Quality Assurance in Europe: Challenges and Opportunities

Maria Helena NazaréEUA President Former Rector Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal.

Structure of the presentation

EUA.

Short overview on the development of European quality assurance (QA) frameworkResults from EQC projectState of affairsA way forwardIEP (linking quality and strategic planning)

EUA at a glance

2001: establishment of EUA a representative organisation of European

universities & rectors’ conferencesMembers: 850 individual universities 47 countries 35 National Rectors’ ConferencesIndependent Voice for the University Sector: policy dialogue (focus: EHEA and ERA)

projects and surveys services to its members (information, events)

EUA’s policy positions on QA

Main responsibility for QA lies with the institutionsContext sensitive (institutional and disciplinary diversity)Fitness for purpose approachEnhancement orientedInternal and external evaluations or QA processes should be complementaryTransparency and co-operation

European Quality Assurance Framework

QA: one action line in the Bologna Process2003: The Berlin Communiqué stated that “consistent with the principle of institutional

autonomy, the primary responsibility for quality assurance in higher education lies with each institution itself”

Invited ENQA to develop – in co-operation with other stakeholders – standards and procedures for quality assurance

2005: European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG) adopted Proposed by the E4 Group (ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE)

2007: European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR) endorsed (launched in 2008)

Why work on internal QA?

EUA’s Trends 2010: enhanced internal QA one of the most important

changes in the past ten years In the next 5 years the 2nd most important theme Relationship between robust internal QA and

internationalisation

Increased competition and collaboration between HEIsDevelopment of external QA systems and demands for accountability

…9…

How to make the most out of external QA?

When developing processes the starting point should be the institutional mission and profileSynergy between internal and external QAEnsure the link between strategic management and QA processesAdopt quality enhancement approach to QAThe goal should be an institutional quality culture supported by the QA processes, not the processes themselves (as emphasised in the ESGs)

The ESGs (1)

A set of generic principles for quality assurance No « procedures » as originally expected What HEIs and QAAs should do, not how they

should do it No standards for quality

Teaching and learningThree levels Internal QA within HEIs External QA conducted by the QA agencies

QA of QA agencies

The ESGs (2)

Underpinning principles: Institutional responsibility for QA Fitness-for-purpose of external QA Diversity of external QA approaches Stakeholder participation and interests

EQC: Aims and Objectives

The project Examining Quality Culture in Higher Education Institutions (EQC) aimed:To provide an overview of the internal quality assurance processes in place within higher education institutions across Europe To examine how they have responded to Part 1 of the European Standards and Guidelines for quality assurance (ESGs) To identify the extent to which quality assurance tools and processes contributed to building a quality culture in institutions.

…6…

EQC result: Introducing QA system or equivalent

European situation: Overview

Different approaches when creating national quality assurance systems: (programme or institutional) accreditation, evaluations or auditsLevel of institutional autonomy in creating internal QA systems variesCountries and also institutions are in different phases in implementing institutional as well as national QA systems

-> There does not exist one European QA, but the ESG provide framework for good practice share by the whole EHEA

State of Affairs (1)

National QA agencies established -> national agendasRecognition remains a challengeIncreased demands for QA to provide information on higher education to various stakeholders

State of Affairs: Programme Accreditation (2)

Mostly follow traditional peer-review steps: Self-evaluation process and report Site visit by external panel Evaluation report Follow-up procedure

Attention to internal QA processes (as defined by the ESG)Cyclical exerciseExact criteria and emphasis varyEx-ante acreditation?

• Monitoring?

State of Affairs: Trends in External QA (3)

ENQA 2011 survey Promoting institutional QA systems -> trend

towards institutional review/audit/acreditation Comparability of external QA results Excellence in higher education Discussion on the impact of QA (institutional follow-

up)

A way forward (1)

The Bucharest Ministerial Communiqué April 2012:

QA “is essential for building trust and to reinforce the attractiveness of the EHEA’s offerings, including in the provision of cross-border education.”

“We will revise the ESG to improve their clarity, applicability and usefulness, including their scope. The revision will be based upon an initial proposal to be prepared by the E4 in cooperation with Education International, BUSINESSEUROPE and the European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR), which will be submitted to the Bologna Follow-Up Group.”

A way forward (2)

Strenthen the links between Bologna action lines such as QA, QFs and recognitionInternationational co-operation in QA Dialogue between agencies and systems QA agencies operating across the borders

…14…

Institutional Evaluation Programme (IEP)

Focus on institution as a whole: Decision-making processes, institutional structures and

effectiveness of strategic planning Relevance of internal quality processes and the degree

to which their outcomes are used in decision making and strategic management as well as perceived gaps in these internal mechanisms. As part of this larger framework the evaluations address the issues on internal quality assurance identified by the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ESG).

Institutional Evaluation Programme (IEP)

Recommendations on the institutional structures, processes, policies and culture, enabling them to perform the full range of their activities (research, teaching and learning and service to society).

IEP: Methodology

Examination of short and long term objectivesExamination of external and internal constraints, as well as the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threatsRecommendation of strategies to improve the quality of the institution

IEP: Methodology

No standardised solution nor imperative proposals, but support to the institution for improvement. Not a pass or fail conclusion

→Contributes to the dynamics of development and evaluates the University’s capacity for change

Further information

www.eua.be

Thank you for your attention

Presentation prepared by Tia Loukkola