Quality Assurance of Higher Education in Finland

1
Quality Assurance of Higher Education in Finland

• Riitta Pyykkö
• University of Turku
• FINHEEC
• St. Petersburg May 12, 2006

2
Finnish QA System of Higher Education Institutions

• publicly funded higher education institutions are
  steered by the Ministry of Education
• FINHEEC is responsible for evaluating the quality
  of education and other activities in higher
  education institutions
• the higher education institutions bear the main
  responsibility for the quality of their activities

3
The Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council
(FINHEEC)

• an independent expert body
• assists universities, polytechnics, and the
  Ministry of Education in matters relating to
  evaluation
• appointed by the Ministry for a four-year period
• 12 members
• a secretariat (currently 11 experts)
• member of ENQA

4
Responsibilities of FINHEEC

• governed by a Decree on the Higher Education
  Evaluation Council (1995)
• organizes audits of quality work
• organizes institutional, programme, and thematic
  evaluations
• provides advisory and consultant services
• develops evaluation methodology
• disseminates good Finnish and international
  practices to higher education institutions and
  the Ministry of Education

5
Evaluations in FINHEEC

• evaluations of higher education institutions
• audits of quality assurance systems
• programme and thematic evaluations (and follow-up
  evaluations)
• accreditation of professional courses offered by
  higher education institutions

6
Evaluation Processes I

• no predeterminated evaluation pattern that is
  applied in every project
• practices of the evaluation are defined in the
  beginning of each project
• when deciding on the process and methods, FINHEEC
  pursues to take in considerations the special
  characteristics of the evaluation target

7
Evaluation Processes II

• however, most evaluation projects follow the
  pattern
• 1. the Council makes a decision on an evaluation
  and appoints a steering committee
• 2. the committee makes a proposition about an
  external evaluation team and prepares a project
  plan
• 3. the Council appoints the external evaluation
  team and approves the plan

8
Evaluation Processes III

• 4. institutions/programmes under review compile
  self-evaluation reports
• 5. external evaluation team visits the
  institutions and writes a report
• 6. the review report is published

9
Audits of quality assurance systems

• background
• the Bologna process, the Berlin communiqué
• Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance
  in the European Higher Education Area (ENQA,
  Bergen 2005)

10
Why auditing?

• promotes the independence and diversity of the
  HEIs
• is a flexible evaluation tool
• shows confidence in the HEIs own operation

11
Aims of audits

• to evaluate how the the HEIs QA system works as
  a quality management and improvement tool
• to evaluate the QA system with regard to the
  audit criteria
• to highlight strengths and best practices
• to give development recommendations
• to decide whether the HEI passes the audit or
  whether the system requires a re-audit

12
Audit targets

• ten targets
• e.g. the objectives, structure and documentation
  of the QA system, involvement of staff, students
  and external stakeholders, links between the QA
  system and HEI leadership and management,
  effectiveness of the QA system to produce
  relevant information and promote operational
  development and change
• each target is scaled for four different
  developmental stages

13
Audit process

• the HEI collects the audit material from its own
  QA system
• FINHEEC appoints an audit group of five members
  (representing HEIs, students and employers)
• the group analyses the documentation and conducts
  a two or three-day site-visit

14
Audit report

• includes
• - the teams evaluation on the strengths and
  development targets of the institutional QA
  system and recommendations for the improvement of
  its quality
• - one of the two conclusions
• 1. the HEI passes the audit or,
• 2. there are essential lacks, and the HEIs QA
  system calls for a re-audit

15
The situation now

• in spring 2005, FINHEEC tested the audit method
  (4 pilot audits)
• from 2006, 4-8 audits annually
• audit manual published (Fi, Swe, En
  www.finheec.fi)
• aim to audit the QA systems of all Finnish higher
  education institutions by 2010 (not realistic)
• audits will be conducted at six-year intervals