Transcript An Overview of Quality Assurance in the EHEA by Prof. Andreas G

An Overview of Quality Assurance
in the EHEA
by
Prof. Andreas G. Orphanides
President of EURASHE,
Rector of European University Cyprus, and
Ex-President of EQAR Board
=============================================
“Meeting of Directors General for Higher Education”
Filoxenia Conference Centre, Lefkosia (Nicosia), Cyprus
22-23 October, 2012
QA in the Bologna Process
Primary
responsibility of
HE institutions
Cooperation of for quality
QA agencies and
HE institutions
European Standards and
Guidelines
European
Register of QA
cooperation in
agencies
E4
Group
quality
assurance
1999
2001
2003
2005
2007
Bologna
Prague
Berlin
Bergen
London
Founding
of EQAR
2008
Current Components of QA in EHEA
• There are European Standards and Guidelines for
internal and external quality assurance of HEIs, and for
external quality assurance agencies.
• European quality assurance agencies (including
accreditation agencies) submit themselves to a cyclical
review every five years.
• There is a European register of quality assurance
agencies (EQAR), which acts as a gatekeeper for the
inclusion of agencies in the register.
• There is an annual European Consultative Forum for
Quality Assurance (EQAF) in the form of international
conference.
Implications of Current Components of QA in EHEA
• The consistency of quality assurance across the EHEA is
improved by the use of agreed standards and guidelines.
• Higher education institutions and quality assurance agencies
across the EHEA are able to use common reference points for
quality assurance.
• The Register makes it easier to identify professional and
credible QA and accreditation agencies.
• Procedures for the recognition of qualifications are
strengthened.
• The credibility of the work of quality assurance and
accreditation agencies is enhanced.
• The exchange of viewpoints and experiences among agencies
and other key stakeholders are enhanced through the work of
the European Consultative Forum for Quality Assurance in
Higher Education.
Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance
in the European Higher Education Area
Part 1: European standards for internal quality assurance within
higher education institutions
Part 2: European standards for the external quality assurance of
higher education institutions
Part 3. European standards for external quality assurance
agencies
Fundamental principles of ESG
• The stakeholders’ model, that is to say, the interests of
students as well as of employers and of society at large.
• The central importance of institutional autonomy, tempered
by a recognition that this brings with it heavy responsibilities.
• The need for external QA to be fit for its purpose and to place
only an appropriate and necessary burden on HEIs.
MAP-ESG project
• By the E4 Group (ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE)
• Mapping the implementation and application of the ESG in the
European Higher Education Area
• The results integrate the perspective of all stakeholders
• E4 recommendation to and mandate from the Ministerial meeting
in Bucharest in April 2012 for a careful revision of the ESG in
order to improve their:
• clarity
• applicability, and
• usefulness
The European Quality Assurance Register
for Higher Education (EQAR)
“EQAR’s mission is to further the development of the European Higher
Education Area by increasing transparency of quality assurance, and
thus enhancing trust and confidence in European higher education.”
• A register of credible and legitimate QA agencies
– Substantial compliance with the European Standards and
Guidelines (ESG) as criterion for inclusion
– Evidenced through an external review by independent experts
– Open to European and non-European agencies
• Stakeholder-managed
– Founded (2008) by ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE (E4 organizations)
Ability for higher education institutions to be
evaluated by an agency outside the country, 2010/11
Principles on QA that underpin
the ESG, EQF and EQAVET
• Quality and QA are primarily the responsibility of the institutions or
organisations providing education or training and should be an integral
part of their management, thus respecting the diversity of nations and
regions, institutions and sectors, their missions, strategies and cultures;
• Quality and QA require the involvement of all stakeholders, both internal
and external;
• Both internal and external QA should be cyclical, systematic, structured
and prolonged with measures enhancing the quality based on the
conclusions;
• QA systems should therefore include clear and measurable objectives and
standards, guidelines for implementation, coherent evaluation methods
which link self-assessment to external reviews, feedback mechanisms and
appropriate resources;
• External QA should be
undertaken independently taking into
consideration elements of input, process and output within their contexts;
• The external reports should be public;
• The external QA agencies or bodies should be subject to regular review;
• Because of the ever growing internationalisation, QA should incorporate
an international dimension, both in contents as in organisation.
Strengths of European QA
• There is strong consensus regarding the principles and/or the
functioning of QA in HE in Europe;
• internal QA is primarily focused on continuous quality
enhancement;
• external QA should extend internal QA in a healthy way, so as to
provide the institution/programme with a mirror and suggested
improvements;
• external QA is the key element in accountability;
• self-evaluation of the audited should be independent and involve all
stakeholders, conduct a site visit and publish its outcomes, as well
as follow up its recommendations in a systematic and cyclical way;
• the external QAAs themselves are subject to cyclical review;
• The European QA that is systematic, professional, fit-for-purpose,
targeted towards enhancement and public accountability, and based
on trust.
Weaknesses and Opportunities of European QA
•
If the stakeholders do not trust each other …
•
If the QAA is not professional …
•
If the panel is not international …
•
If the cycle is too long or the follow-up measures go unchecked …
•
Countries have been reluctant to give more autonomy to HEIs and QAAs and to
recognise degrees and decisions internationally.
•
National governments do not sufficiently trust the whole cycle of QA that they
themselves regulate.
•
A major weakness and deficiency is that European QA does not apply to
research at the institution.
Some final recommendations
• EQAR listing of a QAA reflects a shared trust, but not a choice of a quality
assurance model or quality assurance system.
• It is a government responsibility to create clarity and transparency to
stakeholders and society about the external quality assurance, ranking and
classification systems used in higher education.
• Institutions may benefit from transparency tools that respect the diversity
in higher education in an accessible way.
• Stakeholders’ organisations in higher education have a specific
responsibility towards higher education institutions for communicating with
them and informing them on trends and evolutions.
• In developing QA models and systems, the Bologna process should always
be the governing principle and basis.
• the creation and development of trust in the promotion of quality cultures
are essential.
• The instruments of QA must serve to identify, verify and evaluate the
overall quality of higher education and training within broad, sustainable
quality cultures.
Thank you for your attention