UNIVERZITET NA TRITU ... - TREND 2013 The University Quality - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

XIX SKUP TRENDOVI RAZVOJA “UNIVERZITET NA TRŽIŠTU ...” - TREND 2013

“The University Quality Assessment Committee“

Maribor, 29. May, 2013 11.00 – 10.45

• Prof. Dr. Franc Čuš

Chairman

Guidelines and activities for the preparation of

self-evaluation, internal institutional evaluation ,

external-evaluation processes were drawn up by The University Quality Assessment Committee

• 27 members
• Faculty members 18 + chairman
• representative of the non-teaching employees 1
• student representatives 5
• Student Dormitories 1
• The University of Maribor Library 1

The Faculty …1 Quality Assessment Committee

• 5 members

Chairman is member

• f The University

Quality Assessment Committee The Faculty ….2 Quality Assessment Committee

• 5 members

The Faculty ….17 Quality Assessment Committee

• 5 members

Student Dormitories

• 5 members

The University of Maribor Library

• 5 members

3.2.3 Institutional quality assurance policy

.

The University Senate

Common self-evaluation reports are discussed by senates of the University The University Quality Assessment Committee The Commission reports once a year about the state of quality

Quality Development Centre

The University adopted a quality strategy laid down in the work programme

The Faculty senate The Faculty

Quality Assessment Committee

Facultys self-evaluation reports are discussed by senates of faculties Activities focus on an analysis of the current situation, preparation of reports, setting up of databases for the needs of all stakeholders at UM as well as for further processing and analysing.

Values of The University Quality Assessment Committee:

• independence,
• responsibility,
• being public and transparent,
• professionalism,
• efficiency,
• commitment to progress.

Strategic objectives:

• development and operation of the quality assurance system,
• monitoring progress and strengthening the culture of quality

in higher education.

The aims and goals of the University Quality Assessment Committee (“The Commission”):

LEVELS OF QA :

• Internal QA
• External QA
• The Commission attends and evaluates the quality and

effectiveness of educational, research, artistic and professional activities;

• The Commission works according to the regulations in

collaboration with the faculties;

• The Commission is obliged to obtain the opinion of the students;

The Quality Assurance System elements

• 1. Quality document (strategy, SWOT/ mapping)
• Quality goals (What?)

PLAN

• Mechanisms, procedures (How?) All major activities!
• Role and responsibilities (Who?) Involvement of students!
• 2. Implementation

DO

• 3. Feedback and monitoring

CHECK

• Internal (self evaluation)
• External
• 4. Acting on findings, enhancement measures ACT

• 1. INTERNAL QA of UM

1. The policy of Comission declared in Law of HE, UM Statute in article 264th , and institutions’ internal regulations. 2. Study programmes (learning outcomes, programme content, modes of delivery, learning resources, approval procedure.) 3. Student survays questionairs. 4. Habilitation procedure. 5. Annual selfevaluation (monitoring of students’ achievements, periodic reviews of the programmes, feedback from stakeholders). 6. Summary of the SER published by Comission.

1.2. Field of assessment (ESG NAKVIS)

…in accordance with the Criteria for Monitoring, Assessment and Assurance of Quality in higher education institutions: 1. Education – study activities. 2. Scientific, research, art and professional activities. 3. Higher education teachers, assistants and scientific staff. 4. Administrative and professional-technical staff. 5. Students at the higher education institution. 6. Premises, equipment for educational, scientific, research, art and professional work, the library. 7. Financing the educational, scientific, research, art and professional activities. 8. Cooperation with the social environment.

• 2. Self-evaluations
• On the basis of self-evaluations, university members prepare

action plans containing corrective measures and monitor their implementation (monitoring at university level does not exist).

• The Quality Assessment Committee requires university

members to include a detail analysis of the action plan from the previous self-evaluation period in their current self- evaluation report.

• At university level, no action plans containing corrective

measures have been drawn up.

2.1. Self-evaluations report

• The self - evaluation report is the key document for the

external evaluation report.

http://www.um.si/kakovost/komisija-za-kakovost-univerz/Strani/default.aspx

• The self - evaluation report is the principal aid of the

institution to convey the information about itself.

• The report is also the right place for critical reflection of

the institution about leading and managing and about the way how it deals with the quality as the central value in its strategic deciding.

2.2 “Critical“ joint findings of self - evaluations in the report for 2012:

• great room shortage due to increasing enrolment of

students,

• low transition of students between school years,
• too great groups of students attending the lectures and

particularly the exercises,

• shortage of financial means for modernizing the

researching equipment,

• the greatest drawback for strengthening the quality is

the shortage of financial means for introducing the spotted necessary improvements and not the character

• f internal or external QA processes.

• 3. Internal institutional evaluations
• Since 2009, UM is conducting internal institutional

evaluations in accordance with the Criteria for the Accreditation and External Evaluation of Higher Education Institutions and Study Programmes a regular basis

(Slovenian Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education)..

• In 2012, UM began to conduct follow-up internal

institutional evaluations.

• PLANNING THE INTERNAL EVALUATION: Criteria, Experts,

Call for application, Training of experts, Questionnaire for schools, Self report structure, Report structure, Visit planning, Visit timetable, Report writing, Reporting to the management, Final report

3.1 Commission has made internal institutional evaluation in the following faculties:

• Faculty of Law (2008),
• Faculty of Civil Engineering (2009),
• Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences (2009),
• Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security (2010),
• Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering (2010),
• Faculty of Organizational Sciences (2011),
• Faculty of Economics and Bussines (2011),
• Faculty of Health Sciences (2012).

3.2 Time schedule of the "follow up" internal institutional evaluation

• April 2013 – Faculty of Electrical Engineering
• October 2013 – Faculty of Arts
• April 2014 – Faculty of Mechanical Engineering
• October 2014 – Faculty of Law
• April 2015 – Faculty of Civil Engineering
• October 2015 – Faculty of Agriculture and Life Sciences
• April 2016 – Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security
• October 2016 – Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering
• April 2017 – Faculty of Organizational Sciences
• October 2017 – Faculty of Economics and Bussines
• April 2018 – Faculty of Education
• October 2018 – Faculty of Medicine

• 4. EXTERNAL QA IN HE

ESG

1. Effectiveness of the internal QA procedures 2. External QA processes determined and published 3. criteria for decision should be published 4. Processes fit for purpose 5. Reporting 6. Follow-up procedures 7. Periodic reviews 8. System-wide analysis UMB 1. always better 2. the external evaluation is published 3. criteria are published 4. Yes 5. Reports are available 6. Follow-up procedures is determined 7. Re-accreditation every 7 years 8. Yes, Quality Development Centre

4.1 FUNCTIONS OF THE COMMISSION FOR PLANING THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION

• Call for application
• Questionnaire for faculties
• Self report structure
• Report structure
• Planinng the visit
• Timetable of the visit
• Reporting to the Comission
• Reporting to the Senat

4.2 Commission has made external evaluation in the following faculties:

• Faculty of Health Sciences (2006),
• Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (2008),
• Faculty of Arts (2009),
• Faculty of Mechanical Engineering (2009).

4.3 Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education - NAKVIS (November 2010):

CRITERIA FOR THE ACCREDITATION AND EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS AND STUDY PROGRAMMES:

• Accreditations and external evaluations are part of the external

system of quality assurance in higher education and higher vocational education. They are the fundamental activity of the Agency on which quality assessment of a higher education institution as a whole, an individual study programme or a higher vocational college is based.

• The agencies have appropriate and sufficient human as well as

financial resources for efficiently organizing and executing the procedure(s) of the external QA; in addition, they have sufficient resources for the development of processes and procedures.

4.4 External Audit team (NAKVIS) Audit team consists of six members:

• 3 representatives of HEIs,
• 1 representative of industry or institute
• 1 student’s representative
• 1 representative of the Agency

4.5 External evaluation report is the key document for the acredition (re-acredation):

Each report normally include the following elements:

• Summary of the environment within the activity subject to audit,
• Objectives of the audit,
• Summary of audit methodologies used for collecting and analyzing data

indication of sources of data,

• Explanation of criteria, such as benchmarks, used to interpret findings,
• Conclusions relating to audit objectives,
• Recommendations

The audit team draws up the draft report which is, upon its approval by the audit coordinator, sent to the management of the audited Institution. Management of the audited institution is given the opportunity to comment

• n the draft report within 15 days and have its comments included.

The final report is published on the Agency’s web site.

Conclusions

: The Comission undertakes to follow the standards and instructions from NAKVIS and the European Higher Education Area in carrying out its activities in the following fields:

• 1. building of efficient system of external and internal quality assurance;
• 2. maintaining its legal status as a Comission and independent

spending authority according to the legislation;

• 4. lawfully implementing the procedures of quality assurance on

institutional and programme levels;

• 7. making its functioning transparent and public through publicly

accessible evaluation reports and all related decisions,

• 8. maintaining its independence and not allowing interference by any

third party – administrative and university bodies – in conducting its procedures and carrying out its activities;

Imperatives for the system of QA:

Quality assurance is a complex process which requires cooperation of different actors/stakeholders !!

• Self-evaluations of HE institutions are important for better

management of institution and a basis for external evaluation.

• External evaluation contributes to better communication of all

partners/stakeholders and to the development of trust in quality.

• Investing time, work and money in external evaluation is of long-

term importance for the HE institution.

Thank you!

“The University Quality Assessment Committee”

franc.cus@um.si