AGENCIA NACIONAL DE EVALUACI - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – AGENCIA NACIONAL DE EVALUACI PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: beaeb-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

AGENCIA NACIONAL DE EVALUACI

Description:

HEIs are responsible for the quality of their educational offer ... A quality culture within HEIs must be promoted. Quality of academic programmes for students ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:26
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 29
Provided by: rlla
Learn more at: http://www.inqaahe.org
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: AGENCIA NACIONAL DE EVALUACI


1
INQAAHE Conference 2009 30st March 2nd April
2009 Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Quality Assurance for Enhancement a case study
of ANECA (Spain)
Gemma Rauret Director
2

Table of contents
Tensions and challenges in the evaluation
process Simple vs. diversified models for
assuring quality The Spanish model for quality
assurance The new quality assurance approach
3

1. Tensions and challenges in the evaluation
process in QA
4
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
  1. Is it feasible the evaluation enhancement-oriented
    model?
  2. Is it possible to harmonize an evaluation
    enhancement-oriented to another
    accreditation-oriented?
  3. How to integrate an evaluation for accreditation
    with an evaluation for enhancement?

5
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
Tensions in the two approaches in the evaluation
  • Accountability vs. Quality Enhancement
  • Governmental Regulation vs. Self-regulation
  • Performance Indicators vs. Expert Opinion
  • Accreditation vs. On-going Quality Enhancement
  • Can both approaches be integrated?
  • Purist perspective vs. Practical position
  • Stakeholders claims
  • Accreditation legitimacy
  • Integration in a supra-national framework the
    EHEA

6
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
Basic principles that rule the ESG
  • Higher Education Institutions
  • HEIs are responsible for the quality of their
    educational offer
  • HEIs must be able to show quality both at the
    national and International level
  • A quality culture within HEIs must be promoted
  • Quality of academic programmes for students must
    be developed and enhanced
  • Society
  • Societys interests concerning quality of higher
    education must be assured and safeguarded

7
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
  • Process
  • Quality assurance accountability-oriented is
    compatible with enhancement
  • Processes should be compatible with diversity and
    innovation
  • Transparency and external experts are significant
    within the quality assurance processes
  • Processes allowing HEIs can show their
    responsibility concerning accountability for both
    public and private funds received should be
    developed
  • Scope and Goals of the Evaluation
  • National Higher Education Academic Rules
  • Programme and/or institutional accreditation
  • Users protection
  • Public access to the information about programmes
    and institutions
  • Quality improvement and enhancement

8
2. Simple versus diversified models for assuring
quality
9
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
  • Simple or different evaluation models?
  • External and internal determining factors
  • Reality and evaluation culture of the system
  • Complexity, volume, tradition and legal
    frameworks
  • Problems to be undertaken
  • Potential of the organization to accomplish the
    evaluation
  • Internal quality units in the HEIs and
  • quality assurance agencies involved in the
    process
  • Common aspects of both models
  • An agency that co-ordinates the process
  • A self-evaluation report
  • A peer site-visit
  • A public final report

10
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
  • Stages where different problems will be
    undertaken/ the role played by the quality
    assurance/nature of the external review
  • Doubts regarding educational standards/
    identification of programs placed under that
    threshold/ accreditation
  • Doubts regarding the efficiency of either the
    Higher Education system or the HEIs / Public
    accountability and creating awareness in
    institutions/ranking or report to state

11
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
  • Doubts regarding Innovation capacity and QA
    capacity / stimulate self-regulation capacity of
    institutions. Public accountability/Audit to the
    institution
  • Need to stimulate sustainable Quality Culture in
    Institutions/ Improvement based on self
    regulation or public accountability /audit report
    to the institution
  • Decreasing Comparative Transparency across HE
    Systems/stakeholder information/ publication of
    performance indicators

12
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
  • What kind of agency can provide responses to the
    challenges set up?
  • The nature of an agency
  • learning organization
  • shared know-how
  • critical and independent thought
  • The technology of the agency
  • Guides, standards and benchmarks
  • The process
  • Interaction with the HEI moment and type of
    interaction
  • Ensuring the presence of different stakeholders

13
Evaluation Process in QA tensions and challenges
What kind of profile, training and role place the
experts and agencys staff in evaluation?
  • Experts
  • Highly qualified
  • Trained on the evaluation model to be applied
  • International experience
  • Agencys staff
  • Highly qualified staff
  • On-going training networking with other
    agencies staff
  • Network of collaborating experts

14
3. The Spanish model for quality assurance
15
Total number of students enrolled 1.461.477
16
The Spanish model for QA
  • The Spanish Setting
  • Programme evaluation for improvement was
    introduced but without consequences (1985-2005).
  • The initial reaction was very stimulated
    although due to the lack of consequences the
    impact was rather unequal.
  • A stage without consequences is useful but
    cannot be extended for an indefinite period.
  • This stage led to the creation of QA agencies at
    the regional and the national level and QA units
    in HEIs.


17
The Spanish model for QA
  • The Spanish Setting (2)
  • The EHEA and the quality assurance (2007
    onwards). Problem to be undertaken and evaluation
    model
  • Ensuring that all official programs fulfilled
    the standards established in the legal framework.
  • Adopting the accreditation model with a few
    elements enhance-oriented
  • Adopting a national evaluation model for the
    teaching staff
  • Mandatory for bachelor and master programs
  • Implies funding and recognition of degrees for
    the public service
  • ANECA and other regional agencies are responsible
    for the external evaluation

18
The Spanish model for QA
The programme accreditation process
19
The Spanish model for QA
  • How ANECA has undertaken the new challenge?
  • ANECA as a learning organisation
  • Innovation Area
  • Involvement at the International level
  • ENQA, ECA, RIACES and INQAAHE
  • Taking part in innovative projects
  • ANECAs technology
  • What Tools?
  • Guide for universities
  • Guide for evaluation
  • Methodology, standards and benchmarks
  • How are they created?
  • Innovation Unit
  • Technical Committee for validation
  • Approval by the Board of Directors

20
The Spanish model for QA
  • The methodology An evaluation procedure in three
    stages
  • Provisional Report oriented towards the
    fulfilment of the standards and improvement
  • Response of universities and enhancement
  • Final Report on the fulfilment of the standards
  • ESG Fulfilment
  • External reviewed in 2007 ENQA full membership
  • Included in the European Register for Quality
    Assurance Agencies (EQAR) December 2008

21
The Spanish model for QA
  • Profile and training of the agents involved in
    the evaluation
  • Experts profile
  • Academic peers expertise in QA, in programme
    evaluation,
  • in International teams and members of the
    university staff
  • Professional Experts in the discipline specific
    field
  • Students coming from the discipline specific
    field at the
  • suggestion of student unions
  • Experts in quality assurance
  • Training
  • Specific training sessions in the agency
  • On the university system of Spain
  • On the running of the evaluation procedure

22
The Spanish model for QA
  • Profile, training and role of the technical staff
  • Profile
  • Expert in quality assurance
  • Young academic staff with experience in quality
    assurance of higher education
  • Training subjects
  • On the university system of Spain
  • On the running of the evaluation procedure
  • On quality assurance Systems and the application
    of standards
  • Data processing
  • Role played by the technical staff of ANECA
  • Secretary of the committee
  • Improve the reference book to be used by the
    Experts in the committees
  • Co-ordinates the organisation of the meetings

23
4. The new quality assurance approach
24
The new QA approach
  • The main features
  • Strengthening the internal QA system of HEI
  • A public information system
  • To give importance to improvement plans
  • Evaluation agencies should adopt a
    consultancy role
  • Funding as an incentive for on-going improvement

25
The new QA approach
  • The internal QA Systems of the institution
  • Internal systems of the HEI are the only element
    really sustainable
  • Based on on-going improvement
  • Towards international quality levels
  • Best practices for benchmarking
  • Reporting on progresses
  • Improvement of teaching quality
  • Quality system core
  • Staff involvement at all levels 
  • Public information system
  • Characteristics of the programs
  • Planning and implementation of the learning
    process
  • Performance indicators

26
The new QA approach
  • Quality improvement plan
  • Characteristics
  • Focused on learning quality enhancement
  • Built up from self assessment
  • Relevant actions for achieving the improvement
    goals
  • Feasible human and material resources
  • Adequate time
  • Institutional commitment
  • Accountability of results

27
Conclusions
  • Conclusions remarks
  • The evaluation approach improvement- and
    voluntary-oriented creates COMMITMENT
  • The evaluation approach accountability- and
    mandatory-oriented only creates FULFILMENT
  • Both are necessary components for generating a
    quality culture

28
Thanks for your attention
www.aneca.es
About PowerShow.com