European Quality AssuranceRegister for Higher Education

New Developments in External QualityAssurance in the European Higher

Education Area (EHEA)

28 January 2015, SofijaColin Tück

Topics

1. About EQAR

2. External Quality Assurance Crossing Borders

3. Revision of the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG)

4. European Approach for QA of Joint Programmes

1. About EQAR

European Quality Assurance Registerfor Higher Education (EQAR)

Register of quality assurance agencies that complysubstantially with European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG)

Established by E4 at Ministers' requestJointly governed by stakeholders (E4, social partners)and EHEA governmentsExternal review of agencies by independent expertsIndependent Register Committee

Composed of 11 quality assurance experts Nominated by E4, but not representatives Takes all decisions related to registration

Agencies and Governments

36 quality assuranceagencies registered

32 GovernmentalMembers

2. External Quality Assurance Crossing Borders

Recognition of International QualityAssurance Activity (RIQAA) Project

Research questions: How higher education institutions (HEIs) make use of the

possibilities to request quality reviews by foreign agencies? What are the national requirements in place as well as inhibiting

factors both on the side of governments and HEIs? What are the opportunities and challenges faced by QA agencies

and HEIs in reviews across borders? Implementation (Oct 2013 – Oct 2014) with EU financial support:

Desk research on legal frameworks Survey and seminar for QA agencies Case-studies at higher education institutions Final project report & final conference

Cross-Border Openness toEQAR-Registered QA Agencies

• Countries recognisinginternationally active EQAR-registered agencies to operate aspart of the national requirementsfor external QA;

• Countries recognising foreignagencies as part of the nationalrequirements for external QA

• Countries not open to externalQA evaluation by aninternationally active EQAR-registered QA agency

Country Which agencies? Which HEIs? Which types of EQA? Recognition?EQAR-reg. National req. All Some Only JD/TNE Inst. Prog. Directly Approval

BG

DK

LI

RO

AT

PL

KZ

AL

AM

BE-Fl

LT

PL

DE*

DE*

EE

AZ

DE

FI

MD

CH

ME

NL

PT

TR

Characteristic of national legal frameworks

Number of countries outsidethe EHEA in which QAAshave carried out cross-border reviews (2009-2013)

Number of countries within the EHEA in which QAAshave carried out cross-border reviews (2009-2013)

The rationale for the review

The reviews were sometimes carried out in the context of nationalreforms or to achieve accreditation for regulated professions.

Selection of a suitable QAA

The selection process involves considerable desk research (e.g. expertise indifferent methodologies of external quality assurance, countries where agencies haveworked)

Results: perception and impact

Opportunities Challenges

Development of HEIsinternational profile

Choosing a QA that fits theirneeds (i.e. specialised agency)

Recognition of degrees

Support in the implementation ofBologna Tools

Increased stakeholderengagement

Development of QA practices andprocedures

Identify a suitable agency

Extensive preparation phase

Review in foreign language

Explaining own context

Legislative context

Complexity of the review (e.g.joint and multiple degrees)

3. Revision of theEuropean Standards and Guidelines (ESG)

Background and mandate

Current ESG adopted in 2005 Need updating taking account of developments since Need for clarification

Mandate for revision by Bucharest MinisterialCommuniqué (April 2012) Steering Group composed of ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE, EI,

BUSINESSEUROPE and EQAR Drafting of the document by Drafting Group composed of QA

experts nominated by EUA, EURASHE, ESU, and ENQA Proposal endorsed by Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG) in

September 2014 Subject to approval by Ministers (Yerevan, May 2015)

Guiding principles

Keep the strengths: integrated concept andunderstanding of QA, broad applicability, broadownership

Overcome the weaknesses: vagueness, redundancies,inconsistencies

Update: ESG are part of the “Bologna Infrastructure”,taking into account recent developments in QA and HE

Guarantee adaptability to future developments Keep a balance between changing too much and too little

Scope and concepts

Focus on learning and teaching in higher education, including: Learning environment Links to research and innovation

The ESG are applicable to all types of HEIs and programmes Irrespective of mode of provision “Programme” understood in the broadest sense

Higher education institutions and quality assurance agencies Can have policies and processes for other activities beyond the scope

of the ESG Need to take account of their respective context when deciding how to

implement the ESG

Purposes of the ESG

They set a common framework for quality assurancesystems for learning and teaching at European, nationaland institutional level

They enable the assurance and improvement of quality of higher education in the European higher educationarea

They support mutual trust, thus facilitating recognitionand mobility within and across national borders

They provide information on quality assurance in theEHEA

Underpinning principles

HEIs have primary responsibility for the qualityof their provision and its assurance

QA responds to the diversity of higher educationsystems, institutions, programmes and students

QA supports the development of a quality culture QA takes into account the needs and

expectations of students, all other stakeholdersand society

Structure

Overall structure of the ESG remains:1. Standards and guidelines for internal quality assurance2. Standards and guidelines for external quality assurance3. Standards and guidelines for quality assurance agencies

Standards:set out agreed and accepted practice for QA in HE in the EHEA andshould, therefore, be taken account of and adhered to by thoseconcerned, in all types of HE provision.

Guidelines:explain why the standard is important and describe how standardsmight be implemented. They set out good practice in the relevantarea for consideration by the actors involved in quality assurance.Implementation will vary depending on different contexts.

Current ESG (2005) – Part 1 Revised ESG (2015) – Part 1

1.1 Policy and procedures for qualityassurance

1.1 Policy for quality assurance

1.2 Approval, monitoring and periodicreview of programmes and awards

1.2 Design and approval of programmes

1.3 Assessment of students 1.3 Student-centred learning, teaching andassessment

1.4 Quality assurance of teaching staff 1.4 Student admission, progression,recognition and certification

1.5 Learning resources and studentsupport

1.5 Teaching staff

1.6 Information systems 1.6 Learning resources and student support

1.7 Public information 1.7 Information management

1.8 Public information

1.9 On-going monitoring and periodicreview of programmes

1.10 Cyclical external quality assurance

Current ESG (2005) – Part 2 Revised ESG (2015) – Part 2

2.1 Use of internal quality assuranceprocedures

2.1 Consideration of internal qualityassurance

2.2 Development of external qualityassurance processes

2.2 Designing methodologies fit forpurpose

2.3 Criteria for decisions 2.3 Implementing processes

2.4 Processes fit for purpose 2.4 Peer-review experts

2.5 Reporting 2.5 Criteria for outcomes

2.6 Follow-up procedures 2.6 Reporting

2.7 Periodic reviews 2.7 Complaints and appeals

2.8 System-wide analyses

Current ESG (2005) – Part 3 Revised ESG (2015) – Part 3

3.1 Use of external quality assuranceprocedures for higher education

3.1 Activities, policy and processes forquality assurance

3.2 Official status 3.2 Official status

3.3 Activities 3.3 Independence

3.4 Resources 3.4 Thematic analysis

3.5 Mission statement 3.5 Resources

3.6 Independence 3.6 Internal quality assurance andprofessional conduct

3.7 External quality assurance criteriaand processes used by the agencies

3.7 Cyclical external review of agencies

3.8 Accountability procedures

4. European Approach for QualityAssurance of Joint Programmes

Current Situation

Frameworks for joint and single reviews have been tested (e.g.JOQAR), but are often complex and burdensome, as they needto combine national criteria: Not always quality-related, but often structural Can be contradictory (e.g. # of ECTS Master thesis) Sometimes only make sense nationally, but are difficult to understand to

foreign peers and agencies Is external QA the place to enforce national legal provisions?

The consequence: “Fragmented reviews” is often the easiest solution … … but does it reflect the joint character of the programme?

Proposal - overview

Status: BFUG mandated ad-hoc expert group to prepareproposal, endorsed by BFUG, subject to approval by Ministers

The idea: one agreed and consistent European framework forquality assurance of joint programmes

Based on the Bologna infrastructure only: Qualifications Framework (QF-EHEA) European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG)1

No additional national criteria Allow for integrated, single reviews of joint programmes Carried out by a suitable EQAR-registered QA agency

1 The proposal is compatible with the current proposal for the revised ESG.

Proposal - Standards

Standards for Quality Assurance of Joint Programmes Based on QF-EHEA and ESG part 1 Applied to specific case of joint programmes:

joint development and responsibility, several locations and languages, jointprovision, …

Issues: Status, joint design and delivery Learning Outcomes Study Programme Admission and Recognition Learning, Teaching and Assessment Student Support Resources Transparency and Documentation Internal Quality Assurance

Proposal - Procedure

Procedure for External QA of Joint Programmes Based on ESG (part 2), specified for joint programmes:

panel composition, site visit(s) etc. To be used only if external QA at programme level is needed

Issues: Self-Evaluation Report Review Panel Site Visit Review Report Formal Outcome and Decision Appeals Reporting Follow-Up Periodicity

Application

Cooperating HEIsneed programme

accreditation/eval.

Cooperating HEIs are “self-accrediting”for programmes, i.e. accredited/

evaluated/audited at institutional level

Single accreditation/eval.of JP, based on agreed

Standards & Procedure,by any EQAR-reg. agency

Joint internal QA reviewof the JP (in line with ESG), may use

agreed Standards, externalreview takes account of HEIs' internal

Recognised to fulfil QA require-ments in all countries involved

European Approach, based on ESG & QF-EHEA, and Bucharest Communiqué (“recognise QA decisions of EQAR-registered agencies on joint and double degree programmes“)

Expected Impact

Joint programmes = joint quality assurance

More joint responsibility (i.e. for QA)

More involvement in QA of the whole programme

One single reference points (= the Standards)

Simplify process to create/design programmes

Conclusion

European dimension in QA is growing

Reality is sometimes ahead of regulations

Revised ESG and European Approach consolidate theEHEA framework for QA

Follow-up at national level needed after Yerevan

Thank you for your attention!

Contact: colin.tueck@eqar.eu / +32 2 234 39 11