+ All Categories
Home > Documents > ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the...

ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the...

Date post: 10-Jul-2020
Category:
Upload: others
View: 0 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
25
ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the HEIs? Maria Kelo Director, ENQA Valencia, May 2016
Transcript
Page 1: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2015 – what has changed and what

does it mean for the HEIs?

Maria Kelo

Director, ENQA

Valencia, May 2016

Page 2: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

What is ENQA?

• ENQA is the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher

Education

• ENQA is a membership organisation of external Quality Assurance

Agencies

• The criteria for membership is that an agency undergoes a successful

external review against the 2015 European Standards and Guidelines

(ESG) every five years

2

Page 3: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ENQA – member agencies (48 in 26

countries)

3

Page 4: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ENQA – affiliates (46 in further 15

countries)

4

Page 5: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ENQA activities

• Members Forum in April and a General Assembly in October each year

• lead or partner in projects funded by European Commission (ERASMUS+)

• self-funded projects for members (QPP series; ENQA working groups)

• consultative member in the Bologna Follow-Up Group, E4 group, management of EQAR (member executive board)

• organises workshops, seminars, conferences and networking events for members and wider stakeholders

• organises reviews of member and applicant agencies against the ESG 2015, including training of reviewers, management or reviewer database, coordination of review processes (10-15/year)

5

Page 6: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

European Quality Assurance Framework

• QA: one action line in the Bologna Process since the beginning (1999)

• 2005: Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the EHEA (ESG) – Proposed by the E4 Group (ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE = the

stakeholders, not ministries!)

• 2008: European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR), established by E4 list of “trustworthy agencies”

• 2012: Decision to revise the ESG by 2015 – updating taking account of developments since 2005

– clarification

– undertaken by the stakeholders

• 2015: adoption of ESG 2015 by the Yerevan Ministerial Conference

Page 7: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

Guiding principles for the revision

• Keep the strengths: integrated concept and understanding of

QA, broad applicability, broad ownership

• Overcome the weaknesses: vagueness, redundancies,

inconsistencies

• Update: ESG as part of the „Bologna-Infrastructure‟, taking

into account recent developments in QA and HE in general

• Guarantee adaptability to future developments

• Keep a balance between changing too much and too little

• Focus on learnig and teaching in higher education, including

– Learning environment

– Links to research and innovation

Page 8: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2015 and ESG 2005

• Mandate, Bucharest, 2012,

adoption, Yerevan 2015

• ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE in

cooperation with EI,

BUSINESSEUROPE, EQAR

• EQUIP project, 2015-2018

www.equip-project.eu/esg-2015

8

Page 9: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

Purposes of the ESG 2015

• Set a common framework for quality assurance systems for

learning and teaching at European, national and institutional level

• Enable the assurance and improvement of quality of higher

education in the European higher education area

• Support mutual trust, thus facilitating recognition and mobility

within and across national borders

• Provide information on quality assurance in the EHEA

…9…

Page 10: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

…10…

The principles for QA in the EHEA

• HEIs have primary responsibility for the quality of their provision

and its assurance

• QA responds to the diversity of higher education systems,

institutions, programmes and students

• QA supports the development of a quality culture

• QA takes into account the needs and expectations of students, all

other stakeholders and society

Page 11: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

Some important changes overall

• The ESG 2015 explicitly state that they apply to all programmes whichever mode or place of delivery in the EHEA (elearning, cross-border HE…) many questions to HEIs and agencies, such as:

– How to carry out QA of programmes delivered abroad? Responsibilities, costs, cooperation with local agencies….

– How to assess elearning? Can the same same criteria be used as for traditional forms of education (drop-out rate, m2/student, teacher-student ratio…)?

• Apply to agencies wherever they carry out EQA and weather the activities are compulsory or voluntary Cross-border QA needs to be ESG compliant, too

• Underlines the importance of enhancement for all QA processes, and the support EQA needs to give to the development of a quality culture at HEIs

• Strong focus on the shift to student-centered learning

11

Page 12: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2015 - Main changes in Part 1

• High number of standards (from 7 to 10) and many more

guidelines than before

– reflects the focus on institutional responsibility for

quality and its assurance

– provides more guidance (HEIs have expressed a need)

• Some structural changes to make the standards follow more

logically the student “lifecycle”, and the programme “lifecycle”

12

Page 13: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2015 - Main changes in Part 1 – cont.

• Flexible learning central: frequent reference to LLL, RPL, different delivery modes, diverse student body etc.

• LOs and SCL have a strong focus, and are mentioned in 5 out of the 10 standards!

– 1.2: design of programmes, explicit reference to LOs, national QFs and QF-EHEA

– 1.4: student admission and progression have a stronger focus than before and refer throughout to the LOs based approach

– 1.6: student support standard emphasis the diversity of the student population

• A new standard focusing altogether on student-centred learning, teaching and assessment (1.3) requires a shift in thinking about “what is quality” in teaching and learning

• 1.5: from “QA of teaching staff” to “development of teaching staff” to emphasise the importance of constant enhancement, not of once-for-all checking

The real question is: How can student-centeredness be translated into indicators? HEIs need to think about how to demonstrate their “student-centredness”. No longer an optional - but a “must do”!

5.5.2016 replace txt View menu > Header and footer 13

Page 14: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2005 – Part 1

1.1 Policy and procedures for quality

assurance

1.2 Approval, monitoring and periodic

review of programmes and awards

1.3 Assessment of students

1.4 Quality assurance of teaching staff

1.5 Learning resources and student

support

1.6 Information systems

1.7 Public information

ESG 2015 – Part 1

1.1 Policy for quality assurance

1.2 Design and approval of programmes

1.3 Student-centred learning, teaching

and assessment

1.4 Student admission, progression,

recognition and certification

1.5 Teaching staff

1.6 Learning resources and student

support

1.7 Information management

1.8 Public information

1.9 On-going monitoring and periodic

review of programmes

1.10 Cyclical external quality assurance 14

Page 15: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

How HEIs can address internal quality

assurance in line with ESG 2015

15

Helpful guide on how

universities can address

ESG 2015 (part 1)

Published (Sep 2105) by

www.eua.be

Page 16: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

QA system and information (standards 1.7

and 1.8)

• QA systems should be capable to generate information that is valuable for

both internal decision-making and external stakeholders

• Need to collect information that is useful and makes sense for their own

context and purposes (Less is more? What is useful and informative? Link

to strategy? help to assess achievement)

• Do this through a variety of information sources and methods in order to

ensure a comprehensive and objective view of institutional activities

• Some findings of EUA surveys:

– Institutional research capacity varies

– Quantitative data often follows national guidelines and definitions

– Surveys remain an important source for qualitative information/feedback

– Format and exact contents of information provided to the external stakeholders

vary

…16…

Page 17: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

Quality of student experience and success

(standards 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, and 1.6)

• Measures such as student tracking, supporting teaching staff in improving

their skills and acknowledging good teaching, and student services and

learning support need continuous attention

• Need to take into account the diverse student body in all these areas

• Is teaching staff ready for SCL? Are the required skills there?

• (Are students ready for SCL??)

• Recognition: is it fair? (LRC?)

• NQF – link to QF –EHEA

• Appropriate use of ECTS (see also standard 1.2) and describing LOs

…17…

Page 18: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2015 - Main changes in Part 2

• Rearrangement: moving some standards from and to part 3 (and part 1) to make it

more consistent and logical

• Standard 2.4: peer-review experts

• A new standard More focus on role of peer-reviewers

• requires a student member, in guidelines recommends international experts

• Standard 2.6: reporting

• requires publication of full expert report (summaries and/or decisions not

enough!)

• whether positive or negative

• “Intended readership” clarified

• Standard 2.7 (from ex 3.7 guidelines): complaints and appeals

• emphasised (a standard of its own)

• now required for all procedures (whether formal outcomes or not)

5.5.2016 replace txt View menu > Header and footer 18

Page 19: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2005 – Part 2

2.1 Use of internal quality assurance

procedures

2.2 Development of external quality

assurance processes

2.3 Criteria for decisions

2.4 Processes fit for purpose

2.5 Reporting

2.6 Follow-up procedures

2.7 Periodic reviews

2.8 System-wide analyses

ESG 2015 – Part 2

2.1 Consideration of internal quality

assurance

2.2 Designing methodologies fit for

purpose

2.3 Implementing processes

2.4 Peer-review experts

2.5 Criteria for formal outcomes

2.6 Reporting

2.7 Complaints and appeals

19

Page 20: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2015 - Main changes in Part 3

• Rearranging to be more coherent and logical (3.1. combines previous 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5)

• 3.2: Recognising public authority does not have to be from an EHEA country/a country

• 3.3: Notion of independence explained better

– organisational, operational, and of outcomes

– third party involved in individual capacity (to strike the balance between stakeholder involvement and independence)

• 3.4 thematic analysis

– 2005 “from time to time”, 2015: “regularly” more strict

– not “system-wide necessarily” (agencies may also not operate in “a system”, or operate across several “systems”)

• 3.5: resources - now has guidelines that explain what is “adequate resources”: not only QA activities, but also thematic analysis, information activities, etc.

• 3.6: Professional conduct (see later)

• 3.7: cyclical external review of agencies (appeared before in guidelines to 3.8), to create a parallel with HEIs (see 1.10))

20

Page 21: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

In detail: 3.6 Internal quality assurance and professional conduct

Standard:

“Agencies should have in place processes for internal quality assurance related to defining,

assuring and enhancing the quality and integrity of their activities.”

Guidelines mention that:

• “The agencies need to be accountable to their stakeholders. Therefore, high professional

standards and integrity in the agency‟s work are indispensable”

• Agencies should have “processes to establish the status and recognition of the

institutions with which it conducts external quality assurance”

• Agencies need to have a policy that “outlines the appropriate communication with the

relevant authorities of those jurisdictions where they operate”

• Ensure that any activities carried out and material produced by subcontractors are in

line with the ESG

takes seriously the fact that agencies have started to operate abroad, and how this can lead

to issues regarding the (seriousness/ESG compliance) of activities carried out abroad.

ENQA and in particular EQAR will check and monitor this!

Agencies need to create such policies and processes where these do not exist, yet.

Need consistency between behaviour at home and abroad

21

Page 22: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

ESG 2005 – Part 3

3.1 Use of external quality assurance

procedures for higher education

3.2 Official status

3.3 Activities

3.4 Resources

3.5 Mission statement

3.6 Independence

3.7 External quality assurance criteria

and processes used by the agencies

3.8 Accountability procedures

ESG 2015 – Part 3

3.1 Activities, policy and processes for

quality assurance

3.2 Official status

3.3 Independence

3.4 Thematic analysis

3.5 Resources

3.6 Internal quality assurance and

professional conduct of the agencies

3.7 Cyclical external review of agencies

22

Page 23: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

EQA and IQA – a collaborative relationship

• Primary responsibility of HEIs for quality and quality assurance of their own provision

• Role of external QA is to:

– Provide a way for autonomous institutions to demonstrate their accountability externally

– Support the HEIs in constant enhancement of HE provision and its quality assurance

• Build on each other: EQA can only be successful if it takes into account and is informed by IQA – IQA can be further developed and supported by EQA

• Concentric circles, one smaller only for sphere of activity, not for importance!

• ESG 3 parts: part 1 on IQA not the work of the agency to implement, but to ensure that the HEIs have reliable and well functioning mechanisms in place to address Part 1. HEIs need to take responsibility for implementation – and for providing evidence of the implementation

5.5.2016 replace txt View menu > Header and footer 23

Page 25: ESG 2015 what has changed and what does it mean for the …avap.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/III-Foro-AVAP-Maria-Kelo.pdfmanagement of EQAR (member executive board) • organises

Thank you!

www.enqa.eu

[email protected]


Recommended