectivly, access to the feedback on their performance • Teaching staff should have the opportunity to develop and extend their teaching capacity -> institutions should provide poor teachers with the opportunities to improve and should have possibility to sanction continuous bad teaching performance

Internal QA within HEI (5) • Learning resources and student support Standards • Adequate resources (physical and human) must be available for the support of student learning for each programme Guidelines • Should be readily accessible to students, designed with their needs in mind and responsive to the feedback from the service “users” • Services to students should be routinely monitored, reviewed and improved

Internal QA within HEI (6) • Information system Standards • Collect, analyse and use relevant information for effective management of study programmes and other activities Guidelines • Self-knowledge as starting point for effective QA • Available means for collecting and analysing information • IS should cover at least: student progression and success rates, employability of graduates, students’ satisfaction with the programmes, effectiveness of teachers, profile of student population, learning resources available and their costs, institution’s own key performance indicators • Institutions should compare themselves with other similar organisations within the EHEA and beyond in order to learn more about themselves and to improve -> QA office is in the organisational structure usually responsible directly to the rector’s office

Internal QA within HEI (7) • Public information Standards • Publish up to date, impartial and objective (quantitative and qualitative) information about the programmes and rewards Guidelines • In fulfillment of their public role, HEI have the responsibility to provide publically the following information: • Programmes they are offering • Intended learning outcomes • Qualifications they award • Teaching, learning and assessment procedures used • Learning opportunities available to their students, etc. • Information must be: accurate, impartial, objective, readily accessible

External QA of HE (1) • Use of internal QA procedures • Take into account the effectiveness of internal QA -> Internal QA policies and procedures are to be carefully evaluated within external QA procedures to determine to which extent the standards are being met • Development of external QA procedures • Determine aims and objectives of QA processes prior to their development by those responsible (incl. HEI). They should be published together with the description of the procedures to be used -> For the purpose clarity and transparency of procedures, development of external QA methods should involve key stakeholders, they should be published containing aims, objectives and descriptions of procedures used. They mustn’t interfere more than necessary in the normal work of HEI.

External QA of HE (2) • Criteria for decisions • Formal decisions (as result of external QA activity) must be based on explicit published criteria that are applied consistently -> For the purpose of equity and reliability, decisions are to be made based on published criteria which are interpreted in consistent manner. Conclusions are to be made based on recorded evidence. • Processes fit for purpose • External QA processes designed specifically to achieve the set aims and objectives -> Some elements of review process which help ensure validity, reliability and usefulness: external experts conducting external QA activity have appropriate skills and competences, experts are carefully selected and coached, international experts are used, students are involved, review procedures used are sufficient to support findings and conclusions, use of self-evaluation/site visit/draft report/published report/follow up review

External QA of HE (3) • Reporting • Published and written in clear style and readily accessible. Decisions, commendations or recommendations contained in the report should be easy to find. -> In order for the intended readership to benefit the most from the reports, they should cover description, analysis (incl. relevant evidence), conclusions, commendations, recommendations. Also it should state purpose of the review, its form and criteria for making the decision. • Follow-up procedures • QA processes which contain recommendations for action or which require subsequent action plan, should have predetermined follow-up procedure which is implemented consistently -> Purpose in continuous improvement. External QA should include structured follow-up procedures ensuring implementation of recommended action

External QA of HE (4) • Periodic reviews • External QA (institutional and programme) undertaken on cyclical bases with clearly defined and in advance published length of cycle and review procedures • System-wide analysis • QA agencies should produce summary reports describing and analysing the general findings of their reviews, evaluations, assessments etc. -> Collected information provides material for structured analysis across the whole HE system -> trends, developments, emerging good practices, areas of difficulty and weaknesses -> tools for policy development and quality enhancement. Research should thus be one of the activities of external QA agencies

QA Agencies (1) • Use of external QA procedures for higher education • Described external QA processes should be used as basis • Official status • Agencies should have an established legal basis and should be formally recognised by competent public authorities in EHEA • Activities • Agencies should undertake external QA activities (institutional or programme level) on a regular basis • Resources • Agencies should have adequate human and financial resources to implement their activities and to further develop

QA Agencies (2) • Mission statement • Clear and explicit goals and objectives contained in a publically available statement (incl. division of labour with relevant stakeholders and description of the cultural and historical context of their work) • Independence • They should have autonomous responsibility of their operations and their conclusions and recommendations cannot be influenced by third parties (HEI, ministries, other stakeholders -> they are consulted in the process, but mustn’t influence the decision) • External QA criteria and processes used by the agencies • Processes, criteria and procedures must be pre-defined and publicly available (self-assessment, external assessment/site visit, publication of report, follow-up procedure) • Accountability procedures • They should include: published policy for QA of the agency published on the website, documentation on internal QA processes in place, cyclical external review (at least every 5 years).

European QA Register

The European QA Forum • An annual event organised by the E4 • Considered by organisers as major contribution to QA in HE • Organised since 2006 and brings together HEI, students, QA agencies • Provides a unique platform for the higher education and QA communities to follow, shape and anticipate developments in the area • Main purpose: foster dialog about QA which goes beyond national and organisational boundaries -> truly European discussion on QA in HE

Challenges and Trends • What is the future in the area QA in EHEA? • Further cooperation in the whole area with the knowledge transfer and improvement of QA systems in HEI across the EHEA • Quality vs. quantity based system within EHEA • QA in the area of doctoral studies/research – in which direction will it develop? • Future of ENQA? • Future of the European QA Register?

Conclusions • No legislation • Quality culture through recommendations • Cooperation within the area of QA • Unpredictable developments

Useful links • E4: Standards and Guidelines for QA in the EHEA: http://www.enqa.eu/pubs_esg.lasso • ENQA Website: http://www.enqa.eu/, and publications: http://www.enqa.eu/pubs.lasso • European Quality Assurance Register: http://www.eqar.eu/ • Manual for the Establishing of a Framework for Quality in HE: http://www.wus-austria.org/files/docs/Quality%20Assurance%20Manual_FINAL%20ENGLISH.pdf • European Higher Education Area: http://www.ehea.info/

Thank you for your attention! Ines Suh, ines.suh@wus-austria.org

Outline of the presentation