Quality assurance in doctoral school programmes

Dr. Thomas Ekman Jørgensen6 December 2013

 ECOOM Colloquium, The use of indicators for research evaluation

purposes

Hasselt University

Doctoral Education in Europe

Doctoral education has expanded significantly over the last decade 50%-100% increases in graduations are not uncommon

There has been increasing political attention Inclusion in the Bologna Process 2003 Salzburg Principles 2005 – Salzburg II 2010 Increased importance for EU research policies

• Innovation Union 2010• Principles for Innovative Doctoral Training 2011

National legislation

…2…

Universities have respondedSince 2005, we have seen a ’quiet revolution’ in doctoral education Professional management: The Rise of the

doctoral school • 30 % of universities had a doctoral school in 2007• 65 % in 2009*• 85% EUA ERA survey 2013

Reform of doctoral programmes Transferable skills Mobility components Quality Assurance

…3… *TRENDS V, TRENDS 2010

…4…

EUA Council for Doctoral Education – a response to the changes

EUA – European University Association850 universities and rectors’ conferences in 47 countriesDeveloping evidence-based policiesAdvocating these policiesPromoting development of universities as institutions

Council for Doctoral Education (CDE)a membership service focused on doctoral educationDevelopment of doctoral schoolsDoctorate-specific policy development223 members in 35 countries (from Faro to Tomsk)

CDE activities

…5…

Membership activities- Events, Doctoral Education Bulletin,

networking and projects

Stakeholder dialogue

- EU and globalRecommendations

and policy development

Salzburg Principles and recommendationsSalzburg Principles from 2005 – outcomes of an

EUA-led project and a Bologna seminar The doctorate is research-based Importance of institutional strategies Diversity

Salzburg recommendations 2010 – from consultations with CDE members Research as the ’basis and the difference’ from the other two

cycles Space for individual development Autonomy for the institution to choose mission and strategy

and to set up the appropriate structures…6…

Salzburg II on QA

“It is necessary to develop specific systems for quality assurance [for doctoral education]... there is a strong link between the assessment of the research of the institution and the assessment of the research environments that form the basis of doctoral education.”

Development of systems that combine quality of research, quality of structures and take into account ”the professional development of the researcher as well as the progress of the research project.”

…7…

Convergence between doctoral education and QA

QA has been closely linked to the creation of the EHEA Focus on 1st and 2nd cycle Establishment of a quality culture (shared values and

structures to enhance quality)

Doctoral Education has been reformed through doctoral schools as part of the professional management Close to the research mission of universities Procedures have been established, but not directly labelled as

QA

Common basic elements: Accountability and quality enhancement

…8…

Quality CultureWe are in a period where quality culture in doctoral education is moving from a ’professional’ to an ’integrated culture’

…9…

Quality culture and indicatorsKPIs are good for a quick overview

However, quality only makes sense in a context, and so do indicators

Indicators should reflect qualitative as well as quantitative characteristics

Importantly, they need to be part of a feedback loop for quality enhancement

…10…

…11…

Two sides of quality in doctoral education

Academic qualityCritical mass of research (Salzburg II): ”Europe’s universities have developed diverse

strategies to assure critical mass and diversity, building their areas of strength through focused research strategies and engaging in larger research networks, collaborations or regional clusters”

Indicators could be bibliometrics, external funding, qualifications of staff (Poland), size of programmes (Italy), output/impact/environment (REF, UK)

…12…

Academic quality IIAcademic quality needs an inclusive research environment Doctoral candidates need to be part of the

excellent research Measured through student satisfaction (to be used

cautiously!)Supervision as the main factor Good supervision is central to the quality culture Most universities have rules and/or guidelines for

good supervision Professional development of supervisors is a

priority…13…

Indicators for academic quality (ARDE Survey)

…14…

Procedural qualityLinked to the professional management of doctoral educationAre the rules transparent and efficient? Who gets admitted, how long should it take, how is

the outcome evaluated?Is there accountability? If something does not work, who is responsible? How do we fix it?

Indicators could be satisfaction, time to degree and completion rate

…15…

Satisfaction with procedures (ARDE Survey)

…16…

What do rules and guidelines for supervision contain? (ARDE Survey)

…17…

What are the sanctions? (ARDE Survey)

…18…

The ’life-cycle’ of doctoral education: Thesis defence

…19…

The thesis committee is established by...

The supervisor

The doctoral/graduate/research schoolAcademic body (de-partmental board/aca-demic council)

Other (please specify)

The thesis committee is composed of

Members from the in-stitution of the doctoral candidate

Members from outside the institution of the doctoral candidate

a mix of the above

Other (please specify)

Indicators for procedural quality (ARDE Survey)

…20…

Conclusions

Universities have set up structures to deal with academic and procedural quality

We do not know much about how these are connected to quality enhancement

... And do they promote a quality culture?

…21…

The road goes ever on...Upcoming and ongoing activities connected to doctoral education

Workshop: ”The Outcomes of Doctoral Education” – Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir Turkey 23-24 January 2014Conference: ”The Global Doctorate” – University of Liverpool, UK, 19-20 June 2014

Publication on the European Research Area – Spring 2014

…22…

…23…

Thank you for your attention