Quality Management at BOKU

1
Quality Management at BOKU
Visit of Timirayzev Academy Moscow November 31,
2006 Thomas Guggenberger
2
Content Framework BOKU QM concept Mayor
activities at BOKU Some activities from the
past International projects and
networks Links
3
Berlin Conference As for Quality Assurance,
Ministers stressed that consistent with the
principle of institutional autonomy, the primary
responsibility for quality assurance in higher
education lies with each institution itself.
 New University Law 2002AutonomyContract
management 14 Universities have to design an
own Quality Assurance system Evaluations are a
crucial component of Quality Assurance system
Evaluations have to follow international
standards Evaluations as an ongoing
exercise All scientific staff have to be
evaluated every 5 years Results of evaluations
have to be considered
4
Quality Management System at BOKU
Framework University Act 2002, Human Capital
Report, ENQA-Standards, DeGEval Standards

Quality Development
Follow up to evaluations in research,
education, organisational
development, human resources,
international affairs Consolidation
of all study programmes Results of
Benchmarking Activities

Basis Information systems (Fodok, BLIS, SAP, BSC)
black realised
green ongoing blue planned
5
Individual Evaluation of Professors For the last
3 years only limited contracts for professors at
BOKU. (3-7 years) Objective To check to which
extend professors fulfilled their contracts
to set the basis for future
contracts Process Setting up of an internal
evaluation board, selection of 2 international
peers, self report written by the candidate
(research data basis), discussion of peer
reports, final recommendation to rector,
presentation to rectorate and senate,
contract/no contract Lessons learnt Initial
situation has to be defined before professor
takes up his/her job Objectives have to be
defined more precisely Consequences have to be
defined before realisation of evaluation Longer
observation periods necessary Evaluation
procedure needs continuous refinement
6

• Evaluation of departments/organisational units
• Procedure
• Updating of data basis
• Initiation of evaluation (selection of peers,
  evaluation design)
• Internal Evaluation (SWOT analysis, self report)
• External Evaluation (peer review)
• Final Report
• Follow-up measures contract between rectorate
  and department
• 2006 Evaluation of the Department of
  Biotechnology (periodically every 6 years)

7

• Structure of questionnaire
• What are you trying to do? (relation to strategic
  plans of department)
• How are you trying to do it? (description of
  current activities)
• How do you know it works? (Evaluation of current
  activities)
• How do you change in order to improve?
  (objectives and measures)
• Areas
• 1. Department and organisational development
• 2. Staff management
• 3. Research
• 4. Teaching, learning and continuing education
• 5. Societal aims
• 6. Resources infrastructure

8

• Course evaluations
• redesign of students questionnaires in 2005
• general questions and specific questions for
  each lecture type
• students are asked twice per semester
• online version
• integration into BOKU information management
  system

9

• Evaluation of field of studies Bio Technology
  and Food Technology
• Objective to design a new curriculum in
  reference to content, didactics and
  organisation
• Process Situation analysis, benchmarking,
  self report, curr.dev., peer review,
  implementation
• Lessons learnt
• Importance of empirical data basis
• Importance of external reconfirmation
• Advantage of external firm to raise the data and
  carry out the evaluation
• Chairman contributed largely to objectivity of
  the discussion
• The suggestions of reviewers were broadly
  accepted
• Motivation was risen among BOKU staff
• Some follow up activities still to be
  implemented

10

• Quality Audit at the Centre of Internat.
  Relations
• Objective Evaluation of the universitys
  international strategy and its
  implementation in reference to teaching ,
  research services
• Process Self report workshop interviews
  feedback final report
• Lessons learnt
• Integral focus of advantage (subjects,
  departments, service units etc. and their
  correlations)
• Representatives at BOKU who are critical of
  internationalisation shall be more included
• Existing network of experts was an advantage
  (IROICA)
• Other partners also profited
• Immediate follow up activities were elaborated
  (e.g. setting up of an internat. board)

11

• Evaluation of the orientation period of 5 diploma
  studies
• To what extend does the orientation phase prepare
  the students for the studies and reduce the drop
  out rate?
• Realized by students representation external
  technical support, questionnaires, interviews,
  report, presentation
• Graduates questionnaires
• To achieve information from graduates to design
  an innovative curriculum which helps to reduce
  drop out and the high average study period

12
Euro League of Life Sciences (ELLS)

• The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University
  (KVL), Copenhagen, DK
• University of Hohenheim (UHOH), Stuttgart,
  Germany
• Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
  (SLU), Uppsala, Sweden
• University of Natural Resources and Life
  Sciences (BOKU), Vienna, Austria
• Wageningen University and Research Centre (WUR),
  Wageningen, NL
• Agricultural University Prague (CUA)
• Agricultural University Warsaw (SGGW)
• Objectives
• Joint teaching and learning, esp. joint study
  programmes
• Student and lecturer mobility
• Quality assurance and benchmarking

13
Guidelines for curriculum development of joint
Master programmes

• Basis EUA QA in Joint Master Programmes
• TUNING
• Steps
• Need
• Degree profile and learning outcomes
• Programme structure and mobility
• Teaching, learning and assessment
• Admission
• Master thesis and degree
• Management and resources
• Quality assurance and evaluation

14
Guidelines for Quality Assurance of joint Master
programmes

• Strategy for quality assurance and quality
  enhancement
• Quality cycle including all steps of curriculum
  development has to be established, the
  implementation of follow up measures has to be
  assured.
• The ELLS quality criteria have to be met.
  (Evaluation questionnaire, thesis evaluation
  form, thesis defence evaluation form etc.)
• In order to demonstrate the need for a
  programme, a broad consultation has to be carried
  out (ex ante evaluation).
• After two cycles the Master programme has to be
  evaluated (ex post evaluation)
• Participation of students, teachers and staff in
  the process of quality assurance (continuous
  feedback and feedforward loops).
• The results of evaluations (extended summaries)
  should be made known within the participating
  university and within the ELLS network

15
Evaluation of Summer Schools Pilot Project
2005 International Summer School on ecological
aspects, environmental problems and management
related to land use systems at different
altitudes in the Black Forest region, Germany.
16

• ELLS Quality Label
• Requirements
• Quality Checklist
• Mid course evaluation
• Final evaluation
• External Examiner system
• Implementation of required measures

17
European University Association EUA
Quality Culture
Round III Implementing Bologna Reforms SWOT
Analysis on the implementation of Bologna
reform curriculum teaching and
learning internationalisation profile,
competitors job market funding Action
Plan Implementation Contract with Ministry
of Science for 2007-09
18

• EUA Action Plan
• Action 1.
• Development, redesign and consolidation of study
  programmes at BOKU
• Analysis of existing study programmes
• Survey on qualifications of future graduates
• Development of criteria for designing new
  curricula
• Development of new curricula and revision of
  existing curricula

19

• EUA Action Plan
• Action 2a.
• Quality assurance of the level of study
  programmes at BOKU
• Definition of basic requirements for a BSc.
  programme and for a BSc thesis
• Definition of admission criteria for MSc.
  Programmes
• Definition of admission criteria for doctoral
  studies (especially for students from
  universities of applied sciences)

20

• EUA Action Plan
• Action 2b.
• Quality assurance of the level of BOKU courses
• Maintain the strengths of BOKU courses basic
  research orientation (e.g. lab work), practical
  orientation (field work, excursions),
  goodteacher-student relation, inter-disciplinarity
  , team teaching
• Coverage of a great deal of courses through
  internal staff
• Continuation of level of external lecturers

21

• EUA Action Plan
• Action 3.
• Maintenance of high importance and prestige of
  education at BOKU
• Development of a career model which fosters
  activities in teaching and learning development
  (e.g. curriculum development, continuing
  education, programme coordinators, study
  commissions)
• Strong focus on teaching skills in promotions
  through teaching portfolios (appointments as
  full professor, habilitation, contracts for
  scientific staff)
• Staff development measures in teaching and
  learning

22

• EUA Action Plan
• Action 4.
• Improvement of data management and information
  systems
• in the area of education
• Extension of the information service for teachers
  (e.g. on drop out rates, double enrolment)
• Improvement of the information service for
  students (e.g. on changes of curricula, lecture
  halls) and especially for foreign students (e.g.
  on exams within the same semester)

23
Int. Benchmarking in Life Sciences

• Need
• Objectives
• Optimisation of processes in selected achievement
  processes beginning with research
• Identification of a few crucial key indicators as
  a basis for a simple system for documentation,
  monitoring and evaluation.
• Incorporation of the benchmarking processes into
  the respective quality management systems at the
  participating universities

24
Int. Benchmarking in Life Sciences
Areas Research profile Recruitment and
fostering of young scientists Acquisition of
reserach projects Science- and technology
transfer Cross cutting issues Documentation
and quality assurance Research management and
tools Steps Visualisation of core processes
Comparison of processes, analysis of causes and
effects Evaluation of processes Planification
of measures to optimize processes Evaluation of
implemented measures
25
Erasmus Mundus Project AMEU Promoting Masters
programmes in agricultural and related sciences
at European universities

• Quality Assurance work package
• Develop a methodology for the comparative
  quality assurance of Master degree programmes in
  agriculture, the applied life sciences and the
  rural environment at European higher education
  institutions
• Steps
• Review of existing quality criteria and
  accreditation criteria
• Elaboration of a questionnaires and a set of
  procedures
• Selection of 3-4 European pilot universities
• Self report
• Peer review
• Peer report to universities including measures
  and monitoring of its implementation
• Review/adaption of accreditation criteria and QA
  procedures
• Final report to European Commission

26

• Documents Links
• QA Group of ELLS http//www.euroleague-study.org
  /supportteams/quality/index.html
• European University Association EUA
  http//www.eua.be/eua/index.jsp
• Austrian Quality Assurance Agency AQA
  http//www.aqa.ac.at/
• Accreditation guidelines for Fachhochschulen,
  in English http//www.fhr.ac.at/fhr_inhalt_en/00_
  documents/accreditation_guidelines.pdf
• Accreditation Law for Private Universities in
  Austria http//www.bmbwk.gv.at/universitaeten/rec
  ht/gesetze/uniakkg/uniakkg3332.xml
• European Charta for Researchers
  http//europa.eu.int/eracareers/pdf/am509774CEE_EN
  _E4.pdf

27
University for Natural Resources and Life
Sciences Vienna (BOKU) Thomas Guggenberger Head
of Quality Management Peter Jordan Street 70,
A-1190 Vienna Tel. [phone] thomas.guggen
berger_at_boku.ac.at, www.boku.ac.at Thank you
for your attention!