THE HUNGARIAN PUBLIC EDUCATION QUALITY AWARD PEQA

1
THEHUNGARIAN PUBLIC EDUCATION QUALITY
AWARD(PEQA)
2
COMENIUS 2000 PROGRAM
Intent of the given institution commitment of
leadership
Legal obligation
COMENIUS 2000 Quality Improvement Programme for
Public Education
Quality Improvement Manual
Competition
Quality improvement on institutional level
On-site assessment
Training

Methodological guidance materials
Public Education Quality Award
Supporting Environment
3
Legal background

• The Minister of Education in his Decree No.
• 3 / 2002 (II. 5.) on Public Education Quality
• Assurance and Quality Improvement ( 15)
• established the
• Public Education Quality Award
• with the aim to recognise - on Government
• level- the outstanding performances of public
• education institutions in the field of quality
• improvement

4
Objectivesof high priority

• To maintain and raise the commitment and
  enthusiasm of public education institutions
  towards quality improvement
• To provide a uniform tool to assess continuous
  improvement
• To measure and improve the efficiency and
  effectiveness of quality improvement
• To strengthen the spirit of healthy competition
  among the public education institutions

5
EFQM EXCELLENCE MODEL
6
INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK

• Europe
• EFQM Model based national quality awards were
  established in 21 countries
• In several countries (eg. Sweden)there is a
  separate award exclusively for education
• None of these countries have a separate system of
  criteria elaborated specifically for education
• USA
• Malcolm Baldrige Award has separate criteria
  for education

7
HNQA Model - Enablers
8
HNQA Model - Results
9
Public Education Quality Award

• Award concept
• Award Categories
• based on the requirements of the COMENIUS 2000
  Institutional Model applied
• ? Award for Partner-focused operation
• ? Award for Excellence
• Olimpic Model (gold, silver and bronze award)
• 10 institutions - finalists in each category

10
THE PEQA MODEL
11
Award category requirements

• Award Category for Partner-focused operation
• simplified model (25 sub-criteria)
• within a 30 pages submission document the self
  assessment makes at maximum 23 pages
• Award Category for Excellence
• full model (30 sub-criteria)
• within a 40 pages submission document the self
  assessment makes at maximum 32 pages

12
THE PEQA MODEL STRUCTURE ON CRITERIA AND
SUB-CRITERIA LEVEL
Criterion

• Criterion 1 - Leadership
• How the leaders of the institution develop its
  mission and vision and how they facilitate their
  implementation. How they develop its values
  required for long-term success and act, as role
  models, in their implementation. How they are
  personally involved in ensuring that the
  institutions management system is developed and
  implemented.
• Subcriterion 1a
• How the leaders of the institution are
  personally involved in the development of the
  long term plans and values and are role models
  in spreading the Culture of Excellence
• Personal and active participation in
  activities aiming at improvement

Sub-criterion
Areas to address, explanatory examples
13
ENABLERS
Criterion 3 - HUMAN RESOURCES
How the institution manages, develops and
releases the knowledge and full potential of its
employees at an individual, team-based and
institutional level. How the institution plans
the activities related to its employees in order
to support its education / teaching programme and
effective operation of its processes.
3a How the institution plans, manages and
improves its human resource management
system 3b How the institution assesses, sustains
and develops its employees professional
knowledge and competencies 3c How the
institution ensures that its employees are
involved and empowered 3d How the institution
develops and operates its internal
communication system 3e How the institution
rewards its employees, recognises their
activities and in what other ways cares about
them
14
RESULTS
Criterion 7 - EMPLOYEE RESULTS
What results the institution is achieving in
relation to its employees satisfaction through
its planned objectives, and, compared to the
results of other appropriately selected
institutions, and how these results have changed
in the last years.
7a Employee perception of the institution and
its performance 7b Performance indicators on
employees satisfaction (internal
indicators on satisfaction)
15
THE 2002 PEQA PROCESS
16
PUBLIC EDUCATION QUALITY AWARD

• MILESTONES
• R D activity
• Development of the PEQA Model
• Elaboration of the PEQA application process
• Elaboration of the assessment process of the
  PEQA applications
• Elaboration of the selection and training system
  of PEQA assessors
• Organisation of the 2002 PEQA application process
• Assessment of the PEQA submission documents,
• including Feedback
• Decision on winners, PEQA Award Ceremony
• PDCA of the whole process

17
The 2002 PEQA Process

• The process of the 1st Public Education
• Quality Award competition
• Announcement February 22, 2002
• One day training for institutions willing to
  apply March 6, 7 and 11, 2002
• Deadline for pre-application March 14, 2002
• Deadline for submission April 8, 2002
• Assessment process mid April - early June 2002
• Award ceremony June 28, 2002

18
Institutions applied for the 2002 PEQA
19
ASSESSMENT PROCESS

• - 38 assessors in 11 groups
• Award for Partner-focused Operation
• 6 groups 21 assessors
• Award for Excellence
• 5 groups 17 assessors
• - Site Visit in 24 institutions
• (53 of the applicants)

20
Average scores of the institutions - winners of
the 2002 PEQA (Award Category for Partner-Focused
Operation)
21
Average scores of the institutions - winners of
the 2002 PEQA (Award Category for Excellence)
22
MAJOR FINDINGS OF ASSESSMENT

• Strengths
• Committed leadership (management)
• Highly committed staff
• Partner-focused approach
• Awarded institutions represent high level set
  an example of value

23
MAJOR FINDINGS OF ASSESSMENT

• Strengths
• Appeared in the institutions
• a conscious and planned development (implementing
  PDCA in every day operation)
• measuring efficiency
• setting up their own goals, benchmarking with
  others

24
MAJOR FINDINGS OF ASSESSMENT

• Areas for improvement
• Understanding the Model
• Review of methods, their assessment and
  improvement
• Results
• lack of
• - indicator system
• - trends, targets, comparisons

25
MAJOR FINDINGS OF ASSESSMENT

• Areas for improvement
• Writing submission documents
• The institution is better than the application
• The application contains theory, observations
• Instead of instinctive operation consciousness,
  planning

26
2002 PEQA Process -Results

• Award Category for Partner-Focused Operation
• - 3 Awards
• - 4 Certificate of merit
• Award Category for Excellence
• - 3 Awards
• - 7 Certificate of merits

27
For more information please visit
http//www.ptmik.hu/ujhonlap/kmd This is the
special homepage of the Methodological and
Information Centre for In-Service Teacher
Training (Pt-MIK) for PEQA (KMD)or
contactkatalin.stadler_at_om.hu
Useful addresses
28
Thank you very much for your kind attention!