The European standards and guidelines for quality assurance

Séamus Puirséil,

Vice – President, ENQA

From the 2003 Berlin communiqué

‘At the European level, Ministers call upon ENQA through its members, in co-operation with the EUA, EURASHE and ESIB, to develop an agreed set of standards, procedures and guidelines on quality assurance to explore ways of ensuring an adequate peer review system for quality assurance and / or accreditation agencies or bodies, and to report back through the Follow – up Group of Ministers in 2005’

The 2005 ENQA report to Bergen

• European Standards and Guidelines for quality

assurance in higher education• 5-yearly reviews of European quality assurance

agencies • Register of quality assurance agencies• European Consultative Forum for Quality Assurance

Some principles to start with ….

• There is no globally agreed definition of quality in higher education

• No discussion of policy or practice concerning quality assurance should be started without an explicit and clear contextual definition of the use of the word ‘quality’

• Quality can only be assured by those responsible for providing higher education

• ‘Quality’ frequently includes ‘standards’ but these are different things

A problem:

• ‘Quality assurance’ in higher education does not have a single purpose, a single method, or a single operational definition

• It can, and does, mean many different things in different contexts

A diversity of purposes for quality assurance

• Accountability • Control• Improvement / enhancement• Public information• Public reassurance / confidence• International acceptability• Ranking• Resource allocation

A diversity of quality assurance models

• Programme/subject evaluation • Programme/subject accreditation • Programme/subject assessment• Programme/subject review• Institutional evaluation • Institutional audit• Institutional review• Institutional accreditation

A diversity of methods• Peer Review• Inspection• Connoisseur judgements• Criterion (or standards) – based judgements • Compliance models • Quantitative models• Self-regulatory models• Threshold models • Excellence models• Hybrid Models

A diversity of outcomes

• Public and private information reports

• Recommendations

• Confidence judgements

• Approvals

• Accreditation decisions

• Rankings

Six quality assurance questions

• what are you trying to do?

• why are you doing it?

• how are you going to do it?

• why will that be the best way to do it?

• how will you know it works?

• how will be able to improve it?

Process follows purpose

European Standards and Guidelines (ESG) – 2005

• 3 parts: • Internal quality assurance• External quality assurance• Peer Review of quality assurance agencies

• www.enqa.net/files/ENQA%20Bergen%20Report.pdf3

Objectives of the ESG• To encourage the development of higher education

institutions which foster vibrant intellectual and educational achievement;

• To provide a source of assistance and guidance to higher education institutions and other relevant agencies in developing their own culture of quality assurance;

• To inform and raise the expectations of higher education institutions, students, employers and other stakeholders about the processes and outcomes of higher education;

• To contribute to a common frame of reference for the provision of higher education and the assurance of quality within the EHEA.

What the ESG offer

• Generic, not specific, standards and guidelines;

• A view of what should be done, not how it should be done;

• A source of assistance and guidance

What the ESG are NOT

• Prescriptive

• Detailed Procedures

• A European quality assurance system

• ‘Quality Assurance’ in Higher Education does not have a single purpose, a single method, or a single operational definition

• It can, and does, mean many different things in different contexts

ESG Part 1: Internal Quality Assurance

• 1.1 Policy and procedures for quality assurance• 1.2 Approval, monitoring and periodic review of

programmes and awards• 1.3 Assessment of students• 1.4 Quality assurance of teaching staff• 1.5 Information systems• 1.6 Public Information

ESG Part 2: external quality assurance• 2.1Use of internal quality assurance procedures• 2.2 Development of exernal quality assurance

processes• 2.3 Criteria for decisions• 2.4 Processes fit for purpose• 2.5 Reporting• 2.6 Follow-up procedures• 2.7 Periodic Reviews• 2.8 System-wide analyses

ESG Part 3: external quality assurance agencies

• 3.1 Use of external quality assurance procedures for higher education

• 3.2 Official Status• 3.3 Activities• 3.4 Resources• 3.5 Mission statement• 3,6 Independence• 3.7 External quality assurance criteria and processes

used by the agencies• 3.8 Accountability procedures

Major challenges• Institutions• Formalisation of quality assurance systems• Student assessment (including comparability, consistency and fairness)• Information systems• QA of teachers• Relating quality culture to quality assurance

• Agencies• Clarity of purpose• Professionalism of expert panels• Use of students• Reporting• Independence

Implementation questions

• Organic development or external imposition?

• Support or hindrance for autonomy and ‘quality culture’?

• Total compliance or acceptable variations?

• Consequences of 45 local interpretations?

• How to limit the burden on institutions?

• Deadline 2010?

European Quality Assurance since Bergen

• ENQA• EU Recommendation• BFUG 2007 ‘Stocktaking Exercise’• Register of Quality Assurance Agencies• 1st QA Forum (Munich, November 2006)

This is the beginning, not the end, of the job; quality assurance is a

journey, not a destination

ENQA

European Association

for Quality Assurance in

Higher Education