Transcript Titel

Developing appropriate quality assurance:
Policies and tools
Quality Assurance and Evaluation
Mission and Aims
Mission:
The University of Vienna’s Quality Assurance aims to
ensure that permanent orientation towards quality and
international standards becomes standard practice.
Aims:
•
To analyse the quality of research, teaching and
administrative support which these require
•
To promote academic creativity and innovation
•
To develop ways to help make decisions regarding
medium- and long-term planning
•
To provide public accountability
Organisation of Quality Assurance (QA):
• Senate and Rectorate
• Scientific Evaluation Board
• Department of Quality Assurance
Organisation of Quality Assurance (QA):
• Senate: Adoption of the Statute
• Rectorate: Evaluation Plan
• Scientific Evaluation Board (SEB):
“Special institutions shall be institutions of the University, being
subordinated to an independent, internationally tied expert direction.”
(Organisation Plan):
» Prof. Dr. John Brennan, The Open University
» Prof. Dr. Hans-Dieter Daniel, Universität Zürich
» Dr. Dorothee Dzwonnek, DFG
Department of Quality Assurance (QA):
The University of Vienna’s department of Quality
Assurance (QA) is responsible for the organisation of
quality management in the following areas:
• Research
• Teaching
• Management and service provision
Comprehensive, peer-review-based
evaluation
Performance in research, teaching and the
supporting management and service provision
of these are submitted to a common quality
analysis at the institutional level (faculty or
centre).
Comprehensive, peer-review-based
evaluation
Statute and Evaluation Plan:
Faculties 2008 (5 years cycle):
•Faculty of Computer Science
•Faculty of Philosophy and Educational Sciences
•Faculty of Social Sciences
•Faculty of Physics
Service Units 2008 (7 years cycle):
•Research Services and International Relations
Evaluation Interval
t-5
t-4
t-3
t-2
5 years ex-post
t-1
t
t+1
t+2
t+3
5 years ex-ante
t+4
Two stage process: Informed Peers
stage 1
Questions (qualitativ)
Data, Analysis, Indicators
(quantitativ)
Self Assessement Report
of the Faculty / Centre
stage 2
Peers´ Site Visit
Peers´ Report
Faculty´s Statements
Follow-up
Peer evaluation Procedure
• Data, Analysis and Questions
• Self Evaluation Report
• External Evaluation: Site Visit and Report
write-up
• Follow Up
Data, Analysis and Questions
Data and Analysis (faculty specific):
• Research data and scientometric
analysis of the publication output
• Further data (people etc.)
• Data concerning teaching and
results of the students´
assessment
Questions
Self Evaluation Report
1. Structure and
Strategy
2. Research
3. Study and
teaching
4. Human
Resource
Management
5. Budget,
Infrastructure
and
Administration
Self Evaluation Report
1) Faculty
2) Institute
3) Study
program(s)
4) Persons
Mission, Goals, Strategies

Data
Faculty can formulate
own questions

Language is English
Activities
(exceptions possible)

Analysis
- SWOT Analysis
- Measures
External Evaluation: The Peers
1. Selection of Peers
•
The faculty/centre has the right to suggest peers. The following criteria
should be observed:
–
–
–
–
–
•
Excellent international professional reputation
Expertise in providing structured support to young scientists
Knowledge in field of curriculum development
Management experience in large academic facilities
Experience with evaluations
Appointment of peers is made by the head of the QA, who is not bound
to the suggestions made by the head of the unit undergoing evaluation
(Regulations § 5, para. 3).
2. Site visit
•
•
•
personal assessment of conditions on-site
personal discussions with the representatives of the faculty/centre
First draft of the report
Follow-up
• Follow-up discussions with the Rector and
responsible Vice Rectors
– Catalogue of measures proposed by the department of
quality assurance
– Agreement between faculty and rectorate on the catalogue
and on the implementation of outcomes of evaluation
•
•
•
•
Start of a circle of quality
Establishment of timelines
Current evaluation process is completed
Monitoring process begins
assessment of courses by the students
The assessement of courses is supposed to
• prompt the course instructors to reflect about
the format and the content of their courses
• aid in planning academic programs for the
entire university
• give an input into the self evaluation report of
the faculty in the framework of the peer
evaluation
Assessement of courses
Cycle: Courses are to be evaluated at
least every three semesters (about
2.500 courses/semester).
Furthermore, it is possible to
participate in course evaluations
on a voluntary basis.