View
215
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
Changes in Quality Assurance: the Case of Germany
ECA Seminar “Changing Systems”
Den Haag, 9 December 2009
Academic DirectorProf. Dr. Rainer KuenzelWilhelm-Busch-Straße 22D-30167 Hannover
University of OsnabrueckProfessor of Economics/Higher Education Management and PolicyDepartment of EconomicsRolandstr. 8, D-49078 OsnabrueckPhone.: +49 541 969-2751, Fax.: -2479Mobile: 0171-7757723E-Mail: rainer.kuenzel@uni-osnabrueck.de
Central Evaluation and Accreditation Agency, Hanover
2
Changes in Quality Assurance: the Case of Germany
I. IntroductionII. Main features of System Accreditation
1. Procedure2. Criteria
III. Problems1. Problems in the execution of SA2. Problems of proper judgment in SA3. Problems of transition to SA4. Problems of enhancing quality by SA
3
I. Introduction
Double purpose of Bologna reform in Germany: strengthen cohesion between European countries solve specific problems of the German university system:
– long average study duration– high attrition rate– lack of funding– disregard of employability in many curricula
4
I. Introduction
Detailed prescriptions for all new Bachelor and Master programs were enforced by program accreditation in order to solve
structural problems of the higher education system and achieve the Bologna goals.
5
I. Introduction
Program accreditation was carried out by six independent Accreditation Agencies under
the supervision of the German Accreditation Council.
6
I. Introduction
Opposition against the Bologna reform was especially fierce in southern Germany.
Support came primarily from the „Universities of Applied Sciences“ (Fachhochschulen).
7
I. Introduction
In order to come to a compromise in the Standing Conference of the Federal State
Ministers of Higher Education the so-called „System Accreditation“ (SA) was introduced
in 2008/9.
8
II. Main features of SA
1. Procedure
Eligibility requirement: minimal number of accredited programs
Documentation on internal governance structure, institutional mission and profile, internal QA/QM system, institutional development strategy.Comment by student representatives.
Two site visits of a group of 5 experts and in-depth evaluation of a sample of study programs
9
II. Main features of SA
1. Procedure
Purpose of first site visit:– rounding off information on HEI‘s QA/QM
system– selecting three out of eight program features to
be reviewed across all programs– making a preliminary decision on study
programs to be assessed according to the standards and guidelines of AC for program accreditation
10
II. Main features of SA
1. Procedure
Purpose of second site visit:– analysis of self-report and documentation– review of selected program features– discussion with stakeholders in HEI– compilation of draft report on institution‘s
QA/QM system– final decision on sample of programs to be
evaluated in detail
11
II. Main features of SA
1. Procedure
Criteria for composition of program sample:– 15% of all programs on offer, at least three– cross-section of all types of programs– results of review of program features
12
II. Main features of SA
1. Procedure
Separate expert group for each assessment of a program in the sample. Experts have to decide whether flaws and weaknesses of programs can be traced back to functional deficits of QA/QM system.
Final report validates the effectiveness of the QA/QM system of the HEI and makes a recommendation in favor or against an accreditation decision by the accreditation commission of the agency.
Instead of final verdict the panel can recommend the suspension of the accreditation procedure for 12-24 months.
13
II. Main features of SA
1. Procedure
The accreditation decision, a summary of the final report and the names of the panel members are published. An appeals process is in place.
The accreditation is valid for six years. HEI is exempted from program accreditiation.
After three years the assessment of a sample of study programs has to be repeated („half-time sample“).
The SA can be restricted to an organizational subunit of the HEI.
14
II. Main features of SA
2. Criteria
Criterion 1:
The HEI has defined and published an educational profile for its programs and the institution at large as part of its development strategy. It continually
revises the educational goals of its programs.
15
II. Main features of SA
2. CriteriaCriterion 2:
The HEI has a steering system in place which guarantees that the following goals and requirements are met by its educational
programs:
high academic standards employability citizenship personal development goals of Bologna process requirements of NQF stakeholder involvement
16
II. Main features of SA
2. Criteria
Criterion 3:
The HEI applies a system of QA and quality enhancement which meets the ESG for Quality in
Higher Education.
17
II. Main features of SA
2. Criteria
Criterion 4:
The HEI has a reporting system in place which documents the structural and procedural
characteristics of the educational programs as well as the processes, instruments, results
and effects of the QA/QM system.
18
II. Main features of SA
2. Criteria
Criterion 5:
The competences, responsibilities and decision making processes in the QA/QM system for
teaching and learning are clearly defined and published.
19
II. Main features of SA
2. Criteria
Criterion 6:
At least once a year the HEI informs its commissions for teaching and learning as well as the general public and the owner of the HEI about
measures and results of quality assurance and quality enhancement in teaching and learning.
20
III. Problems
1. Problems in the execution of SA:
Size of sample of program features Indeterminateness of program sample Insufficient definition of required documentation
21
III. Problems
2. Problems of proper judgment in SA:
Blurred picture by overlap of PA and SA Hidden assumptions about relationship between
QA/QM system and quality of programs
22
III. Problems
3. Problems of transition to SA:
Successful SA will block the necessary corrections in the Bachelor/Master system.
HEIs are not ready for SA, yet some give it a try. The development of effective QA/QM systems
takes time and counseling:
23
III. Problems
4. Problems of enhancing quality by SA:
Accreditation does not foster improvement unless coupled with strategic management by contract. This implies the active involvement of a governing authority vis-avis the university leadership.
Recommended