KSUSystem 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 , infra-structure, 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!

Improved educational programmes

Satisfied students

Competitive advantage

Achievement of UMB’s goals

Expected results of quality work

and quality culture:

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

LONG-TERM GOAL:

Guarantee that the time students spend at UMB is used effectively, and that the intended educational results are achieved

The quality assurance system shall:

• ensure that quality standards are met

• promote quality development• document quality work• detect problem areas

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. University Board2. Rector3. Committee for academic affairs4. Department Head5. Head of Education6. Responsible teacher7. Instructor8. Student

1. University Board2. Rector3. Director4. Committee for the learning environment5. University Foundation for Student Life6. 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

1

2

3

4

5

6

2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005

Academic year

Score, avg of all course scores

UMB students evaluated 400 courses annually, for 3 years

"I am satisfied with the way my learning is evaluated" 1= diagree completely, 6=agree completely

1

2

3

4

5

6

2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005

Academic year

Score, avg of all course

scores

Important issues can be identified

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 KEY ELEMENT KEY ELEMENT Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity Activity 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, library9. Studies administration10. Universal access for the

disabled11. Psychosocial learning

environment12. Student welfare13. Governance for quality14. Internationalisation

Quality area 1. Educational offerings

Objective: UMB’s study programmes shall be research- based, 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. Regulations 7. New student introduction period2. Programmes of study 8. Teaching materials3. Courses 9. Computer-based learning4. Quality of matriculating students5. Evaluation of student learning6. 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)

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 2004-2008

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: External evaluations of study programmes

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)

Routine1) 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 treatmentImplementation of the evaluations and the follow-up work are discussed in control dialogue meetings

Activity prepeared by: FB, AS Version 1.1 Approved by SN.11.10.05 case 57

Form describing Activity 1.2.3 cont’d

A last note of caution:

A quality assurance system

is not a free lunch!

www.umb.no/kvalitet

General description of the quality assurance system[kvalitetssystemet@umb.no]

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:

1 Educational offerings2 Academic guidance3 Work on MS theses4 Work on PhD theses5 Educational resources6 Credit transfer7 Physical learning environment8 Information, library and ICT9 Studies administration10 Universal access for the disabled11 Psychosocial learning environment12 Student welfare13 Governance for quality

14 Internationalisation

Quality Assurance System

About the systemGeneral descriptionArchiveAnnual reportNorwegian

More information:- Studies- Research- Student information centre

- Students own website

Quality area 1

Educational offerings[kvalitetssystemet@umb.no]

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:

2.Programmes of studyQuality standard: UMB shall offer programmes of study with high professional and social relevance and keep a high academic and pedagogical standard.

Activities1. Approval of programmes of study.Implementation: Education committee Status: A

2. Student evaluations of programmes of study. Implementation: Director of Academic Affairs Status: U

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 elements1.Regulations2.Programmes of study3.Courses4.Quality of matriculating students5.Evaluation of student learning6.Academic quality of graduates7.New student initiation period8.Instructional materials and textbooks9.Computerbased learning

General:- All quality areas

www.umb.no/kvalitet

Quality Assurance System

About the systemGeneral descriptionArchiveAnnual reportNorwegian

Key element 2.

Activity 3.

Quality area 1