Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork Dr. Norma Ryan University College Cork –...

Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork

Dr. Norma Ryan

University College Cork – National University of Ireland

Cork

2

Dr. Norma Ryan

Biochemist Director, Quality Promotion Unit, UCC Irish Bologna Expert Past-Chair, Irish Higher Education Network Member, Governing Authority, UCC Member, Senate of National University of

Ireland Member, Irish Universities Association Quality

Committee

3

UCC

A University located in the South of Ireland, with 18,000+ students, and one of the highest annual research income of all the Irish Universities

Has a particular focus on delivering Fourth Level Ireland (graduate studies) and lifelong learning

4

Mission

To create, preserve, and communicate knowledge and to enhance cultural, social and economic life locally, regionally and globally.

VISION To be a research-led university of

international standing with impact in Munster, Ireland, Europe and the world

5

Colleges of UCC

Arts, Celtic Studies & Social Sciences Business & Law Medicine & Health Science, Engineering & Food Science

6

Universities Act 1997

Legislation that established all Irish Universities as independent autonomous institutions

Requires all Irish Universities to put in place quality assurance procedures

7

Section 35: Quality Assurance

To promote the improvement of the quality of education of students and all related activities

Responsibility for process rests with the University

8

National Agenda

In 2003 Irish Universities Association published:

A Framework for Quality in Irish Universities

In 2007 second edition published

Principles outlined in Framework compatible with the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education

9

Irish Universities Quality Board

Independent body established by Irish Universities in 2003

Purpose: to assist the Universities in the quality agenda and to conduct reviews of the effectiveness of the Quality Improvement /Quality Assurance reviews on behalf of the Universities.

10

QI/QA

QI: Quality Improvement QA: Quality Assurance

11

What is Quality?

‘Fitness for Purpose’ ‘Fitness of Purpose’ ‘Making the best use of resources available’ ‘added value’

12

Quality Assurance

Ensuring we do what we say we are doing Ensuring what we do is a ‘quality’ job

13

Examples of QA

Peer review of research External Examiner system Accreditation of degrees Employability of graduates

14

QI/QA Procedures

Focussed on quality improvement with rigour of quality assurance as a starting position

Well-established and documented Reviewed internally and amended as deemed

appropriate, e.g.– Implementation of detailed procedures for

development and approval of Quality Improvement Plans following quality reviews.

Developed and amended using a collegial approach

15

Quality Reviews

Focus on ownership of review by unit under review

Focus on all activities of unit All types of unit (academic, administrative,

support service) reviewed under same principles and guidelines

16

Strategy in UCC

Quality Promotion Committee of Governing Body

Reviews scheduled over 6 year period by Quality Promotion Committee

17

Quality Promotion Committee

Committee of Governing Body with executive authority

Chaired by President of UCC Has representatives of

– Academic Staff– Administrative and Support Staff– Governing Body external members– Students

18

Quality Promotion Unit

Facilitates the implementation of Quality Improvement/Quality Assurance (QI/QA) procedures in UCC

Assists in the Follow-Up procedures following a QI/QA review of a unit

19

Methodology

Self-Assessment Peer Review

– Institutional/National/International

Follow-Up– On-going Quality Improvement

20

Reviews must involve

Students Staff of institution Employers Past graduates/Alumni Other stakeholders

21

Questionnaires

Used to obtain views of staff, students and others

Available on web sites Some are linked specifically to guidelines for

preparation of Self-Assessment Report

22

Evaluation Process 1

Appointment of unit co-ordinating committee– Guidelines on web site

Conduct of surveys of opinions of stakeholders– Questionnaires– Focus meetings– ????

Assistance can be provided by QPU upon request

23

Evaluation Process 2

Nomination of members of Peer Review Group– External advisor to nominate a panel of external

experts. – Unit to nominate a panel of external stakeholders– QPC to appoint internal members– Unit to be offered an opportunity to identify any

conflict of interest prior to letters of invitation

24

Evaluation Process 3

Appointment of internal and external peer reviewers by Quality Promotion Committee

Production of Self-Assessment Report Agreement of timetable for conduct of visit

25

Evaluation Process 5

Peer Review Visit & Report Follow-up action On-going quality improvement

26

Self-Assessment Report

Includes assessment by students All staff of department must be involved Includes views of past graduates Incorporates views from

– accrediting bodies – External Examiners – internal stakeholders– external stakeholders

27

Self-Assessment Report

Includes analysis of – Teaching – Learning– Research– Scholarly activity

Includes commentary on actions taken for improvement since last Quality Review and Research Quality Review

28

Self Assessment

Às appropriate, must include assessment of – Staff profile– Teaching– Research– Services provided– standards– Support services, including facilities – Contribution to society

29

Structure of SAR

Core: ‘Overall Analysis & Recommendations’

Appendices: contain factual details

30

Overall Analysis & Recommendations

Succinct and comprehensive Details Mission of Department Details Aims & Objectives Summary of Unit activities Relates all activities to Mission and Strategic

Plan of UCC

31

Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd)

Benchmarking Details of how you plan to show you have

achieved your Aims & Objectives How is quality measured?

Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd.)

How is success measured? Emphasis on strategies for improvement of

quality

33

Summary of Department

1 page executive summary on each of following:– Department Structure and Organisation– Teaching– Research– Consultancy Activities– Public Profile

34

SWOT Analysis

S - Strengths W - Weaknesses O - Opportunities T - Threats

All staff involved Leads to recommendations for improvement Support for facilitator available from QPU

upon request

35

Evaluation of Teaching

Evaluation by students Questionnaires Focus groups Views of external stakeholders Teaching portfolios Peer review

36

Evaluation of Research

Peer reviewed publications Books/chapters in books Supervision of graduate students Research grant income Other scholarly activity

37

Appendices - Academic Units

Unit Details Profiles of all staff - academic, administrative and

support Unit Planning and Organisation Teaching and Learning

– strategy– Reports of extern examiners– Reports from accrediting bodies. E.g. Medical Council

38

Appendices (contd.)

Research & Scholarly Activity– Metrics from Research Quality Review– Strategy

Staff Development Objectives External Relations Support Services Methodology used in preparing Report Additional documentation that Unit may wish to

submit

39

Appendices - Admin & Central Service Units

Unit Details Profiles of all staff Unit Planning and Organisation List of Client Groups for Unit Service Standards for the Unit Staff Development Objectives Unit Budget Methodology used in preparing Report

40

Documentation

Provided to review group by QPU:– Strategic Plans

• UCC• College/Operational Area• Teaching & Learning• Research• Student Experience

– Student statistics– Research profiles – Financial details – Previous Quality Review Report and Follow-Up

report

41

Documentation (contd)

Research Quality Review Report Actions taken by Unit/University following

Research Quality Review

42

Examples of other Documents

Policy documents produced by Unit Procedural Manuals Guidelines/Manuals/Handbooks Audit reports produced by external bodies

43

Peer Review

Evaluation of Self-Assessment Report Site Visit to meet with staff and students Report on findings Recommendations for improvement

– To Unit– To University

44

Peer Review Report

Comments on findings Recommendations

– Acted upon by unit– Acted upon by institution

45

Follow-up - 1

Discussion Draw up Quality Improvement Plan based on

recommendations Implementation

46

Follow-up - 2

On-going quality improvement Re-visit one to 2 years later to discuss

developments Re-visit six years later in a formal review

47

What happens report?

Review Report is considered by– Staff of Department– Quality Promotion Committee of

Governing Body– Budget decision makers in UCC– Governing Body

48

Recommendations in report

Discussed with Head of Unit and Head of College/Vice-President and the Director of Quality Promotion Unit

A Quality Improvement Plan is agreed upon and acted upon by unit in first instance

49

Publication of Report

Review Report is published on University web site.

Annual Report of Quality Promotion Committee to Governing Body also published. Report provides a synthesis of findings and issues as well as full details on each review

50

Follow-up

Unit submits a report on actions taken and outcomes within 18 months of completion of the review to the Quality Promotion Committee

Report on progress is considered by Governing Body and published.

51

Review of QI/QA process

A major review of the process and its effectiveness in UCC and the other Irish Universities was conducted in 2005 by the EUA.

The review was commissioned by the IUQB and the HEA on behalf of the Universities.

The Report endorsed and commended the quality processes in place.

52

Major Successes

Acceptance of quality review process Appreciation of need for self-reflection Embedding of a quality culture in all areas of

the university initiated Ownership by unit being reviewed seen as a

benefit to unit Follow-up procedures ensuring actions

taken on recommendations for improvement

53

Challenges

To reduce the workload for departments/programme boards of study/units in gathering data

To ensure University acts on recommendations requiring resources

54

Activities

Development of thematic reviews, e.g. of quality of total research activity of University

Complete second cycle of quality reviews Development of improved University

Information Systems providing accurate data

55

Embedding a Quality Culture

Role of Director of Quality Promotion Emphasis on quality enhancement Remit wider than management of internal

quality reviews Link to strategic planning Performance indicators Institutional data and research Funding of Quality Improvement Projects

56

Web sites

http://www.ucc.ie/quality http://www.iuqb.ie www.eua.be www.nqai.ie http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/

hogeronderwijs/bologna/

57

Email: n.ryan@ucc.ie

Thank You