Transcript PowerPoint-presentasjon

KSU
System for
Quality assurance of education at the
Norwegian University of Life Sciences
“Quality arises in the
meeting of students and
UMB”
Norwegian University of Life Sciences
• Higher Agricultural School: 1859
• Scientific university college
(Agricultural University of Norway): 1897
• University (UMB): 2005
• 2800 students
• 250 doctorate students
• 870 employees
– of which 440 scientific
• Offers Bachelor’s (3 years),
Master’s (5 years) and Ph.D.
degree programmes
Studies
• Annually, about 2800 students study at
UMB
• Study programmes of three and five
years
• 13 Bachelor’s and 37 Master’s degree
programmes
• 40 – 50 PhDs per year
• Research-based theoretical education
with emphasis on practical experience
International studies
• 280 of 2800 students are foreign citizens
• 30 percent of the students take a study period abroad
• 30 percent of the courses at UMB are offered in English
• Broad cooperation with approximately 80 foreign
universities
• Own department of
international environment
and development studies,
NORAGRIC
Research
• Strong connection between research and
educational activities
• Responsibility for long-term basic
research
• Important areas:
- Environment
- Food
- Biotechnology
- Aquaculture
- Industrial development
The quality system process
at UMB
• A pilot project in 2001 was a soft start
• Study quality has been an important area for
several years
• Reference group managed by rector
• Employees participated in making and testing
quality assurance activities
• Internal discussion in various fora and hearings
laying the foundations for KSU
Motivation for development of a
quality system
• Requirements in national laws and regulations
• Also: We think that quality culture is important for our
own development…
- Continuous improvement culture
- Awareness of teaching process
- Optimising resource use
- Tool in Internationalisation
- Transparency and responsibility
The Norwegian Agency for
Quality Assurance in Education (NOKUT)
and the Universities and Colleges Act
•Regulation on accreditation, evaluation and recognition
pursuant to the Act relating to universities and colleges and
private institutions
•Proposal for revised regulation on accreditation, evaluation
and recognition pursuant to the (new) Universities and
Colleges Act (consultation deadline 24 June 2005)
NOKUT’s 10 criteria for
quality assurance systems
The system should include:
•
Clarification of how quality improvement work is integrated
into the institution`s strategic work.
•
Definition of the institution’s goals for quality work
•
Involvement of the leadership at all management levels in the
organisation.
•
Organisation of the work in routines and measures that
ensure broad participation, with defined areas of
responsibility and authority.
•
Collection and compilation of information from any
evaluations needed to adequately assess of the quality of all
units of study, aggregated to the institutional level.
NOKUT’s 10 criteria cont’d…
•
Analysis of the information and assessment of the degree to
which the goals for quality work have been attained.
•
Use of the results to formulate decisions and take steps to
ensure and enhance programme quality.
•
Clarification of how quality work impacts resource allocation
and priorities at the institution (human resources , infrastructure, service).
•
Active participation of students in the quality work and focus
on the total learning environment.
•
An annual report to the board of the institution providing an
overview of quality development activities and an overall
assessment of educational quality at the institution
Perception by faculty
• Quality systems can be compared to Cod
Liver Oil:
• The language is strange
• It tastes awful
• It is difficult to get children to take
• It is toxic in large amounts
- But when you have become addicted you
cannot live without it!
Expected results of quality work
and quality culture:
Improved educational programmes
Satisfied students
Competitive advantage
Achievement of UMB’s goals
KSU at UMB
• Focus on the students’ learning experience
• Includes academics, learning environment and welfare
• Does not include organisation and research (for the
present)
• Implemented through UMB’s existing organisational map
and management instruments
• A system in continual development
• Presentation on the web for greater transparency and
participation
www.umb.no/kvalitet
The quality assurance
system shall:
• ensure that quality standards are
met
• promote quality development
• document quality work
• detect problem areas
LONG-TERM GOAL:
Guarantee that the time
students spend at UMB is
used effectively, and that
the intended educational
results are achieved
KSU in practice (1)
Systematic collection of information,
documentation of measures and results
• student evaluation of all courses
• external examiners in all courses
• international evaluation of study programmes
• improved routines for course and programme
descriptions and approval
• annual report on educational quality and
educational strategy.
KSU in practice (2)
• The Committee for the Learning Environment
(LMU) is responsible for the health, environment
and safety of the students
• Routines for quality assurance of academic
guidance, student research, studies taken at
other institutions
• Increased focus on staff development (scientific,
pedagogical, language, ICT)
How to develop “wide ownership”?
• Involve teachers, students and management in
developing the system
• Ensure that the leadership is engaged and sends clear
signals that quality assurance has high priority
• Provide staff follow-up in cases of poor evaluations
• Reward departments or groups that demonstrate ability
to improve
Documentation of quality work
• The system should be intuitive and user-friendly
• Web-presentation with tools for users (glossary of terms,
responsibility chart, document archive, quality
requirements/standards, descriptions of routines, links to
databases…)
• Document the system’s effect; quality requirements,
follow-up actions and improvement
• Focus on students’ experiences and feedback
• The Annual Report on Educational Quality should give
an honest, self-critical appraisal of strengths and
weaknesses
Responsibility for
quality assurance
follows UMB’s
new
organisational
map
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
University Board
Rector
Committee for academic affairs
Department Head
Head of Education
Responsible teacher
Instructor
Student
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
University Board
Rector
Director
Committee for the learning environment
University Foundation for Student Life
Division Head
The students: Our partners
and co-citizens in the university community
• Political participation: representation in all university
decision-making bodies; regular meetings with the university
leadership
• Social participation: Students are responsible for student
societies and activities
• Academic participation: daily classroom contacts between
teachers and students
Anonymous, web-based course evaluations
"I am satisfied with access to
equipment and computers"
1= disagree completely, 6= agree completely
Score, avg of all course scores
6
UMB
students
evaluated
400
courses
annually,
for 3 years
5
4
3
2
1
2002-2003
2003-2004
Academic year
2004-2005
Important issues can be identified
"I am satisfied with the way my learning is evaluated"
Score, avg of all course
scores
6
1= diagree completely, 6=agree completely
5
4
3
2
1
2002-2003
2003-2004
Academic year
2004-2005
Examples of improvement activities
Physical and psychosocial learning environment
The Committee for the Learning Environment (LMU) identified these
activities to be carried out in 2006:
•Bicycle racks
•Ventilation in classrooms
•Acoustic improvement in classrooms
•Student center in Soils Science building
•Computer systems
•Classroom furnishings
Budget framework: 3 mill. NOK
Strategic work at UMB
and educational quality
• The University Board has determined goals and
quality standards for educational activities
• UMB’s Strategic Plan and other plans contain
quality goals
• Educational quality is included in departments’
annual plans and reports
• Strategies are implemented through our
management cycle
Structure of UMB‘s system for quality assurance of education
EDUCATIONAL QUALITY
QUALITY AREAS
KEY ELEMENT
Activity
Activity
Activity
KEY ELEMENT
Activity
Activity
Activity
Activity
KEY ELEMENT
Activity
Activity
14 Quality areas
1. Educational offerings
2. Academic guidance
3. Work on MS theses
4. Work on PhD theses
5. Educational resources
6. Credit transfer
7. Physical learning
environment
8. Information, ICT, library
9. Studies administration
10. Universal access for the
disabled
11. Psychosocial learning
environment
12. Student welfare
13. Governance for quality
14. Internationalisation
Quality area 1. Educational offerings
Objective: UMB’s study programmes shall be researchbased, maintain a high level of academic and pedagogical
quality and prepare students for later service to society
within UMB’s areas of expertise.
Overall responsibility: Education Committee
Key elements:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Regulations
7. New student introduction period
Programmes of study
8. Teaching materials
Courses
9. Computer-based learning
Quality of matriculating students
Evaluation of student learning
Academic quality of graduates
Key element 2. Programmes of study
Quality standard: UMB shall offer programmes of study
having professional and social relevance and holding a
high academic and pedagogical standard
Activities: 1.2 3.International evaluation of programmes
Implementation: Education Committee.
Status: A (= active)
Form describing
Activity 1.2.3: External evaluations of study programmes
Quality area: 1. Educational offerings
Key Function: 2.Programmes of study
Overall resposibility : Education Committee
ACTIVITY 1.2.3 External evaluations of programmes of study
Summary: All programmes of study are subjcts to an external evaluation every 5 years in the period 20042008
All Departments and other plyers follow up the evalations by setting up an implementing action plan.
Reporting and control are doing throught the management loop and in control dialogues
Links and documents :
Work description ”External evaluation of programmes of study”
Decision in the University Board case 179/2003, and decision in the Education Committee case 120/2003
Template for Terms of Reference,
Template for action plan
Guidelines for self-evaluation
Limination
Applicable to all Bachelor`s and Master’s degree programmes at UMB, including programmes offered for
payment as fuirther education. External evaluation of UMB`s offers of futher education is commented on
in own routine
Method for collection of quality assurance data
Dialogue-based
Systematically periodic X
Systematically continuous
External X
Form describing Activity 1.2.3 cont’d
Quality standard:
UMB shall offer programmes of study that are academically and socially relevant and that have a high
academic and pedagogic standard
Implementation; Education Committee (SN)
Routine
1) The evaluation is carried out as a project with an introductory self-evaluation phase and an external
evaluation committee.
2) The responsible department follows up the evaluation by setting up and implementing an action plan
for follow-up. The action plan is recommended by the Department Board and approved by the Education
Committee.
3) Players responsible for parts of the evaluation that are not the department’s responsibility follow up the
evaluation by setting up and implementing action plan. The action plan is adopted by the unit in question
and is approved by the Education Committee or the Learning Environment Committee (LMU). The work
on other players’ follow-up is coordinated by the Director of Academic Affairs.
Details on how the work is done can be found in the “ Work description”
Control:
-SN, or possibly LMU, approves the follow-up plans of the departments and other players.
-The departments’ annual plans shall include comments on future programme evaluations and larger
planned measures in the follow-up of implemented evaluations.
-The departments’ annual reports shall include comments on implemented evaluations, main results,
action plans and implementation of action plans.
-Other players’ annual reports shall include comments on evaluation results (within the area of
responsibility), action plans and implementation of action plans.
-The annual report on study quality includes comments on whether or not the evaluation routines have
been followed, main results and the follow-up work.
Deviation treatment
Implementation of the evaluations and the follow-up work are discu
ssed in control dialogue meetings
Activity prepeared by: FB, AS Version 1.1 Approved by SN.11.10.05 case 57
A last note of caution:
A quality assurance system
is not a free lunch!
www.umb.no/kvalitet
Quality Assurance
System
General description of the quality assurance
system
[[email protected]]
About the system
General description
Archive
Annual report
Norwegian
The Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) has defined
clear objectives for its quality assurance system: The system
shall guarantee that students spend their time at UMB
effectively and receive an education of high academic quality.
This is the description of The System for Quality Assurance in
Education at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences. The
web-pages are under construction.
UMB has defined 13 (14) quality areas considered critical for the
students learning achievements:
QUALITY AREAS:
Quality area 1
1 Educational offerings
2 Academic guidance
3 Work on MS theses
4 Work on PhD theses
5 Educational resources
6 Credit transfer
7 Physical learning environment
8 Information, library and ICT
9 Studies administration
10 Universal access for the disabled
11 Psychosocial learning environment
12 Student welfare
13 Governance for quality
14 Internationalisation
More information:
- Studies
- Research
- Student information
centre
- Students own website
www.umb.no/kvalitet
Educational offerings
Quality area 1
Quality Assurance System
[[email protected]]
About the system
General description
Archive
Annual report
Norwegian
Objective(s): UMB’s study programmes shall be scientifically based, maintain a high
level of academic and pedagogical quality and prepare students for later services to
society within UMB’s area of expertise.
Overall responsibility: Education Committee
Key elements for Educational offerings:
Key element 2.
2.Programmes of study
Quality standard: UMB shall offer programmes of study with high professional and social
relevance and keep a high academic and pedagogical standard.
Activities
1. Approval of programmes of study.
Implementation: Education committee Status: A
2. Student evaluations of programmes of study.
Implementation: Director of Academic Affairs Status: U
Activity 3.
3.External evaluation of programmes of study.
Implementation : Education committee Status: A
4. Follow-up of evaluations of programmes of study
Implementation: Director of Academic Affairs/Departments Status: A
5. Annual revision of portfolio of programmes of study offered
Implementation: Education committee Status: A
6. Other studentsurveys
Implementation: Director of Academic Affairs Status: A
Key elements
1.Regulations
2.Programmes of study
3.Courses
4.Quality of matriculating students
5.Evaluation of student learning
6.Academic quality of graduates
7.New student initiation period
8.Instructional materials and textbooks
9.Computerbased learning
General:
- All quality areas