170 likes | 174 Views
This pilot evaluation project examines the methodology for assessing joint Master's degrees, focusing on three programs: CoMundus - Media and Communication, EMLE - European Master in Law and Economics, and EuroAquae - Water Management. It analyzes program length, coherence, number of partners, age, organization and management, program delivery, quality assurance, lessons learned, special challenges, and the evaluation process.
E N D
TEEP II – A Pilot Evaluation of Joint Degrees Staffan Wahlén Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
TEEP II • Transnational European Evaluation Project • Aim: to develop a methodology for external evaluation of joint Masters degrees • Evaluates three programmes: • CoMundus – Media and Communication • EMLE – European Master in Law and Economics • EuroAquae – Water Management Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Three different programmes Length: Comundus – 3 semesters (90 ECTS) • EMLE – 1 year (60 ECTS) • EuroAquae 2 years (120 ECTS) Coherence: CoMundus: 4 main areas, 2 locations • EMLE: 2 main areas, 2 – 3 locations • EuroAquae: different specialities, 3 locations, professional practice Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Three different programmes Number of partners • CoMundus 7+ • EMLE 10+ • Euroaquae – 5 Age • CoMundus – since 1988 • EMLE – since 1990 • Euroaquae – new Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Joint European project • Involves six quality assurance agencies • Based on the European standards and guidelines • Criteria inspired by the Dublin descriptors and the EUA “Golden Rules” Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Evaluation process • European Standards and Guidelines - Self-evaluation - Team of experts (peers) - Site visit - Public report - Follow-up Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Organisation and management • Both professional and academic aims • Different levels of institutional support • Different mechanisms for cooperation, information sharing • Student support services Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Programme and programme delivery • The international environment provides added value and personal development • Harmonisation of teaching and assessment methods? Common textbooks; exams? • Common core – diversification? • Computer based learning platforms Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Quality assurance • Joint quality assurance • Quality assurance practices involving students, staff and external stakeholders (alumni, potential employers) • Student involvement and influence Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned • The importance of institutional commitment and support • The importance of consistent and regular co-operation, information exchange and compliance with agreements: Programme coordinator, local coordinator, teachers, students Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned 2 • Roles of each partner clearly defined • Practicalities: information, accommodation • Common core vs special profile • Legal problems must be defined and solved: - Joint, double, multiple degree? Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned 3 • Agreement on and awareness of teaching and assessment methodologies • Use of ICT, electronic platforms • Role of thesis, supervision and assessment • Agreement on standards in terms of learning outcomes among staff and coordinators • Opportunities for staff development and staff exchange Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned 4 • Importance of a joint quality assurance strategy • Students, teaching staff, management, alumni, employers involved in quality assurance • Regular course evaluations (electronic questionnaires), monitoring and external evaluations Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Special challenges • Who should evaluate or accredit joint programmes? • European label • Different legislation in different countries (special requirements for number of credits, for thesis) Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Who should evaluate joint programmes? • Mandatory evaluation (accreditation) - agreement among national agencies - Two agencies in co-operation - An expert panel of 5 persons including a student representative - Site visits to all partners, or a selection of partners - Programme report Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Who should evaluate • Voluntary evaluation (for label?) - QA organisation (on the European Register) chosen by the programme - The programme foots the bill - Label awarded by ENQA Swedish National Agency for Higher Education