tempus workshop zagreb quality assurance procedures and activities at ghent university

Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Quality Assurance

Procedures and Activities at

Ghent University


Joke Claeys

Ghent UniversityDepartment of Educational AffairsDivision of Quality Management


Internal Quality Management

- Procedures: since 1993-94 Student evaluation- Structures: since about 1998 . Central division for quality management . Each faculty has a quality cell


Student evaluation

- The evaluation of education is considered as an essential part of the quality system. - The users of the education, namely the students, are ideally placed to judge it.


Student evaluation: what about ? (1)

- An impression of the satisfaction of students with the services offered by the university- Specific: the perception of several aspects of the teaching and learning activities, namely:


Student evaluation: what about ? (2)

- The teaching process itself- The examinations- Supporting services: study guidance, library, electronic learning environment- Infrastructure: audiences, laboratories, buildings,…


Objectives of student evaluation (1)

- Gives feedback upon a teacher/

course/ program in order to change

or improve it

- Supports decisions about

nomination and promotion


Objectives of student evaluation (2)

- Is required in the external assessment- Is a means for students to systematically mention problems and complaints- The information can be used for comparative analyses inside the institution


When does student evaluation take place ?

- At the start of a new semester /academic year: . All activities (also examination) have finished . Possible time gap between the experiences and the report . Possible influence of the examination


Methods of student evaluation

Fase 1: Questioning the students- Questionnaires: prestructured answers or open ended questions anonymous- Interviews- Focus groups: panels of students talking about the course, the teacher,…


Fase 2: Composing action plans for change and improvement

Fase 3: Evaluation of the realisation of the action plans


Role of the students

For long term cooperation, it’s important that they are aware of the 2nd and 3rd phase of the cycle.

No awareness of any follow up has a negative impact on cooperation


Student evaluation: initial characteristics

- Startup in 1993-94 . One uniform questionnaire with prestructured and open ended questions is set up for the entire institution . Processing of the results was done centrally



. Results were sent to the respective professors and the deans of the faculties concerned . Each faculty had an evaluation commission, composed of the dean, 3 professors and 2 students, which had an obligation of discreteness



. Tasks of this commission: - take note of the results of the Qs - make evaluation files - make a synthetic report of each course, containing recommendations and corrections of the educational practice - in a next round, follow the evolution of the results and the adaptations made


The main points of the initial questionnaire

1. Teaching2. Course content3. Practical training, laboratory work4. Teaching and learning material5. Examination6. Coaching


Evolution

1. Since 1994, frames of reference are

made: cumulations of the results of

all the courses in a one year program

The result of a course is compared

to the whole of the study year


2. Divergence in method and questioning From 1996 faculties have asked to change and add to the questionnaire for several reasons . Adding specific questions for specific courses/programs . Wanting a more detailed feedback upon all the facets of teaching . Wanting more information about the functioning of the teacher in the totality of the study year,…


Consequences:

- A variety of questionnaires has

emerged, from the very detailed to

the very general -> comparability

-> validity

- Acceptance is improved


3. Establishment of the Quality Cells in the faculties(11 in total), 1998 - Goal: support in all areas of quality management - Composition: one director of education (prof), at least one staff member, representants of professors and students - They take over the role of the evaluation commission


4. Method of questioning - Originally: pen & paper, during a populous course (1 hour) - From 1999: electronic version; the answering of the questions is an individual affair, computer needed - Now: 6 faculties pen & paper, 5 electronic


5. Rate of participation - Participation has never been obliged. - This remains a problem in some study programs - The electronic form has a negative impact on participation rates - For 2003-04, the mean participation rate for the whole institution was about 50 %. Some programs score worse, some better.


6. Frequency of the evaluation per

course/teacher

- Initially all courses were evaluated

every 2 years

- Now, every teacher has to be

evaluated at least once in 3 years


7. Use of the results

Since 1998 it’s practically an obligation to use the results of the 3 phases in the nomination/promotion files of professors. Use is made with great care.


Examples of questions

- A word version of an English

questionnaire is attached- Recently a summary of all the questions

for over 10 years has been made:

the next powerpoint presentation contains

some examples.

tempus workshop zagreb quality assurance procedures and activities at ghent university

Documents

evaluation of education

evaluation commission

tempus workshop zagrebfase

evaluation files

student evaluation structures

quality system

panels of students

students questionnaires