1 / 28

PRO-EAST Workshop Rome, 9 – 11 May 2007 Promotion and Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards

PRO-EAST Workshop Rome, 9 – 11 May 2007 Promotion and Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards. Two Cycles of European Engineering Education: Dublin Descriptors, FQ-EHEA, EQF - LLL and EUR-ACE Standards Günter Heitmann, Technical University Berlin SEFI, E4/TREE, EUR-ACE.

idalia
Download Presentation

PRO-EAST Workshop Rome, 9 – 11 May 2007 Promotion and Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PRO-EAST Workshop Rome, 9 – 11 May 2007 Promotion and Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards Two Cycles of European Engineering Education: Dublin Descriptors, FQ-EHEA, EQF - LLL and EUR-ACE Standards Günter Heitmann, Technical University Berlin SEFI, E4/TREE, EUR-ACE

  2. 1.  Need for qualitative standards in the Bologna Process and the two European Frameworks for Qualifications 2. EUR-ACE standards and its relation to European Framework Standards3. Improving curricula and teaching / learning arrangements by orientation on Framework Standards

  3. Three central aims of the Bologna Declaration of 1999:- a system of comparable and readible degrees- a system based on two main cycles - quality assurance with a view to developing comparable criteria and methodologies Second Cycle DegreeSCD Second Cycle Program SCP (Master) First Cycle DegreeFCD First Cycle Program FCP Soft Standard(~ 5 years) (Bachelor) Hard Standard:Minimum 3 years

  4. Typical options for European HE systems 2007 Source: G. Augusti

  5. 1. Need for qualitative standards in the Bologna process • For comparability and recognition of degrees as well as quality assurance in the common European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010 not only structural and quantitative (cycles, ECTS, credits for cycles) but also qualitative reference points turned out to be necessary; • The Bologna-Bergen Follow-up Conference 2005 adopted the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA ( FQ – EHEA) including the „Dublin Descriptors“ as outcomes oriented qualitative level indicators for higher education; • In addition the European Commission in 2006 adopted a European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF – LLL) with 8 levels including the 3 Bologna cycles with the bachelor, master and doctorate level but slightly different indicators;

  6. BERLIN COMMUNIQUE (2003):„Ministers encourage the member States to elaboratea framework of comparable and compatible qualifications for their higher education systems, which should seek to describe qualifications in terms of workload, level, learningoutcomes, competencesand profile. …Within such frameworks, degrees should have different defined outcomes.  »  

  7. The shift from Input to Outcomes as main challenge: • Outcomes can be addressed either as programme outcomes or more specifically as student learning outcomes with regard to programmes, modules or other kinds of learning situations; • Definition of learning outcomes: Statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to do at the end of a period of learning; • Learning outcomes can be phrased in different terms and be more or less comprehensive, besides knowledge and skillsalso covering competences and attitudes.

  8. Expected advantages of outcomes orientation:1) increase of transparency for different groups of customers,2) stronger emphasis on student learning and competence achievement, 3) facilitation of recognition and mobility, including recognition of prior and experiential learning, 4) better alignment and integration of teaching, learning and assessment and of education, practice and life long learning 5) improvement of quality assurance,6) increase of accountability

  9. Bologna Process: The Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area (Bergen 2005) • Based on the three cycles and degree levels with the possibility to introduce an intermediate level within the first cycle (short cycle); • Quantitative descriptors in terms of ECTS Credits for the first and second cycle; the third cycle not specified in terms of ECTS Credits; • Adoption of the „Dublin Descriptors“ for the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA (FQ – EHEA) as the generic outcomes based qualitative indicators for each degree level and the short cycle.

  10. The „Dublin Descriptors“ as shared qualitative indicators (Joint Quality Initiative, 2005) • First proposed by the Joint Quality Initiative ( see: http://www.jointquality.org ) in March 2003 focused on the first and second cycle level, 2005 enhanced by the doctorate and short cycle level descriptors; • Generic descriptors of required outcomes in 5 areas: 1. Knowledge and understanding 2. Application of knowledge and understanding 3. Making judgements 4. Communication 5. Learning skills

  11. Dublin Descriptors: Knowledge and Understanding • Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: -have demonstrated knowledge and understanding that builds upon and extends their general secondary education, and is typically at a level that, whilst supported by advanced textbooks, includes some aspects that will be informed by knowledge of the forefront of their field of study; • Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: • have demonstrated knowledge and understanding that is founded upon and/or enhances that typically associated with the first cycle, and that provides a basis or opportunity for originality in developing and /or applying ideas, often within a research context;

  12. Dublin Descriptors: Application of Knowledge • Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: -can apply their knowledge and understanding in a manner that indicates a professional approach to their work or vocation, and have competences typically demonstrated through devising and sustaining arguments and solving solving problems in their field of study; • Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: • can apply their knowledge and understanding and problem solving abilities in new or unfamiliar environments within broader (or multidisciplinary) contexts related to their field of study;

  13. Dublin Descriptors: Making judgements • Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - have the ability to gather and interpret relevant data (usually within their field of study) to inform judgements that include reflection on relevant social, scientific or ethical issues; • Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: • have the ability to integrate knowledge and handle complexity, and formulate judgements with incomplete or limited information, but that include reflecting on social and ethical responsibilities linked to the application of their knowledge and judgements;

  14. Dublin Descriptors: Communication • Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - can communicate informations, ideas, problems and solutions to both specialist and non-specialist audiences; • Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: • can communicate their conclusions, and the knowledge and rationale underpinning these, to specialists and non-specialist audiences clearly and unambiguously;

  15. Dublin Descriptors: Learning skills • Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - have developed those the learning skills that are necessary for them to continue to undertake further study with a high degree of autonomy; • Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: • have the learning skills to allow them to continue to study in a manner that may be largely self-directed or autonomous.

  16. Functions of the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA • FQ-EHEA supposed to be an „overarching framework“ and reference for current or future national qualifications frameworks; • The national frameworks by referring to the European ones should allow to assign national qualifications to the Bologna levels and facilitate comparability and recognition; • The European and National Frameworks are not understood as prescriptive for programme development but seem to have respective implications; • Discipline and subject specific standards like EUR-ACE and national ones should aim in general to comply with the generic framework standards.

  17. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF – LLL) • The EQF – LLL comprises 8 levels covering both vocational training and university level education and training; • The EQF is also a „framework of framework“ as national frameworks and qualification systems should refer to it by 2009; • It is based on learning outcomes, described in terms of knowledge, skills and competence, it shall facilitate the recognition of prior and experiential learning; • Levels 6, 7 and 8 compare to the three Bologna cycles, level 5 to a short cycle in higher education or respective programmes in further vocational or continuing education; • Legislative co-decision procedures under way in the Eur. Parliament in 2007

  18. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning: EQF – LLL Standards for level 6 (bachelor) and level 7 (master) • Knowledge: level 6: advanced knowledge of a field of work or study, involving a critical understanding of theories and principles; level 7: highly specialised knowledge, some of which is at the forefront of knowledge in a field of work or study, as the basis for original thinking; critical awareness of knowledge issues in a field and at the interface between different fields;

  19. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning: EQF – LLL Standards for level 6 (bachelor) and level 7 (master) • Skills: level 6: advanced skills, demonstrating mastery and innovation, required to solve complex and unpredictable problems in a specialised field of work or study; level 7: specialised problem-solving skills required in research and/or innovation in order to develop new knowledge and procedures and to integrate knowledge from different fields;

  20. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning: EQF – LLL Standards for level 6 (bachelor) and level 7 (master) • Competence: level 6: manage complex technical or professional activities or projects, taking responsibility for decision-making in unpredictable work and study contexts, take responsibility for managing professional development of individuals and groups; level 7: manage and transform work or study contexts that are complex, unpredictable and require new strategic approaches, take responsibility for contributing to professional knowledge and practice and/or for reviewing the strategic performance of teams;

  21. 2. EUR-ACE Standards and its relation to European Framework Standards • EUR-ACE standards with regard to expected Programme Outcomes have been derived primarily from requirements at the „entry into the profession“ and not just from „academic“ requirements, taking appropriate standards in various European countries into account; • Dual level: According to the Bologna system of cycles the expected outcomes are defined as generic outcomes for the first cycle degree (EUR-ACE bachelor) and for the second cycle degree (EUR-ACE master), with the first cycle degree already providing „employability“ and an entry into the engineering profession; • The outcomes oriented EUR-ACE Standards aim to satisfy also the level descriptors of the Framework for Qualifications (FQ) of the EHEA but are necessarily more specific; • They are supposed to function as a sectoral „framework of frameworks“, namely with regard to the quality and/or accreditation standards of national agencies devoted to engineering programmes;

  22. EUR-ACE Standards for Programme Outcomes • EUR-ACE standards for programme outcomes are generic for engineering and focus on 6 areas of graduate attributes and competence achievement: - Knowledge and Understanding: FCD: 4, SCD: 2 outcomes are specified, - Engineering Analysis: FCD: 3, SCD: 4outcomes specified; - Engineering Design: FCD: 2, SCD: 3 outcomes specified; - Investigations: FCD: 3, SCD: 4 outcomes specified; - Engineering Practice: FCD: 4, SCD: 3 outcomes specified; - Transferable Skills: FCD: 5, SCD: 7 outcomes specified; • For the First Cycle Degree (FCD), the EUR-ACE-Bachelor, 21 outcomes are required and need to be addressed and achieved by the programme applying for the EUR-ACE label, the Second Cycle Degree (SCD), the EUR-ACE Master, requires 23 outcomes;

  23. EUR-ACE Standards for Programme Outcomes • EUR-ACE outcome standards are usually phrased in terms of „ability to ...“ statements; they need to be further specified by the accreditation agencies or programme provider with regard to engineering branches; • Example: Engineering Design - First Cycle graduates should have: - the ability to apply their knowledge and understanding to develop and realise designs to meet defined and specified requirements; - an understanding of design methodologies, and an ability to use them; Second Cycle graduates should have: - an ability to use their knowledge and understanding to design solutions to unfamiliar problems, possibly involving other disciplins; - an ability to use creativity to develop new and original ideas and methods; - an ability to use their engineering judgements to work with complexity, technical uncertainty and incomplete information;

  24. Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards and some open questions • Are the EUR-ACE outcome standards appropriate and comprehensive enough, in particular to achieve a first degree quality compatible with global standards (Washington Accord) and the European Frameworks for Qualifications? • Do all 21 EUR-ACE Programme Outcomes for the First Cycle Degree or all 23 for the Second Cycle Degree need to be addressed by national accreditation standards and respectively achieved by the programme providers before a EUR-ACE label can be awarded? • Is it necessary to introduce different levels of attainment with regard to the required outcomes and do we need respective shared performance or outcomes indicators? • How can a EUR-ACE appropriate outcomes assessment be implemented by programme providers and evaluated by National Agencies and external reviewers? • How can or should EUR-ACE standards be improved? Need for a special Quality Assurance System within National Agencies and ENAEE?

  25. 3. Improving Curricula and Teaching/Learning arrangements by orientation on Framework Standards • Outcomes and competence based Qualification Frameworks and the EUR-ACE accreditation requirements are only reference points; • Accreditation Agencies as well as programme providers may want to go beyond the described minimum standards; • Faculty and teaching staff has to get involved in discipline, branch, programme, subject and module related specification of learning objectives and intended learning outcomes; • A comprehensive process of alignment of programme planning, teaching/learning arrangements, an appropriate outcomes assessment and feed-back for continuous quality improvement is needed; • Programme providers have to make evident and the external reviewers (peers) have to evaluate whether required outcomes are achieved.

  26. Determine Outcomes Required to Achieve Objectives Determine How Outcomes will be Achieved Evaluate Objectives/Assess Outcomes Determine How Outcomes will be Assessed Formal Instruction Student Activities Establish Indicators for Outcomes to Lead to Achievement of Objectives ABET - Evaluation & Assessment Cycles“2-loop Process” Determine educational objectives Evaluate Objectives Input from Constituencies

  27. LTSN UK: Constructive Alignment Concept map / Houghton/Biggs

  28. Thanks for your attention.Waiting for questions and comments: guenter.heitmann@tu-berlin.de

More Related