tam quality assurance at ghent...

08/02/2017

1

QUALITY ASSURANCE AT GHENT

UNIVERSITY: A DATA BASED

APPROACH TOWARDS QUALITYPaul Leys – Technical Assistance Mission Kosovo - 8/02/2017

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL POLICYINTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OFFICE

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW

3

08/02/2017

2

• UGent had a decentralised quality assurance model for years: external accreditation of every educational program

• Change in 2016: external accreditation of every study program replaced by institution review

• Institution review : first in Flanders for every Institution Higher Education 2016-2017 (UGent in May 2016)

Introduction : a new system for accreditation

Institution Review

• Evaluation of 4 standards : o Educational vision, mission and policy (PLAN)o Implementation of education policy (DO)o Monitoring and feedback (CHECK)o Action and improvements (ACT)

• General questions of the Institution reviewo Is the university in control of the quality of its programs?o Does the university prepare the students for the problems of the future?o Is the PDCA-cycle closed?o Has the university the means to monitor the quality and does it have the

tools and authority to intervene if necessary

5

• Development of a new Internal Quality Assurance system was needed

• A tendency towards centralisation can be observed

• The faculties and study programs remain responsible for the development of their local quality assurance system

• Many of these practices are supported by the central level

• Several ‘old’ and ‘new’ quality assurance instruments have been put forward

6

08/02/2017

3

• New accreditation system from external to internal QA

7

Central government and

administration

Faculty 1 Faculty 2 Faculty 3 Faculty 4 Faculty 5

Programs

Introduction• Need to develop a new QA system

• Need for a balance between• Existing autonomy of faculty / program• Central administration to be ‘in control’

8

NEW INTERNAL QA SYSTEM

9

08/02/2017

4

DOPolicy

implementation

CHECK

Monitoring

PLAN

Vision and

Mission

ACT

Improvement

initiatives

• Systematic introduction of the PDCA cycle

• PDCA at 3 levels: o Study Program Levelo Faculty Levelo Central Level

• Continuous focus on reflection

• P: development of vision and policy

• A: closing the cycle: improvement based on monitoring

PLAN

11

PLAN : articulating a mission and a vision

• “Dare to think” Multiperspectivism

• Six strategic educational goals = basic framework

12

Plan

Stakeholder involvement

08/02/2017

5

DO

13

DO : Policy implementation

• Strategic goals translated into clusters of operational goals

• 2 to 8 operational goals / actions per stategic goal • broad processes needed to address the strategic goals • choice of actions by faculties and study programs to address processes• choice based on own identity and culture

14

Do

Example: Faculty goal and action

The faculty participates in a reasonable number of international partnerships, being it bilateral or multilateral, to support its goals in terms of internationalisation. At the same time there is no oversupply and quality of these partnerships is assured

Possible actions the faculty can take (see quality handbook): • Faculty participates in central initiatives

• U4 network• Platforms• International Thematic Networks• …

• Use of eQuATIC to increase quality of partnerships• Monitoring of participation rate• Stop existing agreements• Explore new opportunities• …

15

08/02/2017

6

Example: Study Program goal and action

The study program has developed processes to discuss all monitoring results at study program committee meetings, to take care of privacy issues, and to develop appropriate action plans for remediation and improvement (PDCA cycle)

Possible actions the study program can take (see quality handbook): • Frequency and planning of study program committee• Follow-up procedures of monitoring results• Development and implementation of extra monitoring for emerging problems• Involvement of representative group of students in study program committee• Active follow-up of remediation and improvement plan • Establishment of a ‘bureau’ of the study program committee• Administrative support of the study program committee• Etc….

16

CHECK

17

• Quality indicators: do actions lead to high quality?

o Hard quality indicators (cfr European Standards and Guidelines)Fixed goal for every faculty / program

o University-wide quality indicatorsFixed goal for university but choice for faculty / program

o Faculty/study programme specific indicatorsChoice by faculty / program

18

CHECK : Monitoring

Check

08/02/2017

7

Hard quality indicators

The study programme explicitlystates the study subjects thatcomprise international andintercultural competences

Internationalisation is anchoredand visible in the vision, mission and learning outcomesof the study progamme

University-wide quality indicators

25% of the students has international mobility in his/her curriculum by 2020

100% of the study programmes contains international and intercultural competences

Faculty specific quality indicators

Teachers participate in staff mobility

Teachers integrate international aspects in their classes (e.g. international speaker, links with international vision/practices…)

19

Example: Quality Indicators

• 360° of monitoring sources

20

CHECK : Monitoring

Check

Policy information systemUGI (University Ghent Information)

StudentsEvaluation of programsEvaluation of teachingStudy time measurement

TeachersTeachers surveyTeachers portfolio

External stakeholdersAlumni surveyEmployers evaluation

Faculties and programsPortfolioFaculty and study program specific evaluation instruments

Central toolsInternal auditThematic quality reportsOmbudsman and appeal

• Information system that integrates many databases (study programs, student curricula, personnel, research, etc)

• Easy-to-use by study programs, faculties and central administration

• Monitoring and evaluation of educational policy and program quality

21

Policy information systemUGI (University Ghent Integrated Information System)

08/02/2017

8

22

Example : Number of Belgian/NON-Belgian students in master programs per Faculty

Veterinary Medicine Bioscience-engineering Science

24







08/02/2017

9

• Evaluation of programs

• Evaluation of teaching

• Study time measurement

25


• Two-yearly: 2010 – 2012 – 2014 – 2016 (May-June)• Students at the end of the program (bachelor, master)• 2014: +/- 10.000 students invited to participate• Online • Response rate

• Active strategy of recruitment (email, reminder, during courses, online messages, student counsels, teachers, ppt on screens, …)

2010 2012 2014

bachelor 35% 53% 52%

master 34% 50% 54%

Evaluation of Programs

STUDENT EVALUATION OF PROGRAMMES

Name of your presentation

08/02/2017

10

• On course level (every 1 - 2 - 3 year) • One instrument for the whole university• Dimension oriented• Based on “SEEQ Students’ Evaluations of Educational Quality”

(Herbert Marsh) = Internationally validated • Limited access to results - by quality committee in department

(incl. delegation of students – confidentiality agreement)• 30% participation is minimum for reporting

Evaluation of Teaching

STUDENT EVALUATION ON TEACHING

Name of your presentation

08/02/2017

11

STUDENT EVALUATION ON TEACHING

Learning value

Teaching style

Individual rapportCourse materials

Evaluation

Organisation

your scoremaster program

Student evaluations of teaching

• Is the study time in line with the study guide / ECTS points

• All students of a study year

• Selection of 10 groups at random

• Each group participates 4 weeks equally divided over the academic year=prospective method

• 2 normal lesson weeks• 1 preparatory week• 1 exam week

Study time measurement

33

Opleidingsonderdeel Titularis S begroot gemeten plan zelfmin gids max

niet toegewezen 70 70 30 40Kwaliteits-, welzijns- en milieuzorg in Jan Goossens 125 135 150 64 -61 -49 % 14 50Kristalchemie Diederik Depla 75 84 90 150 60 67 % 15 135Inleiding tot de polymeerwetenschap Filip Du Prez 125 125 150 115 -10 -8 % 33 82Kwantumchemie Patrick Bultinck 125 132 150 174 24 16 % 47 127Fysische chemie II: elektrochemie, kine Katrien Strubbe 125 138 150 145 geen 34 111Synthetic Methods in Organic Chemistry Johan Van der Eycken 125 148 150 174 24 16 % 64 110Analytical Separation Methods Patrick Sandra 125 125 150 82 -43 -35 % 27 54MAJOR 150 232 180 164 geen 32 133BACHELORPROEF Pierre De Clercq 450 500 540 294 -156 -35 % 135 159Radiochemie Karel Strijckmans 75 84 90 167 77 86 % 29 138

totaal: 1500 1703 1800 1601 binnen range 460 1141

%: 29 71

verschil ~ %Name of course Professor Theoretica l Measured Difference

08/02/2017

12

34







• First teacher survey end of 2015• Teaching practice related to the 6 strategic educational goals• Monitoring from the teachers perspective• Input for quality indicators (PDCA) at the faculty and program level• About 1700 were invited, 964 completed the survey• Self-reports and open ended question

35


I use activating teaching methods to stimulate students in their learning process

Psychology

Law

79%

Not agree at all Not agree Neutral Agree Completely agree

08/02/2017

13

I use the ‘four eyes principle’ which means that two individuals review and approve my exams or other evaluations before it is given to the students

47%

Political and Social Sci

Bioscience Engineering

Not agree at all Not agree Neutral Agree Completely agree

38







• Evaluations by faculties and/or study programs• Specific questions on employment, competences, program, etc• Survey or meetings (qualitative information)• Follow-up of a longitudinal cohort

39


08/02/2017

14

Which skills and competencies that you acquired during your BA and MA program Movement Sciences are important in your current employment?

Social competencies

Sport

competencies

Research competencies

Analytical competencies

Scientific competencies

Management competencies

Other competencies

not at all very much

Example: alumni

41







• Specific instruments of faculties / study programso Focus groupso Masters thesis evaluationo Internship evaluationo Evaluation of tutorso ….

• Portfolio’s of faculty and study program (see later)

42


08/02/2017

15

43







• Internal audito Evaluation of tuition fee, educational quality, strategic planning, …

• Ombudsman and appealo Identification of problems in processes leading to adaptations in

regulation, practices, etc.

44


• Thematic quality reports = yearly reports on specific topic

o Masters thesiso Internationalisationo Group worko Teaching quality in first bachelor yearo Innovation index of study programs

45

08/02/2017

16

• Supporting tools

o Quality handbookSuggestions for action, good practices, support documents

o Online interactive portfolio systemPortfolio for each faculty and each study program

To document, argument and reflect on processes, actions, indicators and results Follows the PDCA cycle for all goals

46

CHECK : Monitoring

Check

47

PDCA in the portfolio

• Description of the policy and the processes within a study programme with regard to the six strategic educational goals at the UGent

• Description of the actions that are implemented within the study programme with regard to this policy (in accordance with the identy and culture of the study programme)

• Description of the results that were attained with regard to the six strategic educational goals. Herefore, the quality indicators can be used.

• Description of the (remedial ) actions for the future.

PLANPLAN

DODO

CHECKCHECK

ACTACT

08/02/2017

17

49

50

51

08/02/2017

18

• Full Quality Assurance at 3 levels:

o Faculty level: yearly Quality Consultation Proces

o Study program level: Peer Learning Visits of each study program

o Central level : Central Bureau for Educational Quality

52

CHECK : 3 audit systems for monitoring

Check

53

• FACULTY level : yearly Quality Consultation Proces

o central Director of Educational Policy and faculty

o based on portfolios, quality indicators, 360° monitoring results, meeting with students

o to evaluate educational policy implementation and QA

o to co-create a joined understanding of the successful processes and actions needing follow-up

54


Check

08/02/2017

19

55

• STUDY PROGRAM level: Peer Learning Visits of each study program

o a detailed visit of every programme within a 5-to-6 year time frameo a learning experience between the study programme staff, and the visiting team

o team includes study programmes’ chairs of other faculties, a student, an external content expert

o replace the former external quality control audits aiming to get in-depth insight into the study programme’s excellent processes, adequate actions,and points for improvement.

56


Check

57

08/02/2017

20

• CENTRAL level : Central Bureau for Educational Quality

o a newly established Central Bureau

o evaluates the results of the 11 yearly Faculty Quality Consultation Processes and the Peer-Learning Visits and comes to conclusions and policy decisions

o the internal certification authority of educational quality at Ghent University.

58


Check

59

CHECK : monitoring

Check

ACT

60

08/02/2017

21

61

ACT: strategies for improvement

Act

Do

Check

Plan

Act

Do

Check

Plan

Act

Do

Check

Plan

Act

A VERBETERBELEID Beleidsbeslissingen

onderwijs,

middelenenpersoneel

D

RaadvanBestuurofBestuurscollege+Directies

C

INFOuit:

OnderwijsraadOnderwijskwaliteitsbureauBeleidscyclusFaculteiten

P

RaadvanBestuur(RvB)

ofBestuurscollege(BC)

Centraal: Voorzitter

RvBofBC

A VERBETERBELEID ContinuopOR

Jaarlijksverslagnaar

Onderwijskwaliteitsbureau

Kwaliteitsoverleg=gesprek

metelkefaculteitjaarlijks

D

Onderwijsraad(OR)+

DOWA

C

UGI

Portfoliofaculteitenopleiding

Evaluatiesstudenten

Lesgeversbevraging

Eigenevaluatiesfacenopl

Stakeholdersbevragingen

P

Onderwijsraad(OR)

Centraal: DirecteurDOWA

D

CommissieKwaliteitszorg

Onderwijs(KCO)+FDO

C

UGI

Evaluatiesstudenten

LesgeversbevragingEigenevaluaties

Opleidingsportfolio

P

CommissieKwaliteitszorg

Onderwijs(KCO) 6

A

VERBETERBELEID ContinuopCKOJaarlijksverslagnaar

universiteitDOWA

Gesprekmetelke

voorzitterOC

Faculteit:

Onderwijs-

directeur

D

Opleidingscommissie(OC)+

FDO

C

UGI

Evaluatiesstudenten

LesgeversbevragingStakeholdersbevraging

Eigenevaluaties

P

Opleidingscommissie(OC)6

A VERBETERBELEID ContinuopOCJaarlijksverslagnaar

faculteit

Opleiding:

voorzitterOC

Jaarlijks gesprek

Jaarlijks

kwaliteitsoverleg

Jaarlijks rapport Rapport en advies

Pe

er-

lee

rbe

zoe

k

Rapport en advies

Study Program

Faculty

Central

Education

council

Bureau for

education quality

Board of governors

Executive board

63

08/02/2017

22

64

TO CONCLUDE

The key to

keeping the

is knowing when

you’ve lost it

Paul LeysPolicy Advisor

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS OFFICE

E [email protected] +32 9 264 70 32

www.ugent.be

Ghent University@ugentGhent University

tam quality assurance at ghent...

Documents