realizing continuous quality through educational development 31st annual eair forum - vilnius,...
TRANSCRIPT
Realizing continuous quality through educational development31st Annual EAIR Forum - Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
Huyghe Steven
Creten Hilde
Totté Nicole
Verhagen Alexandra
Introduction
▪ QA systems QD ? ▪ stimulate quality culture to promote QD ?▪ Classification of issues, opportunities and challenges
related to promotion of QD and QC▪ (Inter)national▪ Institutional▪ Faculty/department▪ Programme▪ Staff
▪ Educational development initiatives considering these challenges and opportunities
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 2
LEVEL (Inter)national
Institutional Faculty Programme Staff
Issues Hierarchical control and enforcement
Perceived ownership
Time and manpower for QDTransfer and sharing of QD not obvious
Value of QA outcomes Priorities and expertise of programme coordinators
Motivation and perceptionConflict with priority of teaching
Opportunities Increased attention towards quality of teaching and institutional transparency
Installing “quality culture” via bottom-up approach
Taking position in handling QAAgreements on purposes, means, outcomes
Tuning QA processes to the complexity of the programmeProfessional development of process leaders
Culture focussing on learning and teachingIndividual commitmentAssembling a team lo lead QD
Challenges Context and processes in QA protocols
Sense of necessityProactive and developmental approach to QA
Faculty as “learning organisation” (shared vision, communication and commitment)
Characterisation of quality culture allowing for tailor-made design of QD
Agreement on QD via reflective practices of staff
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 3
LEVEL (Inter)national
Institutional Faculty Programme Staff
Issues Hierarchical control and enforcement
Perceived ownership
Time and manpower for QDTransfer and sharing of QD not obvious
Value of QA outcomes Priorities and expertise of programme coordinators
Motivation and perceptionConflict with priority of teaching
Opportunities Increased attention towards quality of teaching and institutional transparency
Installing “quality culture” via bottom-up approach
Taking position in handling QAAgreements on purposes, means, outcomes
Tuning QA processes to the complexity of the programmeProfessional development of process leaders
Culture focussing on learning and teachingIndividual commitmentAssembling a team lo lead QD
Challenges Context and processes in QA protocols
Sense of necessityProactive and developmental approach to QA
Faculty as “learning organisation” (shared vision, communication and commitment)
Characterisation of quality culture allowing for tailor-made design of QD
Agreement on QD via reflective practices of staff
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 4
Faculty level
▪ Institutional and (inter)national claims on quality▪ Limited time and manpower for QD▪ Communities of practice not obvious
▪ Taking position in handling QA quality culture (Gordon, 2002)
▪ Agreements on purposes, means, outcomes
issues
opportunities
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 5
Faculty level
▪ Faculty as “learning organisation” (Yorke, 2000)
▪ Shared vision and strategy
▪ Communication, support and shared commitment
▪ Long- and short term plan at the level of the Faculty
▪ Consolidation and transfer
challenges
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 6
LEVEL (Inter)national
Institutional Faculty Programme Staff
Issues Hierarchical control and enforcement
Perceived ownership
Time and manpower for QDTransfer and sharing of QD not obvious
Value of QA outcomes Priorities and expertise of programme coordinators
Motivation and perceptionConflict with priority of teaching
Opportunities Increased attention towards quality of teaching and institutional transparency
Installing “quality culture” via bottom-up approach
Taking position in handling QAAgreements on purposes, means, outcomes
Tuning QA processes to the complexity of the programmeProfessional development of process leaders
Culture focussing on learning and teachingIndividual commitmentAssembling a team lo lead QD
Challenges Context and processes in QA protocols
Sense of necessityProactive and developmental approach to QA
Faculty as “learning organisation” (shared vision, communication and commitment)
Characterisation of quality culture allowing for tailor-made design of QD
Agreement on QD via reflective practices of staff
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 7
Programme level
▪ Validity of QA outcomes for discipline, context,... (Gosling & d’Andrea, 2001)
▪ Priorities, expertise and appreciation of QD by programme coordinators (Verhagen et al., 2006)
▪ Tuning QD to the specificity of the programme (Verhagen et al., 2006)
▪ Developing expertise of process leaders in curri-culum design, QD, leadership (Verhagen et al., 2006)
issues
opportunities
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 8
Programme level
▪ Investment in culture: characterisation of quality
cultures (Harvey & Stensaker, 2008)
embedded in daily practice
inducing a sense of ownership
▪ Tailor-made design of QD processes
challenges
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 9
Integrated and aligned educational development
▪ Opportunities and challenges fine-tuning support of QD at K.U.Leuven 4 approaches▪ Integration between central and decentral educational
development ▪ Educational development covering different domains▪ Conceptual frameworks for educational development▪ Alignment between instructional, curriculum and
organisational development
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009 10
11
Study Programme
1. Integration between central and decentral educational development at K.U.Leuven
Integrated model
Faculties
LED
Course
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
12
2. Educational development covering different domains
Different domains
instructional development
curriculum development
LED
organisational development
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
13
instructional development
curriculum development
organisational development
3. Conceptual frameworks for educational development
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
14
instructional development
curriculum development
organisational development
3. Conceptual frameworks for educational development
AlignmentAlignment Alignment
▪ Professional development initiatives for staff, programme coordinators and local educational developers▪ Development of supporting tools (scenario’s, exercises)
Step forward in making “process leaders” independent
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
15
4. Alignment between instructional, curriculum and organisational development
Alignment between domains
instructional development
curriculum development
LED
organisational development
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
16
4. Alignment between instructional, curriculum and organisational development
▪ communication of experiences, plans and ideas within CED and with partners▪ creation of an integrated and aligned plan for building teaching and learning capacity in each Faculty▪ creation of a shared vision and strategy▪ advocate for harmonization of different domains of educational development
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
LEVEL (Inter)national
Institutional Faculty Programme Staff
Issues Hierarchical control and enforcement
Perceived ownership
Time and manpower for QDTransfer and sharing of QD not obvious
Value of QA outcomes Priorities and expertise of programme coordinators
Motivation and perceptionConflict with priority of teaching
Opportunities Increased attention towards quality of teaching and institutional transparency
Installing “quality culture” via bottom-up approach
Taking position in handling QAAgreements on purposes, means, outcomes
Tuning QA processes to the complexity of the programmeProfessional development of process leaders
Culture focussing on learning and teachingIndividual commitmentAssembling a team lo lead QD
Challenges Context and processes in QA protocols
Sense of necessityProactive and developmental approach to QA
Faculty as “learning organisation” (shared vision, communication and commitment)
Characterisation of quality culture allowing for tailor-made design of QD
Agreement on QD via reflective practices of staff
Integrated model
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
LEVEL (Inter)national
Institutional Faculty Programme Staff
Issues Hierarchical control and enforcement
Perceived ownership
Time and manpower for QDTransfer and sharing of QD not obvious
Value of QA outcomes Priorities and expertise of programme coordinators
Motivation and perceptionConflict with priority of teaching
Opportunities Increased attention towards quality of teaching and institutional transparency
Installing “quality culture” via bottom-up approach
Taking position in handling QAAgreements on purposes, means, outcomes
Tuning QA processes to the complexity of the programmeProfessional development of process leaders
Culture focussing on learning and teachingIndividual commitmentAssembling a team lo lead QD
Challenges Context and processes in QA protocols
Sense of necessityProactive and developmental approach to QA
Faculty as “learning organisation” (shared vision, communication and commitment)
Characterisation of quality culture allowing for tailor-made design of QD
Agreement on QD via reflective practices of staff
Integrated model
Different domains
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
LEVEL (Inter)national
Institutional Faculty Programme Staff
Issues Hierarchical control and enforcement
Perceived ownership
Time and manpower for QDTransfer and sharing of QD not obvious
Value of QA outcomes Priorities and expertise of programme coordinators
Motivation and perceptionConflict with priority of teaching
Opportunities Increased attention towards quality of teaching and institutional transparency
Installing “quality culture” via bottom-up approach
Taking position in handling QAAgreements on purposes, means, outcomes
Tuning QA processes to the complexity of the programmeProfessional development of process leaders
Culture focussing on learning and teachingIndividual commitmentAssembling a team lo lead QD
Challenges Context and processes in QA protocols
Sense of necessityProactive and developmental approach to QA
Faculty as “learning organisation” (shared vision, communication and commitment)
Characterisation of quality culture allowing for tailor-made design of QD
Agreement on QD via reflective practices of staff
Integrated model
Different domains
Conceptual frameworks
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
LEVEL (Inter)national
Institutional Faculty Programme Staff
Issues Hierarchical control and enforcement
Perceived ownership
Time and manpower for QDTransfer and sharing of QD not obvious
Value of QA outcomes Priorities and expertise of programme coordinators
Motivation and perceptionConflict with priority of teaching
Opportunities Increased attention towards quality of teaching and institutional transparency
Installing “quality culture” via bottom-up approach
Taking position in handling QAAgreements on purposes, means, outcomes
Tuning QA processes to the complexity of the programmeProfessional development of process leaders
Culture focussing on learning and teachingIndividual commitmentAssembling a team lo lead QD
Challenges Context and processes in QA protocols
Sense of necessityProactive and developmental approach to QA
Faculty as “learning organisation” (shared vision, communication and commitment)
Characterisation of quality culture allowing for tailor-made design of QD
Agreement on QD via reflective practices of staff
Integrated model
Different domains
Conceptual frameworks
Alignment between domains
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
Conclusions▪ Tailor-made quality development
▪ integration and alignment of initiatives in different domains on central and decentral level
▪ complexity (context, discipline)▪ “quality culture” via approach of ownership and
empowerment
▪ Classification was difficult▪ Actions on (inter)national level ?
▪ Partnership with QA agencies
▪ QD initiatives win-win-situation for QA
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009
Questions and suggestions ?
31st Annual EAIR Forum in Vilnius, Lithuania – 23 to 26 August 2009