1 / 17

TEEP II – A Pilot Evaluation of Joint Degrees

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.

morganricky
Download Presentation

TEEP II – A Pilot Evaluation of Joint Degrees

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. TEEP II – A Pilot Evaluation of Joint Degrees Staffan Wahlén Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

  2. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. Evaluation process • European Standards and Guidelines - Self-evaluation - Team of experts (peers) - Site visit - Public report - Follow-up Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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

  17. 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

More Related