Quality Assurance and Student Involvement

1
Quality Assurance andStudent Involvement
Johan Almqvist ESIB Chairperson 2004 EURASHE 14th
Annual Conference, Cyprus 2004
2
ESIB Membership
3
ESIB Structures
43 National Unions of Students from 33
countries(full members)
Board(2 delegates/country)
Commissionon Internal Audit
Chair
SecretaryGeneral

Working Groups
Executive Committee
Expert Committees
Staff
4
Student involvement

• Letting students run the university is like
  letting the lunatics run the asylum
• But who are the inmates anyhow?

5
ESIB in the QA debate

• Quality is a central theme for students
• ESIB debate took off in 2001 (seminar) and 2002
  (policy paper)
• General recognition of ESIB in Prague (2001)
• Recognition of ESIB as a full partner in QAA
  debate in Berlin (2003)

6
ESIB in the QA work

• Strong partnership with EUA (Quality Culture
  Institutional Evaluation)
• ENQA Steering Group
• E4 meetings with EURASHE, EUA and ENQA
• Some national involvement (CNE/France)

7
ESIB policy development

• Updated in autumn 2003 in reaction to the Berlin
  mandate
• Specified at European level in spring 2004 in
  reaction to E4 discussions
• Prepared by BPC and others
• Ratified by BM (highest decision-making body)

8
ESIB policies

• Accessible higher education that is not of high
  quality is worthless and high quality education
  that is not widely accessible is meaningless.

9
ESIB policies

• Many different types of QAA agencies in Europe
• Confusion between QA and Accreditation
• In Accreditation in particular, the situation is
  chaotic and uncontrolled, which does not enhance
  the mutual trust between higher education
  institutions or benefit higher education in
  Europe and as such threatens mobility.

10
Quality Assurance

• Definition
• Quality Assurance is an ongoing process that
  ensures the delivery of agreed standards.
• These agreed standards should make sure every
  educational institution, of which the quality is
  assured, has the potential ability to achieve a
  high quality of content.
• Quality Assurance must not to be confused with
  accreditation.
• The goal of Quality Assurance is to improve
  education and therefore it should take place on
  all levels (course, programme, and institution
  and its sub-divisions) and be a continuous
  process.

11
Accreditation

• Definition
• Accreditation is both a status and a process.
• It should provide a public certification of
  acceptable minimum quality as well as the
  opportunity and incentive for self-improvement in
  the programs accredited.
• The process of accreditation should provide
  higher education with an opportunity for critical
  self-analysis leading to improvement of quality
  for consultation and advice from persons coming
  from other higher education institutions.
• Accreditation reflects the fact that in
  achieving recognition, the individual program is
  committed to self-study and external review. Not
  only to meet certain minimum standards but also
  to continuously seek ways in which to enhance the
  quality of education.

12
National Level

• National Agency, publicly accountable and
  operationally independent from the ministry and
  HEIs
• Primary function the assurance of quality at
  programme level.
• Look at all aspects of the academic provision,
  including library and IT resources, tutor
  support, student participation etc.
• Used by the institution to maintain and improve
  the quality of all programmes.
• Because programme quality assurance is of the
  greatest importance for students, this cannot be
  substituted by a purely institution level
  approach to quality assurance.

13
Institutional Level

• Ultimate goal of institutional quality assurance
  to develop an internal quality culture
• Ensures that quality is a focus of the
  institution at all levels
• Incorporated in the everyday work of the
  institutional management, academic and support
  staff as well as students and their
  representatives.
• Institutional quality assurance and evaluation is
  primarily a responsibility of the higher
  education institutions.
• First step of the process defining the goals and
  missions at institutional and faculty level.
• The learning environment for the student should
  be at the core of these goals and missions

14
The European Dimension

• To achieve transparency, comparability and
  compatibility of quality assurance systems,
• Not to replace them, recognising that there is a
  variation in the background of the higher
  education systems in Europe and on the national
  perspective on quality assurance and
  accreditation.

15
European Dimension (II)

• Co-operation on standards, procedures and
  guidelines
• Network of national agencies, members subject to
  peer review
• Thematic and regional accreditation cooperation
• E4 discussions

16
but first the Global Level

• Education is globalising
• and so should QA, in the interest of students
• UNESCO is ESIBs preferred framework
• Peer review process!

17
Berlin Mandate

• Co-operation on standards, procedures and
  guidelines
• Network of national agencies, members subject to
  peer review
• Thematic and regional accreditation cooperation
• E4 discussions

18
Berlin Peer Review

• Ensures that agencies conform to an agreed set of
  standards
• Carried out not only by agencies, but also by
  students and HEI representatives
• Public scrutiny and reporting
• Recommendations to the agency under review
• Report submitted to a wider board (social
  partners...)
• Appeals of decision?
• Link to ENQA membership?

19
Agency Criteria

• An agency must have a clear legal basis, its own
  budget and professional staff with resources
  proportional to assigned tasks
• The agency must be active in, at least, one of
  the countries within the Bologna Process
• Review results must in all cases reflect the
  findings of the reviews and not be subject to any
  pressure from other sources
• Terms of procedures (inc the terms of references
  and identification of experts) of evaluations
  must be defined by evaluation professionals of
  quality assurance agencies, in consultation with
  representatives of students and HEIs, not by
  other bodies
• The section on internal quality assurance
  mechanisms of the agencies must also include an
  indication of no conflict-of-interest mechanisms
  in the selection of external experts
• Reports by the national agency must be made
  public.
• The process of review undertaken by the national
  agency should be cyclical.

20
Agency Criteria (contd)

• Internal feedback mechanisms that includes
  procedures for reflections and subsequently
  revisions on processes and methods
• Mechanisms that provide feedback from external
  expert panels
• Mechanisms that ensure dialogue and feedback from
  stakeholders. The latter may be institutions or
  programmes that have been evaluated, stakeholders
  in general such as higher education institutions
  and should be students and student organisations,
  while bearing in mind representativity.
• Present on the agency website a public (i.e. non
  confidential) quality policy, including agency
  goals, processes and methods and a description of
  their decision making processes and governance
  structures to enable transparency and
  accountability.

21
Berlin Standards, Procedures and Guidelines

• European standards - or European reference
  points for these standards that are still
  outlined at the national and institutional
  level.
• The Process of QA
• Procedures and Guidelines
• Specific standards
• Generic standards

22
Generic Standards

• Mission and goals of programmes and institutions
• Quality of content of education
• Quality of the education process
• Relation between education and research
• Results for graduates (satisfaction,
  employability)
• Quality of the learning process (achievability)
• Internal QA process of education
• Internal QA procedures of teaching staff
• Governance/leadership
• Participation of students in all decision making
  bodies (on all levels)
• Internationalisation
• Educational facilities
• Equality
• Access provision
• Use of funds
• Guidance (academic and welfare)

23
Contact

• ESIBAvenue de la Toison dOr 17A/boite 801050
  BrusselsBelgium
• Phone [phone]Fax [phone]
• Email secretariat_at_esib.orgwww www.esib.org
• Thank you for your attention!