ELIA /inter}artes INSTITUTIONAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT & ENHANCEMENT REVIEW2006 - 07

inter}artes Thematic Network Strand 1 Quality Assurance & Enhancement

the Strand 1 project is to devise a scheme, test & analyse, establish& recommend to EU Commission

European QA&E Process for the Arts

Working Group

UK-England-BirminghamScandinavia-Norway-Bergen-Sweden-StockholmRomania-Cluj-NapocaPortugal-LisbonGermany-StuttgartItaly-VeniceIreland-Limerick

Quality Assurance & Enhancement

QA&E exists in

• Scandinavia

• Scotland

• England

• Ireland

• ENQA- EUA

• Warsaw- European QAE for the Arts

• Berlin-appointed expert group

• Birmingham – developmental Training

• Decided - CRITICAL FRIENDS

• Developed the process-

• Established pilot scheme

• Cluj, Sofia, Vilnius, Brno

Working GroupMeetings & Outcome

What is Quality Assurance & Enhancement

• Transparency

• Accountability

• Institutional Self Awareness

• Information gathering & management system

• Developmental Process

External StakeholdersEmployers Student Destination & AchievementGalleriesEducational Institutions

Internal StakeholdersStudentsAcademic StaffAdministrative StaffAncillary Staff

External/Institutional StakeholdersExternal ExaminersConsultantsNational Agencies

INSTITUTIONAL QA&E REVIEW

• It is intended to combine scrutiny of internal Quality Assurance (QA) systems at institutional level with investigation of how those systems work at discipline level. The review will examine three main areas:

• Effectiveness of institutions’ QA structures

• The accuracy and reliability of the information provided to students about courses

• Examples of how internal QA mechanisms work at course level – discipline reviews (DR’S)

INSTITUTIONAL QA&E REVIEW

Evaluation teams (ET) focus on the following evidence:

• Internal QA reviews and their outcomes• Review/validation of programmes• Use of external reference points in course construction• Internal systems for the management of information• Development and use of programme specifications• Academic standards expected from students• Progression, retention and achievement data• The experience of students as learners• Management of teaching staff – appointments, appraisal

etc

EVIDENCE COLLECTED

• Self evaluation reports (SER’s)

• Information presented by and gathered from students.

• Student achievement, progression, etc.

• Recent review reports

• Information acquired during the visit

STUDENTS

Students are central to the process of review

The audit will examine:

• Information available to students

• How learning is facilitated

• Academic standards they are expected to achieve, and achieve in practice

INSTITUTIONAL SELF EVALUATION REPORT (SER)

The self evaluation report is intended to

address four questions:

• What is the institution trying to do?• How is the institution trying to do it?• How does the institution know if it works?• How does the institution change in order to

improve?

Institutional SER Content

What is the institution trying to do?

• Mission statement - broad institutional philosophy/aims • Distinctive features - what it is recognised for • Governance, organisation and management• Learning, teaching and assessment• Research and scholarship• Relationship to external agencies, professional bodies,

industry and society• Major developments, changes over last 4 years

Institutional SER Content

How is the institution trying to do it?

Analysis of strengths and areas for improvement• Academic activities

- research and educational approaches- education programme design and organisation- evaluation of how these programmes reflect

institutional mission• Academically related activities

- analysis of external links, regional and community service

- analysis of student support services- evaluation how these programmes reflect the mission

• Management and administrative systems and activities- communication

Institutional SER Content

How does the institution know that it works?Institution Processes for Assurance of Academic Quality & Standards

• Quality monitoring processes for:

- appointment of staff

- creating new courses- external examiners- learning support services- learning, teaching and assessment- research- review and approval of existing courses- staff development- student involvement and feedback in quality assurance process- student progression, retention and achievement- student support and guidance.

Institutional SER Content (cont)

How does the institution know it works?

Institution Processes for Assurance of Academic Quality & Standards (cont)

• Framework for management of quality and academic standards- policy- key features- aims- key documents

• Committee and management structures- overview and structure- institution- department/faculty- management responsibilities

• Feedback by key stakeholders: students, graduates, employers and professional bodies

Institutional SER Content

How does the institution change in order to improve?

Strategic management and capacity for change

Analysis of the role of quality management toimplement/support change

• Identify and respond to internal and external demand and opportunities

• How are internal and external representatives involved in strategic management?

• What role does quality monitoring and management play in these developments?

• What changes do you envisage due to these influences?

DISCIPLINE REVIEW (DR)

• To verify that the institutions QA mechanisms are working at course/programme level

• A window to view student achievement and effectiveness of support for learning

• A means to check claims made by the institution

DISCIPLINE REVIEW

Comprises five elements:

• Short self evaluation report• Discussion between team and staff and students about

how QA policies are implemented• Scrutiny of the accuracy of information (prospectus,

website, programme specifications, etc)• Observation of the relation between programmes and

intended learning outcomes (sample of assessed work, progression, achievement, external examiners reports etc)

• The QA team can request additional information

DISCIPLINE SELF EVALUATION REPORTThe report is an objective, critical self-evaluation of the

course/programme by the course/programme team including programme specification and addressing the following:

• Maximum 3,000 words• Educational philosophy and aims of the provision • Description of the learning outcomes• Curricula and assessment• Quality of learning opportunities• Learning and teaching policy and strategy• Student admission and progression (including statistics)• Learning resources• Process for maintenance and enhancement of standards

and quality

EVALUATION REPORT

Relies on the accuracy, integrity,

completeness and frankness of the information

provided by the institution

‘Essential Recommendations’

‘Advisable Recommendations’

‘Desirable Recommendations’

‘Highlight of Good Practice’