Changes in Quality Assurance: the Case of Germany

ECA Seminar “Changing Systems”

Den Haag, 9 December 2009

Academic DirectorProf. Dr. Rainer KuenzelWilhelm-Busch-Straße 22D-30167 Hannover

University of OsnabrueckProfessor of Economics/Higher Education Management and PolicyDepartment of EconomicsRolandstr. 8, D-49078 OsnabrueckPhone.: +49 541 969-2751, Fax.: -2479Mobile: 0171-7757723E-Mail: rainer.kuenzel@uni-osnabrueck.de

Central Evaluation and Accreditation Agency, Hanover

2

Changes in Quality Assurance: the Case of Germany

I. IntroductionII. Main features of System Accreditation

1. Procedure2. Criteria

III. Problems1. Problems in the execution of SA2. Problems of proper judgment in SA3. Problems of transition to SA4. Problems of enhancing quality by SA

3

I. Introduction

Double purpose of Bologna reform in Germany: strengthen cohesion between European countries solve specific problems of the German university system:

– long average study duration– high attrition rate– lack of funding– disregard of employability in many curricula

4

I. Introduction

Detailed prescriptions for all new Bachelor and Master programs were enforced by program accreditation in order to solve

structural problems of the higher education system and achieve the Bologna goals.

5

I. Introduction

Program accreditation was carried out by six independent Accreditation Agencies under

the supervision of the German Accreditation Council.

6

I. Introduction

Opposition against the Bologna reform was especially fierce in southern Germany.

Support came primarily from the „Universities of Applied Sciences“ (Fachhochschulen).

7

I. Introduction

In order to come to a compromise in the Standing Conference of the Federal State

Ministers of Higher Education the so-called „System Accreditation“ (SA) was introduced

in 2008/9.

8

II. Main features of SA

1. Procedure

Eligibility requirement: minimal number of accredited programs

Documentation on internal governance structure, institutional mission and profile, internal QA/QM system, institutional development strategy.Comment by student representatives.

Two site visits of a group of 5 experts and in-depth evaluation of a sample of study programs

9

II. Main features of SA

1. Procedure

Purpose of first site visit:– rounding off information on HEI‘s QA/QM

system– selecting three out of eight program features to

be reviewed across all programs– making a preliminary decision on study

programs to be assessed according to the standards and guidelines of AC for program accreditation

10

II. Main features of SA

1. Procedure

Purpose of second site visit:– analysis of self-report and documentation– review of selected program features– discussion with stakeholders in HEI– compilation of draft report on institution‘s

QA/QM system– final decision on sample of programs to be

evaluated in detail

11

II. Main features of SA

1. Procedure

Criteria for composition of program sample:– 15% of all programs on offer, at least three– cross-section of all types of programs– results of review of program features

12

II. Main features of SA

1. Procedure

Separate expert group for each assessment of a program in the sample. Experts have to decide whether flaws and weaknesses of programs can be traced back to functional deficits of QA/QM system.

Final report validates the effectiveness of the QA/QM system of the HEI and makes a recommendation in favor or against an accreditation decision by the accreditation commission of the agency.

Instead of final verdict the panel can recommend the suspension of the accreditation procedure for 12-24 months.

13

II. Main features of SA

1. Procedure

The accreditation decision, a summary of the final report and the names of the panel members are published. An appeals process is in place.

The accreditation is valid for six years. HEI is exempted from program accreditiation.

After three years the assessment of a sample of study programs has to be repeated („half-time sample“).

The SA can be restricted to an organizational subunit of the HEI.

14

II. Main features of SA

2. Criteria

Criterion 1:

The HEI has defined and published an educational profile for its programs and the institution at large as part of its development strategy. It continually

revises the educational goals of its programs.

15

II. Main features of SA

2. CriteriaCriterion 2:

The HEI has a steering system in place which guarantees that the following goals and requirements are met by its educational

programs:

high academic standards employability citizenship personal development goals of Bologna process requirements of NQF stakeholder involvement

16

II. Main features of SA

2. Criteria

Criterion 3:

The HEI applies a system of QA and quality enhancement which meets the ESG for Quality in

Higher Education.

17

II. Main features of SA

2. Criteria

Criterion 4:

The HEI has a reporting system in place which documents the structural and procedural

characteristics of the educational programs as well as the processes, instruments, results

and effects of the QA/QM system.

18

II. Main features of SA

2. Criteria

Criterion 5:

The competences, responsibilities and decision making processes in the QA/QM system for

teaching and learning are clearly defined and published.

19

II. Main features of SA

2. Criteria

Criterion 6:

At least once a year the HEI informs its commissions for teaching and learning as well as the general public and the owner of the HEI about

measures and results of quality assurance and quality enhancement in teaching and learning.

20

III. Problems

1. Problems in the execution of SA:

Size of sample of program features Indeterminateness of program sample Insufficient definition of required documentation

21

III. Problems

2. Problems of proper judgment in SA:

Blurred picture by overlap of PA and SA Hidden assumptions about relationship between

QA/QM system and quality of programs

22

III. Problems

3. Problems of transition to SA:

Successful SA will block the necessary corrections in the Bachelor/Master system.

HEIs are not ready for SA, yet some give it a try. The development of effective QA/QM systems

takes time and counseling:

23

III. Problems

4. Problems of enhancing quality by SA:

Accreditation does not foster improvement unless coupled with strategic management by contract. This implies the active involvement of a governing authority vis-avis the university leadership.