quality a ssurance and accreditation in higher education
Post on 23-Mar-2016
36 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Golden Sands – 16 June 2009ByMagda Kirsch (EduconsultHans Daale (LEIDO)
1QA in HE - Varna 2009
Growing stronger in Bologna * Sorbonne, 1998* Bologna, 1999:
- the Golden Triangle of Bologna reforms: Ba/Ma + ECTS + QA/accreditation
* Salamanca, 2001: self-regulation* Prague, 2001: scenarios for mutual acceptance of QA/accreditation* Graz/Berlin 2003: renewed request to ENQA, in cooperation with others; diverging views, relevant seminars on way to Bergen 2005
2QA in HE - Varna 2009
3
[The ministers] agree that by 2005 national quality assurance systems should include: A definition of the responsibilities of the bodies
and institutions involved Evaluation of programmes or institutions, including
internal assessment, external review, participation of students and the
publication of results A system of accreditation, certification or
comparable procedures International participation, co-operation and
networking
QA in HE - Varna 2009
4
Ministers call upon ENQA through its members, in co-operation with the EUA, EURASHE and ESIB, to develop an agreed set of standards, procedures and guidelines on quality assurance, to explore ways of ensuring an adequate peer review system for quality assurance and/or accreditation agencies or bodies
QA in HE - Varna 2009
A network to disseminate information, experiences, good practices, and new developments in quality assessment and quality assurance in HE.
An important step towards a pan-European framework of quality management.
Originates from the European Pilot project for Evaluating Quality in HE. (September 1998, EC recommendation)
Has been very active and important to BP.5QA in HE - Varna 2009
Ministers adopted the standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area as proposed by ENQA (ESG). They commited themselves to introducing the proposed model for peer review of quality assurance agencies on a national basis,
They also welcomed the principle of a European register of quality assurance agencies based on national review.
They ask that the practicalities of implementation be further developed by ENQA in cooperation with EUA, EURASHE and ESIB with a report back through the Follow-up Group.
They stress importance of cooperation between nationally recognised agencies with a view to enhancing the mutual recognition of accreditation or quality assurance decisions.
6QA in HE - Varna 2009
7
Internal quality assurance External quality assurance External quality assurance agencies
QA in HE - Varna 2009
Policy and procedures for quality assurance,
Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards,
Assessment of students, Quality assurance of teaching staff, Learning resources and student support, Information systems Public information:
8QA in HE - Varna 2009
Use of internal quality assurance procedures,
Development of external quality assurance processes,
Criteria for decisions, Processes fit for purpose, Reporting, Follow-up procedures, Periodic reviews, System-wide analyses.
9QA in HE - Varna 2009
External QA criteria and processes used by the agencies are predefined and publicly available and include: a self-assessment or equivalent procedure by
the subject of QA process; an external assessment by a group of experts,
including, as appropriate, (a) student member(s), and
site visits as decided by the agency; publication of a report, including any decisions,
recommendations or other formal outcomes; a follow-up procedure to review actions taken
by the subject of the QA process. Accountability procedures:
10QA in HE - Varna 2009
11
Ministers in London agreed with proposal to establish the Register, along the lines proposed by E4, based on the ESG
ESG do not refer to qualifications frameworks as such
Guideline for standard 1.2: The quality assurance of programmes and
awards are expected to include: Development and publication of explicit intended
learning outcomes
QA in HE - Varna 2009
Representatives from 13 accreditation organisations from 13 countries (A, B nl, D, IRL, NO, E, CH, NL) + Joint Quality Initiative + EC (Hague, June 2003).
Initial aim: Development of a concept of accreditation that not only serves the national needs but also the needs of the emerging EHEA.
Ultimate aim: Mutual recognition of accreditation. Participants were against imposing accreditation
as the sole instrument for QA, and stressed that ECA should collaborate with ENQA.
12QA in HE - Varna 2009
HUGE DIVERGENCE IN NATIONAL SYSTEMS- out of a jungle of degrees,- into a jungle of QA/accreditation agencies ?
NEW NEEDS IN QA / ACCREDITATION- shorter higher education
- LLL- private universities, transnational education
ISSUES- becoming stronger where problems are least ?- consequence of accreditation in one EU country?
13QA in HE - Varna 2009
We [the ministers] ask the E4 group (ENQA-EUA-EURASHE-ESU) to continue its cooperation in further developing the European dimension of quality assurance and in particular to ensure that the European Quality Assurance Register is evaluated externally, taking into account the views of the stakeholders.
14QA in HE - Varna 2009
15QA in HE - Varna 2009
Internal quality control, which results in self-evaluation
External visitation, which results in a public report
Accreditation
16QA in HE - Varna 2009
Colleges of higher education and universities carry out their own internal quality control through self-evaluation
IQC belongs to the autonomy of the HEI’s who can choose their own system
HEI’s have to write a SER This SER and its annexes serve as a
basis for the in-site visitation.
17QA in HE - Varna 2009
Format for self-evaluation report provided by Council for Higher Education
Self-evaluation report (SER) is written by the HEI’s
Upon completion, the SER and the addenda are reviewed by an international team of experts
18QA in HE - Varna 2009
Visitations of courses are conducted on a regular basis by a committee of external experts who draw up a public report,
The visitation evaluates both the quality of education and of research activities,
Can be for one course or a cluster of related courses,
All courses in the same field are reviewed at the same time
Organisation by VLIR or VLHORA.
19QA in HE - Varna 2009
Visitation panel will audit the course and see whether the learning outcomes meet the competences laid down by law (Dublin descriptors) or in the DSRF,
They do this through: Interviews with all the stakeholders (students,
teachers, employers, alumni), Visit of the premises, Going through course materials and
documentation.
20QA in HE - Varna 2009
The on-site visitation results in a public report that is published in the websites of VLIR and VLHORA,
This report will serve as a basis for accreditation by the NVAO,
The HEI has to present the report to the NVAO within one year.
21QA in HE - Varna 2009
Accreditation by NVAO (Accreditation organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders)
Formal recognition that a course attains the international minimum quality standards,
Condition for carrying the higher education label and for granting the bachelor and master degrees,
Positive accreditation is granted for 8 years.
22QA in HE - Varna 2009
Accreditation is granted by the NVAO – The Accreditation Organisation for the Netherlands and Flanders,
This entails that accreditation is not national but international,
Visitation panels also consist of experts from the two countries thus guaranteeing that courses/programmes meet international quality standards.
23QA in HE - Varna 2009
On site visitation in Flanders by VLHORA (PHE) and VLIR (univ.)– in Holland by independent and private organisations, on behalf of the NVAO
These organisations are called VIB: Organisation for visiting and judging HE-programs and are recognised by NVAO
The Universities in Holland use the same VBI – the Professional HEIs can use one of four VBIs (they all have their own way of going through the process)
Visitation panel is composed by the VBI
QA in HE - Varna 2009
24
In Higher Professional Education no international members in the panel (except of course for international programs taught in English)
VBI is responsible for the report about the results of the visitation
the NVAO takes the final decision about a positive or negative accreditation, for every individual program
In Flanders all programs are visited in the same period (opportunity for benchmarking) – in Holland the HEI is deciding when the visitation will take place (in a period of six years)
QA in HE - Varna 2009
25
There are plans for changing the system in 2010 or 2011 (as well in Flanders as the Netherlands: No accreditation for every program but for the
HEI as a whole (less time, less money There will still be audits on a program level,
every few years (depending on status of HEI) More time for ‘improving’ the programs, if the
visitation proofs that the quality is not okay
QA in HE - Varna 2009
26
Thank you for your attention!
27
http://www.enqa.eu/pubs_esg.lassohttp://www.nvao.net/
QA in HE - Varna 2009
top related