NEW CHALLENGES Student-centred learning FOR THE EHEA (SCL ...€¦ · Standard 1.2 : Design and Approval of Programmes “(…) The programmes should be designed so that they meet

Student-centred learning (SCL)

in relation to

Learning Outcomes (LO) &

Quality Assurance (QA)

Lucien Bollaert

International QA expert

BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

Lucien Bollaert

independent international QA expert

International Bologna Process Conference

30 March 2016

Vilnius

New EHEA challenges contents

The European successful(?) QA short story

The revised ESG Student-Centred Learning (SCL)

Learning Outcomes (LO)

EQA – Transparency & Independence

International EQA

New concepts of quality & QA The Dimension of Quality Culture Which new QA is needed? Other EHEA challenges Conclusions


in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

The European successful(?) QA

short story

New EHEA challenges European QA short story

1999 2000 2003

Berlin

communiqué

ESG

2005 2006 2008 2009 2010 2015


Stage of development of EQA against ESG 2013/14

Implementation report 2015, fig. 3.8, p. 98

Source BFUG questionnaire


Published institutional strategies for continuous enhancement in the past 5 years 2013/14




in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

The revised ESG

Student-Centred Learning

(SCL)

New EHEA challenges revised ESG : SCL

Importance of SCL elements in EHEA countries group A

(countries where steering docs mention SCL)

Implementation report 2015, p. 73


Importance of SCL elements in EHEA countries group B

(countries where steering docs do not mention SCL)

Implementation report 2015, p. 74



New European challenges revision ESG : SCL

Yerevan Conference : approval of revised ESG

ESG Standard 1.3 :

Student-centred Learning, Teaching and

Assessment

“Institutions should ensure that the programmes

are delivered in a way that encourages

students to take an active role in creating the

learning process, and that the assessment of

students reflects this approach.”

agreed & proposed by E4+

(incl. EUA, EURASHE & EI)


Guidelines 1.3 :

“Student-centred learning and teaching plays an important role in stimulating students’ motivation, self-reflection and engagement in the learning process. (…)

The implementation of student-centred learning and teaching

- respects and attends to the diversity of students and their needs, enabling flexible learning paths;

- considers and uses different modes of delivery, where appropriate;

- flexibly uses a variety of pedagogical methods;

- encourages a sense of autonomy in the learning, while ensuring adequate guidance and support from the teacher; (…)

agreed and proposed by the

E4+ (incl. ESU)

SCL Survey Analysis 2011 SCL Theory & Practice 2011

SCL Toolkit 2014


“Student-Centred Learning represents both a mindset and a culture within a given higher education institution and is

learning approach (…) characterised by innovative methods of teaching which aim to promote learning in communication with teachers and other learners and which

take students seriously as active participants in their own learning,

forstering transferable skills such as problem-solving, critical thinking and reflective thinking.”

Time for Student-Centred Learning (T4SCL) Toolkit, 2011

QUALITY CULTURE


“Student-centered instruction (SCI) is an instructional approach in which students influence the content, activities, materials, and pace of learning. (…)

The instructor provides students with opportunities to learn independently and from one another and coaches them in skills they need to do so effectively. (…)

Properly implemented SCI can lead to increased motivation to learn, greater retention of knowledge, deeper understanding, and more positive attitudes towards the subject being taught.”

Collins & O’Brien(2003),Greenwood Dictionary of Education,Westport


5 Characteristics of Learner-centered teaching

1. SCL engages students in the hard, messy work of

learning.

2. SCL includes explicit skill instructions.

3. SCL encourages students to reflect on what they

are learning and how they are learning it.

4. SCL motivates students by giving them some

control over learning processes.

5. SCL encourages collaboration.

Weimer, M. (2015), see annex hand-out


SCL integral components

FLEXIBILITY and freedom in terms of time & structure of learning;

More and better QUALITY TEACHERS who strive to SHARE their knowledge;

A clear UNDERSTANDING of students by teachers;

A FLAT HIERARCHY within HEIs;

Teacher RESPONSIBILITY for student EMPOWERMENT;

A continuous ongoing IMPROVEMENT process;

A POSITIVE ATTITUDE by teachers & students with the aim of improving the LEARNING EXPERIENCE;

A relationship of MUTUAL ASSERTIVENESS between students & teachers;

A focus on LEARNING OUTCOMES which enable GENUINE LEARNING & DEEP UNDERSTANDING;

Student-Centred Learning (T4SCL) Toolkit, 2011, 2014


The Learning Pyramid

10%

20%

30%

50%

75%

90%

National Training Laboratories, Bethel, Maine



in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

The revised ESG

Learning Outcomes

(LO)

Standard 1.2 :

Design and Approval of Programmes

“(…) The programmes should be designed so

that they meet the objectives set for them,

including the intended learning outcomes. (…)

New EHEA challenges revised ESG : LO

Steering and/or encouraging LOs in national policy 2013/14




Learning outcomes : need of common language

need of common understanding

21

LO = what a learner is supposed to know &

be able to do after a successful study

competence = ability to integrate

knowledge, skills & attitude to be successful

in a certain context

Make of the LO LIVING things that are formulated by

the stakeholders concerned, passionately shared by

the whole team and shaping the teaching, learning

and assessment practices & formats accordingly !


New competences needed Communication, problem-solving, creativity, team-work

Research skills, both academic as well as ‘mode 2’ (applied)

and mixtures

Inter-disciplinary but with skill and attitude to go deep into a

particular discipline

Meta-cognition

Willingness to change, risk-taking, entrepreneurial

‘Global competences’ (e.g. computer skills)

Visionary & inspirational leadership

HOW YOU ENGAGE IN THE WORLD

= ATTITUDES! CHARACTER! PERSONALITY

(see HRM in industry and business)

CERTAINLY ON TEAM LEVEL


More or other knowledge & skills are not enough!

23


24

Innovative teaching & learning processes

OECD


Standard 1.2 :

Design and Approval of Programmes

“(…) The programmes should be designed so that they meet the objectives set for them, including the intended learning outcomes. (…)

Guideline 1.3 :

Student-centred learning, teaching and assessment

“(…) The assessment allows students to demonstrate the extent to which the intended learning outcomes have been achieved. (…)”


Steering and/or encouraging assessment of LOs 2013/14




congruence between LO, learning & assessment LO T & L forms assessment

cognitive lecture end of course exam

tutorials multiple choice

discussions essays

laboratory practical assessment

fieldwork

affective clinical work clinical practice

seminar presentation

peer group project work

presentation co- or peer- &

psychomotor overall assessment Kennedy (2007)

Demonstrate

Knowledge

Comprehension

Application

Analysis

Synthesis

Evaluation

Integration of

beliefs, ideas &

attitudes

Acquisition of

physical skills


Good practices LOs & assessment

https://www.nvao.net/system/files/pdf/Programme%20with%20Case%20S

tudies-Presenters-List%20of%20Participants.pdf

https://www.nvao.net/peer_learning_event


https://www.nvao.net/system/files/pdf/Programme with Case Studies-Presenters-List of Participants.pdf








in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

The revised ESG

External Quality Assurance (EQA)

transparency & independence

New EHEA challenges revised ESG : EQA

ESG 2015 part 1 : IQA

ESG 2015 part 2 : EQA

Standard 2.1 : Consideration of IQA

“External quality assurance should address the

effectiveness of the internal quality assurance

processes described in Part 1.”

New EHEA challenges revised ESG : EQA - transparency

Standard 2.6 : Reporting

“Full reports by the experts should be

published, clear and accessible to the

academic community, external partners

and other interested individuals. If the

agency takes any formal decision based

on the reports, the decision should be

published with the report.”

Publication of critical and negative outcomes by HEIs 2013/14



New EHEA challenges revised ESG : EQA - transparency

New EHEA challenges revised ESG : EQA - independence

Standard 3.6 : Independence

“Agencies should be independent and act autonomously. They should have full responsibility for their operations and the outcomes of those operations without third party influence.”

Guideline :

organisational independence;

operational independence;

Independence of formal outcomes.

Main outcome of EQA by QAA (2013/14)



New EHEA challenges revised ESG : EQA - independence


in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

The revised ESG

External Quality Assurance (EQA)

international

New EHEA challenges revised ESG : EQA - international

Yerevan 2015 : approval of the “European

approach of QA of Joint Programmes” :

Use & interpretation of ESG in order to audit

a joint programme through through a single

audit …

by a(n) (international) panel …

coordinated by an EQAR-registered QAA.

But a lot still needs to be done :

National frameworks, legislation &

competence;

Promotion & information : EQAR PLA

Good practices


RIQAA project (2014)

Final report p. 9

Scorecard indicator n°6: level of openness to cross border QA

by EQAR registered QAAs




Scorecard indicator n°7: ESG-proof EQA



New EHEA challenges revised ESG

Scorecard indicator n°8: level of student participation in EQA (2013/14)



New EHEA challenges revised ESG


in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

New concepts of quality and QA

Q as concept of Q QM concept

“Exceptional” externally recognised Q control with standards

as high class & benchmarking

excellence

“perfect or focus on process with TQM: process control &

consistent” everybody involved assessment

training & culture

“fit for Q is functional service satisfaction purpose”

customer requirements frameworks & PDCA

provider’s needs(mission) strategic TQM

“value for accountability & change & Q competition

money” effectiveness against performance indicators

cost = efficiency audits

“transforming” qualitative change enhancement by em-

powered participant

Harvey & Green (1993), Harvey (1999), Newton (2007) quality culture

New EHEA challenges new concepts of quality & QA

Paradigm shift in concept of Q & QA(M)

early opinions new views

Quality is absolute and fixed Q is relative & multi-

layered

One standard is dominant… QA has many aspects

& determined by the producer Starting point =

customers’ needs

The final product is central… Service is vital

and should be inspected Q = result of

processes

Quality requirements are fixed Q requirements

change & raise

Quality control by quality unit Q = everybody’s



New definition of quality :

• Quality, as defined by its stakeholders (=

international minima standards), is the added

value between input and output.

• Quality is the added value between the LOs

of the incoming student and those achieved

by the outgoing student in relation to what

all stakeholders want and need.

Dirk Van Damme (OECD)

Q

U

A

L

I

T

Y

EDUCATIONAL STRATEGIC CHOICE and REALITY

secondary

secondary

QF minimum standard/LO

excellence

HE a

HE b

secondary

HE c

Secondary minimum leaving standards/LO


Q(A) development phases

# management & processes results

1. Q is result of individual commitment Q is variable

2. Beginning or thinking in processes Q is result of start

of systematic approach

3. Organisation is managed Q is guaranteed

professionally taking into consideration

the existing and wanted quality culture

4. Organisation & management are Q is continuously

systematically renewed improved with

innovation

5. Organisation is outward-oriented & Q is recognized by

strives towards excellence externals as excellent

international example


intended LO

LO new students study programme achieved LO

use standards

& indicators

influenced by

development phase

input output processes

Internal Quality Assurance (QA)

transformation = value added

methodology

tool tool tool tool tool


“You shouldn’t value what you measure,

but you should measure what you value.”

(Headgraves)


intended LO


mission strategy & policies results

use standards

& indicators

influenced by

development phase




methodology



New vision, mission & (strategic) policy of HE(I)

• Traditionally :

Education : gone global with new stress on global

competences fit for global knowledge society of the 21st

century

Research : more global than ever through rankings new

continuum from fundamental to applied fit for global

challenges & innovation

Social services/impact : from regional to global

• New vision & mission?

HE(I) as a open & global community of co-creation with

all the stakeholders underpinned by a quality culture


“We prepare the leaders of tomorrow.”

“We nurture lifelong learners.”

“We aim to have a global impact, while serving our local community.”

Gallup (2015) found that more than 50% of vision or mission statements of HEI share striking similarities, regardless of size, public or private, land-grant status or religious affiliation, or for-profit or not-for-profit.

They may accurately represent the broad views and aspirations of education leaders and their institutions, and they probably differentiate the institutions from financial services and retail companies…

BUT THEY OFFER LITTLE GUIDANCE TO CURRENT AND FUTURE STUDENTS (and staff).

51

www.gallup.com/businessjournal/184538/hard-

differentiate-one-higher-brand.aspx


http://www.gallup.com/businessjournal/184538/hard-differentiate-one-higher-brand.aspx









GALLUP’s RECOMMENDATIONS :

Establish a clear and differentiated purpose by answering the questions: “Why do we exist?” and “What value do we provide to the world?”.

Align the brand by telling the outside world what the institution is and what it will deliver. (see mission)

Support identity with engaged culture primarily including the student experiences that should support the HEI’s purpose and brand.

Gallup (2015)

www.gallup.com/businessjournal/184538/hard-differentiate-one-higher-brand.aspx

52











START WITH THE QUESTION “WHY ?”

THEN ASK “HOW ?”

FINALLY ASK “WHAT ?” Simon Sinek (2009)

53


“You have to earn trust by communicating and demonstrating that you share the same values and beliefs.

You have to talk about your WHY and prove it with WHAT you do.

Again, a WHY is just a belief. HOWs are the actions we take to realize that belief, and WHATs are the results of those actions. When all three are in balance, trust is built and value is perceived.”

Simon Sinek (2009), p. 84-85

54


Why do we need quality (assurance) management?

Why do we want quality?

Why are we in (higher) education?

Why do we want a better society?

Why do we need a better world?

Why do we want a better life?

55



in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

The Dimension of Quality Culture

intended LO


mission strategy & policies results

use standards

& indicators

influenced by

development phase

influence on

development

phases




underlying principles

underlying (hidden) values

methodology



Underlying principles & values

Leading with vision, inspiration and integrity by leaders acting as a role model

for their values and ethics (responsibility, people management…)

Managing through structured and strategically aligned processes using fact-

based decision making

Integrated system interconnecting all processes and measuring their

performances;

Trust in continuous improvement;

Succeeding by people who are valued in a culture of empowerment for

balanced achievement of organisational and personal goals

(democracy)


“A company is a culture. A group of people brought together around a common set of values and beliefs. It’s not products or services that bind a company together. It’s not size and might that make a company strong, it’s the culture – the strong sense of beliefs and values that everyone, from the CEO to the receptionist, all share.

So the logic follows, the goal is not to hire people who simply have a skill set you need, the goal is to hire people who believe what you believe.”

Simon Senik (2009), p. 90

59

New EHEA challenges quality culture

“A pattern of shared basic assumptions that

the group learned as it solved its problems

of external adaptation and internal

integration that has worked and, therefore,

to be thought to new members as the way

to perceive, think, and feel in relation to

those problems.”

Schein (1985, 2004 3rd ed.), Organisational Culture and Leadership, San

Francisco, p. 90

60



Short story of Quality Culture in Europe

Harvey &

Stensaker

Quality

Culture

organizational QA in HE Flanders

culture Bologna

Berings

project

1970s-80s 2002-06 2006 2008 2009-12 2013 1980s-90s

Quality Culture (existing & desired)

dr. Berings, Dries (2011)


Elements of quality culture


Sattler, Götzen & Sonntag (EQAF 2013), University of Heidelberg


quality as result QC + QA = presumable quality result

O + M + ++

M + O + ++

O + M - +

M + O - presumably + (variable)

O - M + presumably - (variable)

M - O + presumably - (variable)

O - M - --

M - O - -- O = overwhelming M = minor (strength)


There always is a quality culture, just as there

always is an organisational culture.

There can be a positive or negative quality

(sub)culture.

There is no one-to-one relationship between

quality culture, QA and the resulting/existing quality.

The relationship between quality, quality culture and

QA is dialectic.

“A (positive) Quality Culture is that part of organisational

culture in which all stakeholders concerned engage for the

creation of quality and the ambition of continuing

enhancement through quality assurance.” Lucien Bollaert

(2014)

66



in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

Which new QA is needed?

dimensions of quality & QA

GLOBAL SOCIETY

21st c competences

research & innovation

services to society

input processes output

QA (management) system

mission/input

LO

ach.LO/results

methodology

instruments & tools

underlying principles underlying values

Q U A L I T Y

C U L T U R E

QUALITY

learner

teacher L

environment

IQF

NQF input

LO

NQF

IQF

ach.LO

New EHEA challenges which new QA?

• Still important potential but conditions of its initial

design have changed. So a new vision if needed, not just technical

adjustments.

• Policy making is hindered by the lack of sufficient evidence.

• One of the main shortcomings has been the exaggerated

emphasis on structures and bureaucratic ways of implementation,

at the detriment of content and substance.

• Advance excellence in teaching and learning in European HE

•The challenge is to continue the push for excellence while

respecting autonomy and the culture of self-development.

•Rankings provide a partial picture of what a university is and

does. It remains an open question whether ranking measures are

related to QA or organizational effectiveness.


Future of HE – 2nd Bologna Process Researchers’ Conference (Bucharest, 24-

26 November 2014) :

Findings :

QA is applied very differently and it is

reflected in different policies and practices.

ESG guide national and institutional

practices, but are not commonly known

outside the QA community.

There is a need to pay more attention to

the role of students

Transnational QA has both benefits and

challenges. In many countries national

legislative framework is inhibiting such

reviews.


QA recommendations to HEIs:

Use revised ESG for creating a quality

culture with all stakeholders

Define critical points in students’

experience and put in place more

innovative support structures to equip

students with threshold capital.

Improve communication and information

internally & externally.

Improve data collections.


QA recommendations to governments:

Create national QA forums for dialogue and

communication

Find solutions for opening HE systems to cross-border QA

Reduce bureaucratic QA reporting requirements

Consider for the purpose of QA broader contexts and

factors, such as: demography, globalisation, technology,

HEI’s social responsibility, poverty, climate, sustainable

development

Consider that quality is a multidimensional concept

determined by other processes outside QA as well.

Create avenues for a better dialogue between research

and decision-making using the new ESG.



in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

Other EHEA challenges

Future of HE – 2nd Bologna Process Researchers’

Conference (Bucharest, 24-26 November 2014) :

The current state of the Bologna Process and the

EHEA

The future of HE in Europe

New priority areas for the development of HE in

Europe

The role of research vis-à-vis policy making in HE

Financing & governance ; internationalisation ;

education, research & innovation ; QA ; evidence-

based policies in HE: data analytics, impact assessment

& reporting ; teaching, learning, and student

engagement ; excellence and diversification of HEIs’

missions ; social dimension/equity

New EHEA challenges other EHEA challenges

The Future of HE in Europe :

“Currently, these policies and tools might not represent the

best answer to the question “are we ready for the future?”

This situation makes a fundamental re-thinking of how a

European common space for higher ecuation could continue

necessary. For this, we could build on the positive experiences

and achievements to date.”

“For that, however, a new vision is needed, not just technical

adjustments.”

“(...) inform decision-making and practical action,

coordinated or individually, in order to address new and

emerging national challenges, first, and then also European

challenges.”

“It is important to acknowledge that a European common

space for higher education can continue to exist and play a

positive role in the future even though the European

integration process might be stalled or even in the same ways

reversed.”


Most challenging recommendations on other items :

Study more thoroughly the impact of various funding

policies and tools on a more structured approach in

gathering data and involving the HE sector and

considering regional inequalities.

Promote and reward good teaching, including through

appropriate funding policies & incentives.

Further research identification & needs of

underrepresented groups in HE to provide better

support measures.

Countries & HEIs should have internationalization

strategies based on more evidence-based research.

All EHEA students should benefit from the same

conditions as the EU students to internationalise.

• Clear policies & mechanisms to support & promote

independence, interdisciplinarity, and achievement of

transferable competences are needed.



Develop national and international comparative data

systems.

Create efficient mechanisms to study and assess the

impact of internal activities and work in relation to

external factors, to support the achievement of the

institutional mission.

Explore further the links between research and policy

making at institutional, national and European level.

Explore the feasibility of a Global Recognition

Convention (see Lisbon Convention and UNESCO).



Redefine the core objectives of the Bologna Process

• More cross-country projects in (excellence in) teaching

and learning, and translating scholarship into policy and

practice.

• Develop indicators to demonstrate the 3rd mission and

sustainability.

• Develop strategies and data to improve the social

dimension and LLL.


Yerevan communiqué :

Many versions, until last but 2 very negative tone

“Nonetheless, implementation of the structural reforms is

uneven and the tools are sometimes used incorrectly or in

bureaucratic and superficial ways. Continuing

improvement of our higher education systems and greater

involvement of academic communities are necessary to achieve

the full potential of the EHEA.

We are committed to completing the work, and recognize the

need to give new impetus to our cooperation.”

A RENEWED VISION

BFUG WG 3 new goals

BFUG AG 2 non-implementation



A RENEWED VISION :

“By 2020 we are determined to achieve an EHEA

where our common goals are implemented in all member countries

to ensure trust in each other’s higher education systems;

where automatic recognition of qualifications has become a reality so

that students and graduates can move easily

where EH is contributing effectively to build inclusive societies,

founded on democratic values and human rights;

and where educational opportunities provide the competences and

skills required for European citizenship, innovation and employment.”

ANSWERS TO THE WHYS



ACTIONS TO REALIZE THE RENEWED VISION :

“We will support and protect students & staff in exercising their

right to academic freedom and ensure their representation as full

partners in the governance of autonomous HEIs.

We will support HEIs in enhancing their efforts to promote

intercultural understanding, critical thinking, political and religious

tolerance, gender equality, and democratic and civic values, in order

to strengthen European and global citizenship and lay the

foundations for inclusive societies.

We will also strengthen the links between EHEA and ERA

HOW ? No QA yet, no IQA nor EQA !!!



EQUALLY IMPORTANT GOALS IN THE NEW CONTEXT :

Enhancing the quality and relevance of learning & teaching “Moreover,

we will actively involve students, as full members of the academic community,

as well as other stakeholders, in curriculum design and in quality assurance.”

Fostering the employability of graduates throughout their working

lives

Making our systems more inclusive

Implementing agreed structural reforms

… common QA standards and guidelines, cooperation for mobility and joint

programmes and degrees are foundations of the EHEA…

… implementation of agreed reforms at national level requires shared

ownership and commitment by policy makers and academic communities and

stronger involvement of stakeholders.


Yerevan communiqué : APPENDIX

I. Policy measures adopted :

revised ESG

European Approach for QA of Joint Programmes

revised ECTS Users’ Guide, as an official EHEA document

II. Commitments :

short cycle qualifications

information on graduates’ career patterns and progression in the

labour market

review national legislations to comply with Lisbon Recognition

Convention

recognitions of prior learning

group of volunteers to facilitate professional recognition

automatic recognition of qualifications

to enable HEIs to use a suitable EQAR registered agency for their

external QA process, respecting the national arrangements for the

decision making on QA outcomes.



in relation to



Lucien Bollaert


BFUG

7 March 2016

Amsterdam

NEW CHALLENGES

FOR THE EHEA

after Yerevan

QA and beyond

Conclusions

the need of a new generation of QA

taking into account new contexts, challenges, concepts

contextual quality and the dimension of quality culture, and

stakeholders’ involvement and commitment

doing away with bureaucratic window-dressing

replacing it with innovative means of ownership of quality,

quality policy and QA by those who create quality and all

stakeholders concerned

related to the vision, mission, (strategic) policy of a HEI/study

programme and its students’ life-times and employability?

linked with research and social responsibility/relevance

breaking QA open internationally ...

not in a free market, but one regulated by ESG & EQAR

New EHEA challenges conclusions

Quality Assurance of the near future:

From study programme to institutional level : ready?

Global mission & (strategic) policy vs budget cuts!

Vision of co-creative community with all stakeholders

education – (applied) research – impact to society (from local

to global)

student-centred learning, co-creation of learning (revised ESG)

Learning outcomes : 21st century competences really achieved |

LLL | Social relevance - employability

More generic & less standards – essential indicators : risk based

approach (metrixs) vs own (strategic) indicators

Increase of professional control & labels

Internationalisation of QA : joint programmes, QAAs,

international recognition through single audit

Quality culture : acknowledge existing & wanted, shared values

86



© Patrick Sanders op EQAF 2013 Göteborg


THANKS

Q & A

Selected bibliography (EHEA) :

Background report on European Approach for QA of Joint Programmes

http://bologna-yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/European

_Approach_QA_of_Joint_Programmes.pdf

The Bologna Process Revisited: the Future of the EHEA http://bologna-

yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/Bologna Process Revisited_Future of the

EHEA Final.pdf

The 2015 Report on the Implementation of the Bologna Process

http://bologna-yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/2015 Implementation report

20.05.2015.pdf

Future of HE – Bologna Process Researchers’ Conference

http://bologna-yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/ 06052015_ FOHE-

BPRC2_Final_report.pdf

Curaj, A., Matei, L., Pricopie, R., Salmi, J., Scott, P. (eds.)(2015), The

European Higher Education Area – Between Critical Reflections and

Future Policies, Springer


http://bologna-yeravan2015.ehea.info/files/European_Approach_QA_of_Joint_Programmes.pdf




http://bologna-yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/Bologna



http://bologna-yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/2015 Implementation report 20.05.2015.pdf




http://bologna-yerevan2015.ehea.info/files/06052015_FOHE-BPRC2_Final_report.pdf





Selected bibliography (QA) :

Bollaert, L. (2014), A Manual for Internal Quality

Assurance in Higher Education, Berlin: Raabe/

Brussel: Eurashe

available from www.eurashe.eu/manual-iqa

Bollaert, L. (2014), QA Trends in Europe (2005-2015) –

From Internal and Institutional to External and

International, EHEA Journal, 2014 No. 3, Berlin: Raabe,

pp. 85-107

Bollaert, L. (2015), The Future of Quality Assurance to

and after Yerevan, EQAF, London, 19-21 November

2015

Bollaert, L. (2016), Student-centred learning in relation

to Learning Outcomes and QA, BFUG, Amsterdam, 7

March 2016 91


http://www.eurashe.eu/manual-iqa



Documents

NEW CHALLENGES Student-centred learning FOR THE EHEA (SCL ...€¦ · Standard 1.2 : Design and Approval of Programmes “(…) The programmes should be designed so that they meet