EQA Austrian FH sector

Kurt Sohm

managing director, FH Council

learning and quality

• cross-sector perspective between VET and HE– compare developments and achievements of QA

• differences and similarities– differences in terms of educational goals, organisation, culture,

governing structures, responsibilities, legal backgrounds etc.

• what do they have essentially in common?– learning and education takes place

» privileged places for storing, developing and sharing knowledge

learning and quality

• knowledge society– correlation between education and knowledge,

technological progress, economic growth, social development and prosperity has gained tremendously in importance

– the learners and their learning processes need to be at the focus of all efforts and endeavours for quality

• learners have to be provided with the best possible learning environments

• quality of learning and education is of major significance

learning and quality

• managing, ensuring and enhancing quality as key issues– internal QM > the classic cycle

• planning, doing, checking and taking subsequent improvement measures as integral part of everyday life at institutions (PDCA)

– quality awareness and a culture of quality needs to develop– quality management must be envisioned as an ongoing development

task and as a strategy– main responsibility for ensuring and enhancing quality lies with the

institutions themselves

– responsibility of EQA > auditing institutions to determine whether they adequately meet this responsibility

system of (e)qa?

• fundamental questions in defining the methodological, organisational and content-related aspects of QA– who is in charge of what: with government, education

institutions, QA agencies all on the playing field?– how to structure the relationship between autonomy

and EQA?– how can EQA contribute to the development of a

culture of quality within the institution?

system of (e)qa?

• fundamental questions (cont.)– what is the main subject of EQA: whole institution or

single programme?– what about the relationship between institutional QA

and the quality of programmes?– how to integrate different aspects of EQA

• quality checks / transparency / accountability • self-reflection / quality improvement

– how to link qualification frameworks to QA?

principles of (e)qa

• to be taken into account regardless of the methods applied: quality audit, programme accreditation, institutional evaluation …– sensibly combine institutional and programme-related

quality aspects at institutions• functioning internal QM is an important prerequisite for

successful EQA

– for institutions, it is easier to assure and improve quality if there are binding incentives from without

principles of (e)qa

• to be taken into account (cont.)– conditions for internal effects of EQA

• if they are accepted by the institutions themselves• if they are useful for the “people on site”• if they are able to be linked to consequences

– EQA must respect autonomy of institutions and must not result in purely bureaucratic execution of a task

– EQA works best if institutions have comprehensive powers of self-management

FH sector at a glance: history

• newly set up in 1994 and is still developing– building up: not by transforming existing educational

institutions but by accrediting new programmes • the FH Studies Act became effective on 1 October 1993

– the first 10 programmes started 1994/95

– meanwhile: 18 institutions offering 150 programmes, 28.000 study places, 7.700 annual intake, 17.000 graduates

– at present about 52 % of the programmes are offered in the BaMa-System (2006/07 > about 75 %)

» the BaMa-reorganisation is an ongoing process

FH sector at a glance: framework

• FH Studies Act is based on principles of „New Public Management“– deregulation at the state level and regulation

by private sector under state supervision• the state no longer centrally controls and regulates

the Higher Education sector as it previously did

– decentralisation of decision-making process • to foster independence, responsibility and flexibility

of the institutions

FH sector at a glance: framework

• FH institutions were given greater autonomy to organize themselves – the providers are – with one exception – privately

organised• legal person under private law, e.g. companies with limited

liability, associations or public foundations (e.g. contracts with lecturers are also concluded under private law)

– public funding (financial concept of study place management)

– EQA by a public authority (FH Council)

FH council

• public authority responsible for EQA– independent decision-making body

• independence of members is guaranteed by law– members are not bound by any ministerial directives – 16 members with academic and professional qualifications – appointed by Federal Minister for Education, Science and

Culture for three-year terms» four members on recommendation of the Advisory Board

for Economic and Social Affairs » singular re-appointment for a second, consecutive term is

possible » current president Claus J. Raidl, CEO of Böhler-Uddeholm

AG

design of new programmes

• on behalf of the provider by expert teams with academic and professional qualifications (2 + 2)

• on the basis of FH Studies Act and the accreditation guidelines of the FH Council

– requirements that need to be met to get an accreditation

– modularisation of the curricula • entails a fundamental change of perspectives, which goes

from an– input focus > Which content do I want to teach? – to an output focus > What knowledge, skills, competences

should result from the learning process?

eqa FH sector

• close link between initial accreditation, evaluation and re-accreditation– accreditation refers to programs > valid for max. of 5

years– accreditation > formal and independent decision,

indicating that a program offered is meeting certain standards

– decision on initial accreditation is carried out by the members of the FH Council themselves

• if there is no expertise in the FH Council written expert opinions are asked for

eqa FH sector

• decision on re-accreditation is based on a previously conducted evaluation – each re-accreditation requires a new application and

the submission of an evaluation report– evaluation regulation of FH Council

• evaluation: internal, external, follow-up, publication– institutional and programme-related evaluation

– evaluation doesn’t state an own methodological concept but it serves to fulfil the task of accreditation

the educational mandate

• a scientifically sound and practice-oriented professional education at higher education level– particularly to provide the graduates with the skills to

solve the tasks of the respective professional field • in accordance with scientific and professional requirements

– focused on the employability of FH graduates• curricula are to be designed in such a way that

– the graduates will stand a reasonable chance of finding a job that matches their qualifications

• the usability of the acquired qualifications in the job market was an important reason to set up the FH sector

basic concept FH programme

• it has to describe the connection between – the vocational fields of activity for which it is aimed– the related qualification profile

• which the future graduates will have to achieve• in order to be able to satisfy the tasks of the professional field• in a way which is adequate for higher education level

– and the curriculum > the required qualifications must be reflected in the courses of the curriculum

• these connections have to be demonstrated in the teaching concept as well

core elements accreditation

• accreditation decision– programmes are reviewed against the fulfilment of the

educational mandate– review of the coherence of vocational fields of activity,

qualification profile and curriculum is important • Does the submitted concept fulfil its educational mandate in

a reliable and transparent way?• Has the [field-specific] implementation of the educational

mandate been demonstrated in a logical, conclusive and valid way?

core elements accreditation

• aim of accreditation– to assure that institutions meet their

responsibility for quality– guaranteeing students, sponsors, the

business community and society that the programmes offered have been through a positive quality assurance procedure prior to their approval

crucial elements

• which make the approach work– clearly defined legal background for the QA system

and the tasks of the FH Council– independence of FH Council > guaranteed by law– the accreditation system was established (by law in

1993) prior to setting up the FH sector (1994)– the FH sector was developed and is still developing

under the auspices of an established accreditation system

crucial elements

• which make the approach work (cont.)– every programme needs a positive

accreditation decision to start operation• accreditation is equivalent to approval

– the FH sector has a clear structure • it is young, small, flexible and innovative

– there is a combination of institutional and programme-related approach to EQA

crucial elements

• which make the approach work (cont.)– accreditation sets binding incentives for the HEI to

assure and improve quality• the non-fulfilment of quality standards and requirements is

related to consequences

– the quality assurance system gains acceptance by the HEI and is of benefit to the people “on the spot”

– the procedures are further developed in consultation with the HEI

crucial elements

• which make the approach work (cont.)– the EQA system works under the auspices of

modern and innovative framework conditions• deregulation at the state level and regulation by

the private sector under state supervision• autonomy, responsibility and flexibility of the HEI

– FH development in the interplay between the factors of autonomy, responsibility and EQA

Thank you very much for your attention…

www.fhr.ac.at