Transcript Quality Culture at UCC

Internal Quality Assurance at
University College Cork
Dr. Norma Ryan
University College Cork –
National University of Ireland
Cork
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
2
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
3
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
4
Colleges of UCC




Arts, Celtic Studies & Social Sciences
Business & Law
Medicine & Health
Science, Engineering & Food Science
5
Universities Act 1997
 Legislation that established all Irish
Universities as independent autonomous
institutions
 Requires all Irish Universities to put in
place quality assurance procedures
6
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
7
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
8
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.
9
QI/QA
 QI: Quality Improvement
 QA: Quality Assurance
10
What is Quality?




‘Fitness for Purpose’
‘Fitness of Purpose’
‘Making the best use of resources available’
‘added value’
11
Quality Assurance
 Ensuring we do what we say we are doing
 Ensuring what we do is a ‘quality’ job
12
Examples of QA




Peer review of research
External Examiner system
Accreditation of degrees
Employability of graduates
13
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
14
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
15
Strategy in UCC
 Quality Promotion Committee of
Governing Body
 Reviews scheduled over 6 year period
by Quality Promotion Committee
16
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
17
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
18
Methodology
 Self-Assessment
 Peer Review
– Institutional/National/International
 Follow-Up
– On-going Quality Improvement
19
Reviews must involve





Students
Staff of institution
Employers
Past graduates/Alumni
Other stakeholders
20
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
21
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
22
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
23
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
24
Evaluation Process 5
 Peer Review Visit & Report
 Follow-up action
 On-going quality improvement
25
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
26
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
27
Self Assessment
 Às appropriate, must include assessment of
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Staff profile
Teaching
Research
Services provided
standards
Support services, including facilities
Contribution to society
28
Structure of SAR
 Core: ‘Overall Analysis &
Recommendations’
 Appendices: contain factual details
29
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
30
Overall Analysis &
Recommendations (contd)
 Benchmarking
 Details of how you plan to show you have
achieved your Aims & Objectives
 How is quality measured?
31
Overall Analysis &
Recommendations (contd.)
 How is success measured?
 Emphasis on strategies for improvement of
quality
Summary of Department
 1 page executive summary on each of
following:
–
–
–
–
–
Department Structure and Organisation
Teaching
Research
Consultancy Activities
Public Profile
33
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
34
Evaluation of Teaching






Evaluation by students
Questionnaires
Focus groups
Views of external stakeholders
Teaching portfolios
Peer review
35
Evaluation of Research





Peer reviewed publications
Books/chapters in books
Supervision of graduate students
Research grant income
Other scholarly activity
36
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
37
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
38
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
39
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
40
Documentation (contd)
 Research Quality Review Report
 Actions taken by Unit/University following
Research Quality Review
41
Examples of other
Documents




Policy documents produced by Unit
Procedural Manuals
Guidelines/Manuals/Handbooks
Audit reports produced by external bodies
42
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
43
Peer Review Report
 Comments on findings
 Recommendations
– Acted upon by unit
– Acted upon by institution
44
Follow-up - 1
 Discussion
 Draw up Quality Improvement Plan based on
recommendations
 Implementation
45
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
46
What happens report?
 Review Report is considered by
– Staff of Department
– Quality Promotion Committee of
Governing Body
– Budget decision makers in UCC
– Governing Body
47
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
48
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
49
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.
50
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.
51
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
52
Challenges
 To reduce the workload for
departments/programme boards of
study/units in gathering data
 To ensure University acts on
recommendations requiring resources
53
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
54
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
55
Web sites





http://www.ucc.ie/quality
http://www.iuqb.ie
www.eua.be
www.nqai.ie
http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeron
derwijs/bologna/
56
 Email: [email protected]
Thank You
57