QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION WHICH MODEL AND WHY

1
QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION WHICH
MODEL AND WHY ?
EUROPOS SAJUNGA Europos socialinis fondas
MYKOLO ROMERIO UNIVERSITETAS

• D.M.REKKAS
• Associate Professor
• School of Pharmacy, University of Athens
• HELLAS
• rekkas_at_pharm.uoa.gr

2
CONTENTS

• What is Quality-Quality Assurance
• What is missing?
• The systems perspective Quality by Design
• The stakeholders
• The Bologna Process and the EU vision
• The ENQA-European Association for QA in HE
• The role of the Universities-EUA-Key findings
• The Quality Assurance Standards for HE
• Do we need a model for QA?
• Which Model and Why?
• Conclusions

3
DEFINITIONS

• Quality is the totality of features and
  characteristics of a product or service that bear
  on its ability to satisfy given needs (ASQ)
• Quality Assurance all those planned or
  systematic actions necessary to provide adequate
  confidence that a product or service will satisfy
  given needs (ASQ)

Value to the Customers
Making sure that Quality is what it should be
4
ARE WE MISSING SOMETHING?

• How Quality can be implemented in the first place
  Quality by Design-Built in Quality
• How we can assure Quality if we do not know what
  and how to implement it?
• Quality is a depended variable
• It is there only if it is built in the provided
  service
• Then we can assure with adequate evidence that it
  is constantly satisfies given needs

5
QUALITY IS A DEPENDED VARIABLE
6
THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS AS A SYSTEM-QUALITY BY
DESIGN

• What is a System ?
• A network of interdependent components that work
  together to accomplish the aim of the system. The
  system should have an aim.If there is no
  aim,there is no system. (Deming)
• Coming together of parts, interconnections and
  aim The real power lies in the way the parts
  come together and are interconnected to fulfill
  some purpose. (Plsek)
• Set of elements stand in interrelations.
  (Bertanlanffy)
• The whole is more than the sum of its parts.
• The properties of the system are the properties
  of the interrelations

7
THE 3 STEPS FOR QUALITYAND THE PDSA CYCLE
DO
PLAN
Design
Implementation
ACT
STUDY
Assurance
SYSTEMS APPROACH
8
THE FIRST MISTAKE

• Discussion-Standards about QA
• BUT no thinking about Design and Implementation
  of Quality in HE
• Fast forward to the 3rd step
• Without the prerequisite two steps
• Danger of falling into the gap!
• Why?
• Policy makers may lack knowledge of Quality
  theory
• and its tools

9
THE STAKEHOLDERS(SATISFY THE NEEDS OF WHOM?)

• The students
• Their parents
• Employers
• Governments -Regulatory bodies
• Taxpayers
• Other schools
• Professional communities etc

10
WHAT DO THEY EXPECT?(THEIR NEEDS)

• The Governments want to keep the cost low
• The students want short duration/ low cost
  studies and to find well paid jobs quickly
• The Employers want made to order scientists at
  the lowest possible cost but very productive
• The society needs high quality services and low
  cost studies
• The policy makers want fast, low cost and
  efficient educational processes to fill the gap
  with the competition around the globe

11
IN SHORT

• All these needs have to be met through the
  educational processes

students
employers
society
staff
12
THE SECOND MISTAKE

• No answers-Discussion
• No consensus
• Resistance to changes

13
DEFINING THE RIGHT QUESTIONSTO GET THE RIGHT
ANSWERS

• Can we satisfy all these needs simultaneously ?
• Is the educational process capable of meeting
  these needs?
• By whom and how this transformation will be
  carried out?
• Can the University staff lead the way?
• Do we have the knowledge, the commitment and the
  resources required?
• Competition or Partnership?
• The state is considering all stakeholders and
  their needs of equal importance?

14
DEFINING THE RIGHT QUESTIONSTO GET THE RIGHT
ANSWERS

• Guidelines and standards or policies for the
  implementation of Quality?
• Which needs ?
• All needs of equal weight?
• Which are the in depended and depended variables?
• If Quality is the depended variable how will be
  achieved ?
• Can we manage the educational process effectively
  to achieve quality? Do we own/ understand the
  process?
• Curricula frozen or changing to address the
  changing needs?

15
DEFINING THE RIGHT QUESTIONSTO GET THE RIGHT
ANSWERS

• Students with innovative culture or practical
  skills?
• Preparation of students with social
  responsibility (society needs first) or ready to
  be employed?
• Staff responsive to the societal needs through
  the educational and research process or staff
  making papers with high impact factor?
• Each staff member/University alone to survive the
  competition or team work and partnership?
• Discussion with all the stakeholders on common
  understanding or just following orders?
• Quality Standards or Quality Culture?
• Both ? OK, but which comes first?

16
THE EU POLICY IN HE

• The Bologna Process
• The ENQA-European Association for QA in HE

• 3 cycles, ECTS, Diploma supplement
• Mobility
• Employability
• Student centered learning
• Life long learning
• Awareness on QA in HE
• Publication of the standards guidelines for
  QA in HE (2005) as a response to the Berlin
  communique (2003)

17
KEY FINDINGS SO FAR

• National understanding of the reforms/Support not
  enough.
• While 82 of the respondents have 3 cycles
• in many cases,reform in structures seems to be
  taking place in advance of the reforms of
  substance and content and without link to the
  institutional strategy
• Many institutions stated that national
  requirements obliged them to introduce the first
  cycle
• In some cases the two systems run in parallel
• Stakeholders unaware of the reforms in curricula
• Societal dialogue needs to be strengthen

18
THEIR CAUSE

• However relatively few institutions seem to
  take a holistic approach to Quality improvement
• Source Trends V Universities shaping the
  European Higher Education Area, EUA report to
  the ministers of education conference 05/07
  London

19
THE WISH

• Awareness that concern for Quality must be at
  the heart of the system

20
UNDERSTANDING THE RELATIONSHIP

• THE TWO MISTAKES
• THE KEY FINDINGS
• THEIR MAJOR CAUSE
• THE END OF THE TUNNEL
• (if the wish comes true)

21
LEARNING FROM MISTAKESto err is human

• Quality First-Holistic Approach-Systems Theory
• Link the Bologna targets with the stakeholders
  needs through discussion
• Reach consensus about their needs and their
  relative importance
• Check if there is a clear relationship between
  the Bologna reforms and the addressed needs
• Implement the reforms
• Study the results Capture the knowledge
• Act on the differences (Feedback Loop- PDSA
  cycle)
• Stabilize gain and constantly improve the system
• Apply QA audits

22
QUALITY ASSESSMENT

• Lets suppose that TQM has been successfully
  implemented (1ST Step)
• We need to assess the Quality of our
  organization
• against some kind of Standards(2ND Step)
• Any already existing?
• As it is or modified?
• By whom and How?

23
QUALITY STANDARDS AND AWARDS

• ISO series
• EOQ-EFQM (Europe)
• MALCOLM BALDRIGE (USA)
• DEMING PRIZE (Japan)
• PUBLICATIONS
• STATE POLICIES/INITIATIVES
• EXAMPLES FROM HE INSTITUTIONS

24
PROS AND CONS

• Standards provide the basis for designing,
  implementing,evaluating (assessing) , specifying
  and certifying a QA system. Common language for
  QA disciplines. Increase awareness for Quality.
• They are not product/process specific
• Least common denominator approach
• More emphasis on conformance than efficiency
• Emphasis on corrective actions than long term
  improvement
• Possession of the certificate might matter more
  than quality improvement
• They are not standards for Total Quality
• 
  (R.W.Peach,The ISO 9000 Handbook)

25
FILLING THE GAP

• The QUALITY AWARDS
• More emphasis on the Quality pillars
• (de facto requirements)
• Leadership and full Management commitment
• Innovation
• Customer focus and satisfaction
• Full participation and development of employees
• Public responsibility
• Quality by design,Prevention etc

26
EFQM MODEL
efqm.org
27
MBNQA
nist.org
28
SOMETHING STILL MISSING?

• HOW TO MAKE THE TRANSFORMATION/CHANGE
• What about the DEMING prize
• Who is E.W.Deming (deming.org)
• An American engineer in Japan((deming.org)
• Perhaps the most highly respected author for his
  work in Quality Theory and Practice
• 14 points to the management
• The system of profound knowledge leading to the
  learning organization

29
DEMING PRIZE

• The Deming Prize examination does not require
  applicants to conform to a model provided by the
  Deming Prize Committee. Rather, the applicants
  are expected to understand their current
  situation establish their own themes and
  objectives, and improve and transform themselves
  company-wide
• The Deming Prize Committee views the examination
  process as an opportunity for "mutual-development,
  " rather than "examination
• Every factor such as the applicants' attitude
  toward executing Total Quality Management (TQM),
  their implementation status, and the resulting
  effects is taken into overall consideration. In
  other words, the Deming Prize Committee does not
  specify what issues the applicants must address,
  rather the applicants themselves are responsible
  for identifying and addressing such issues, thus,
  this process allows quality methodologies to be
  further developed.

30
THE 14 POINTS

• Create constancy of purpose toward improvement of
  product and service, with the aim to become
  competitive and to stay in business, and to
  provide jobs.
• Adopt the new philosophy. We are in a new
  economic age. Western management must awaken to
  the challenge, must learn their responsibilities,
  and take on leadership for change.
• Cease dependence on inspection to achieve
  quality. Eliminate the need for inspection on a
  mass basis by building quality into the product
  in the first place.
• End the practice of awarding business on the
  basis of price tag. Instead, minimize total cost.
  Move toward a single supplier for any one item,
  on a long-term relationship of loyalty and trust.
  
• Improve constantly and forever the system of
  production and service, to improve quality and
  productivity, and thus constantly decrease costs.
  
• Institute training on the job.

31
THE 14 POINTS

• Institute leadership. The aim of supervision
  should be to help people and machines and gadgets
  to do a better job. Supervision of management is
  in need of overhaul, as well as supervision of
  production workers.
• Drive out fear, so that everyone may work
  effectively for the company
• Break down barriers between departments. People
  in research, design, sales, and production must
  work as a team, to foresee problems of production
  and in use that may be encountered with the
  product or service.
• Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for
  the work force asking for zero defects and new
  levels of productivity. Such exhortations only
  create adversarial relationships, as the bulk of
  the causes of low quality and low productivity
  belong to the system and thus lie beyond the
  power of the work force.

32
THE 14 POINTS

• Eliminate work standards (quotas) on the factory
  floor. Substitute leadership.
• Eliminate management by objective. Eliminate
  management by numbers, numerical goals.
  Substitute leadership.
• Remove barriers that rob the hourly worker of his
  right to pride of workmanship. The responsibility
  of supervisors must be changed from sheer numbers
  to quality.
• Remove barriers that rob people in management and
  in engineering of their right to pride of
  workmanship.
• Institute a vigorous program of education and
  self-improvement.
• Put everybody in the company to work to
  accomplish the transformation. The transformation
  is everybody's job.

33
PROFOUND KNOWLEDGE

• The layout of profound knowledge appears in four
  parts, all related to each other
• Appreciation for a system
• Knowledge about variation
• Theory of knowledge
• Psychology

FROM HIS BOOK OUT OF THE CRISIS (
E.W.DEMIMG,1982)
34
THE PROPOSAL

• Through Deming's human approach, with the
  standards/awards and other publications on
  Quality taking also into account , we should
  create a Quality culture first based on managing
  the required change where all people concerned
  are in the center of our attention and second
  using the tools from quality literature we should
  align our strategy towards serving the society
  needs.
• The model for QA in HE lies within the above and
  will be easy to agree upon a general approach for
  Quality assessment without sacrificing the
  pursuit knowledge and the search for truth which
  constitute HE intrinsic Qualities
• (Towards a general model for quality
  assessment in HE, Higher Education,1995)

35
THE PROPOSAL

• Insisting and/on relying on audit mechanisms
  
• Overemphasis in inspection
• Policing-in Quality
  Failure
• Today is well documented that Quality should be
  built-in through the design and redesign of core
  processes that underlie the quality of products
  or services (Quality is a depended variable)
  Success
• (Through Deming's Eyescross national
  analysis of QA policies in HE,Quality in
  HE,1995)

36
INSTEAD OF CONCLUSIONS

• What we need to do is learn to work in the
  system, by which I mean that everybody, every
  team, every platform, every division, every
  component is there not for individual competitive
  profit or recognition, but for contribution to
  the system as a whole on a win-win basis.
• It is not enough to do your best.You must know
  what to do and then do your best.
• 
  W.E.Deming

37
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
NATIONAL AND KAPODISTRIAN UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS