How to discover and to assure
my quality????
Workshop in the framework of the 2nd
KNUST Summerschool
August 20 -24, 2012
Ton Vroeijenstijn
Quality Consultants
The Netherlands
Expected learning outcomes
After the training session, it is expected that you will be able:
 to describe the concepts of “quality” and “quality assurance” in Higher
Education
 to participate in the on-going discussion about quality
 Contribute to the implementation of a quality assurance system in
your university/faculty
 to discover the quality of your university/faculty by means of a self
assessment
 to prepare your programmes for an external assessment /
accreditation.
2
Program
Tuesday, 21 August 2012
Introduction into quality and quality assurance (09.30 -12.00 a.m)
Without QA, no university will survive (Why quality assurance is needed)
Are we speaking the same language?
Quality assurance instruments (13.00-16.30)
How to assure our quality?
An X-ray of your university
Wednesday 22 August 2012
How to discover the quality of our programmes? The instrument of Self assessment
(09.00-10.00)
A Road map to Quality’ Is the IUCEA handbook a valuable instrument for KNUST?
Open questions and discussion (11.30-12.00)
1
Without quality assurance, no university will
survive
4
Why Quality assurance is needed
 More students, less money
 Rise of private institutions
 Growing competition
 Changing expectations labour market
 Globalisation
 Tax payer want value for money
 “ Consumer” protection
QA in Industry
 TQM-Deming cycle
 ISO
 EFQM
The EFQM model
Quality Assurance in HE
 Assurance of quality in higher education is a process of
establishing stakeholder confidence that provision (input,
process and outcomes) fulfils expectations or measures
up to threshold minimum requirements. (Harvey, 2004,
Analytic Quality Glossary)
 Systematic, structured and continuous attention to quality
in terms of maintaining and improving quality. (
IUCEA handbook A Roadmap to quality)
Quality assurance system in HE
Important elements of the QA
system HE
 Self assessment
 External peer review
 (Public) report
 Formal decision (accreditation)
 Follow up
Individual assignment
(10 minutes)
You are a member of the QA-committee. It is your first meeting and the basic aim of the meeting is to come to a mutual understanding of
the concept “quality”

Describe how you define quality

Give the 5 most important criteria for the quality of an Institutions for HE

Give the 5 most important criteria for the quality of a curriculum
2
“Do we speak the same language?”
12
Basic questions concerning quality
 What is quality?
 Who are the players in the quality game?
 Can quality be measured? (Criteria and standards)
 Who set the standards?
 how do we know the quality?
13
HIGHER EDUCATION
Players in the quality field
 students
 staff
 Government / parliament
 employers/professional bodies
 society at large
 international forum
14
DIFFERENT VIEWS ON QUALITY
 Quality is the satisfaction of the client
 Quality as excellence
 Quality as additional value
 Quality as value for money
 Quality as fitness for purpose
 Quality as meeting threshold standards
15
Quality
 Absolute Quality does not exist
 There is no fixed definition of Quality
 View on Quality is changing in time
But we must find a workable concept, shared by all
16
Stakeholders and Quality
17
Quality is
• achieving our goals and aims in an
efficient and effective way (fitness for
purpose),
• assuming that the goals and aims
reflect the requirements/expectations of
all our stakeholders in an adequate way
(fitness of purpose).
18
Quality
 Is context based
 But there is always a threshold quality
International
standards
University of
the
Amazonas
University
Rio de
Janeiro
Berkeley
National
standards
19
Criteria & standards
 Criterion:
 the specification of elements against which a judgment
is made
 a specific aspect, essential for the quality
 Standard: the level that a criterion must reach. Normally:
adequate or satisfactory. Sometimes quantifiable
20
Criteria & standards
 Who is setting standards?
 Who is checking the standards?
 Because there is no absolute quality, there are no
absolute standards; standards are a matter of
negotiation.
 Criteria: valid in all circumstances
 Standards: context bound: Mc Donald and 3 stars
restaurant
21
Can Quality be measured?
 Tendency of governments to quantify quality aspects
 Use of performance indicators?
 But….performance indicators does not tell us all about
the quality
 “Performance indicators may harm the quality”
22
Performance indicators and quality assessment
Acidity
% alcohol
tannin
sediment
performance
indicators
smell
taste
expert team
23
Part 3
How to discover our quality??
24
Key-questions
 Do we do the right things?
 Do we do the right things in the right way?
 Do we have a thorough command of the process to realize
actually what we want?
 Do we really achieve what we want to achieve?
25
Instruments to discover the
quality
 Analysis of our QA system
 Analysis at institutional level
 Analysis at program level
Towards an IQA system
 Internal Quality Assurance is:
Systematic, structured and continuous attention to quality in
terms of maintaining and improving quality.
IUCEA
handbook A Roadmap to quality)
Implementation IQA-system

there is no one fit for all

IQA system is tailor made, but ….

Requirements set by out side agencies

Code of good practice ENQA, INQAAHE, UNESCO
28
CRITERIA FOR IQA
(enqa)
1
Policy and procedures for QA
2
Monitoring system
3
Periodic review of the core activities
4
Quality assurance of the student assessment
5
Quality assurance of staff
6
Quality assurance of facilities
7
Quality assurance of the student support
8
Self assessment
9
Internal audit
10
Information systems
11
Public information
12
A Quality handbook
29
Basic conditions for IQA
 As simple as possible and not bureaucratic
 Balance between centralized and decentralized
approach
 Supported by management
 Effective instruments
 Tuned to national and international developments
30
Problems with the introduction of IQA
 Lack of quality awareness
 Resistance against innovations
 Resistance of staff because they feel threatened
 Lack of knowledge about QA. Training is needed.
 resistance because it is time consuming and money consuming
(“We have other things to do”).
 It is difficult to define what quality is; the QA indicators are not
always clear;
 The purpose and the added value are not always clear
 Lack of clear communication between the staff and the
institutions management
31
To overcome the problems it is important to:
 Understand clearly what Quality Assurance means;
 Know the available instruments;
 Know about the requirements set for an IQA system
 Design the system very clearly and formulate the strategy to
introduce it
 Tune the system to external developments.
32
Individual assignment 2
(10 minutes)
You are still a member of the QA-committee. It is your 2nd
meeting and the basic aim of the meeting is to analyse what is
already done for Quality Assurance and to discuss the
possibility foir introducing the IQA model.
Questions:
 What elements are already in place in the university?
 Is the model useful in your situation to analyse your activities
concerning quality assurance?
 Which activities belongs to the responsibility of the central
management? Which one to the responsibilities of the faculty?
What are joint activities?
An institutional self assessment
 Provide us information about the performance of the
institution
 Offer the possibility to define clearly our profile
 Input for strategic planning
How to discover the quality of
our programs??
 A program is defined as a coherent set of courses
leading to a certain degree (bachelor or master).
 We may call the program also a curriculum
 It is not only about the content, but also about the
process and the boundary conditions
CONDITIONS FOR SELF ANALYSIS
A self assessment:
 should never be felt as threatening
 aims at improvement and enhancement
 need a broad support; Everybody has to be involved.
 Need support of the management
 demands a good organisation.
 is an analysis supported by the whole faculty
 Not everyone has to agree with all the points in the selfassessment report.
39
The guide for analysis
 Look at the given criteria and explanation
 Describe the situation
 Give a critical analysis
 Are you satisfied with the situation
 If not what you are you planning to do?
 Look for evidence that you are meeting the criteria
 Give the weak and strong points
40
Strengths and weaknesses analysis
1
1
Goals and objectives; expected learning outcomes
2
Programme content
3
Programme specification
4
Programme organisation
5
Didactic concept/teaching/learning strategy
6
Student assessment
7
Staff quality
8
Quality of the support staff
9
Student profile
10
Student advice/support
2
3
4
5
6
7
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
41
The 7-point scale read as follows
 1= absolutely inadequate; immediate improvements
must be made
 2= inadequate, improvements necessary
 3= inadequate, but minor improvements will make it
adequate
 4= adequate as expected
 5= better than adequate
 6= example of good practice
 7= excellent
42
The follow-up of the self-assessment
 In many cases followed by accreditation
 If not: organize an inter-collegial assessment
 Outcomes of the SWOT-analysis is used for a quality
plan
 Each year check of the quality plan
43
The IUCEA handbook
The quality project East
Africa
 June 2006 workshop “Supporting a regional QA
initiative” organised by IUCEA an DAAD
 Developing handbook
 Training QA officers
 2008 -2009: 23 universities SA+External
 2009-2010: second cohort
 2011: external evaluation of the project
 2012-2013 3rd cohort
Participants in the quality project East Africa
Why an IUCEA quality handbook was
seen as needed
Development in the region of
 a shared idea of quality
 harmonized internal quality assurance systems
 a shared idea about criteria and standards
 shared ideas about the accreditation framework
47
A Road Map to quality
 Initiative of the IUCEA 2006, supported by DAAD and HRK of Germany
 Based
 on documents and experiences of the national regulatory bodies in East Africa
 Based on similar developments in South-East Asia, Central America and
Europe
 Editorial board with members of the standing committee of the IUCEA
 Discussion of drafts at the different workshops
 5th draft used by the 1st cohort of universities
 Revised draft (4 volumes ) by 2nd cohort
 Endorsed by IUCEA and official publication June 2009 (www.iucea.org)
48
Contents of the handbook
 Volume 1
Guidelines for Self- assessment at program level aims at the
faculty/department offering an instrument to learn more about the quality of
the programs at offer by means of an effective self assessment at program
level
 Volume 2:
Guidelines for external assessmentexplains the procedures and processes
for an external assessment at program level. The specific target group is the
external expert team, but also the faculty/department to be assessed.
 Volume 3:
Guidelines for Self-assessment at institutional level aims especially at the
central management of an institution and offers an instrument to discover
more about the quality of the institution
 Volume 4:
The implementation of a Quality Assurance system aims at all level of an
institution, but is especially useful for the Quality Assurance coordinators
for the development and installation of an Internal Quality Assurance
49
system
How to use the handbook
1. The handbook is not forcing an institution to apply
fixed standards and ideas
2. It is voluntary, but…….. members of IUCA should
play the rules of the game
3. For private institutions: it will help to be in line with
international developments
4. The handbook offers a toolkit for quality
assurance and quality improvement.
50
1.
Central management can use the handbook to discuss and implement a
quality policy
2.
The Quality-officer can use the handbook to promote quality assurance
in the institution and to facilitate the quality process in the university. The
handbook contains basic materials for training sessions.
3.
Faculty deans can use the instrument for self assessment at program
level and provide staff and students with basic background information
4.
Staff and students can use the handbook for better understanding of the
need of quality assurance and also for a better understanding of the
instruments.
.
51
Assignment for the case study
 You are a member of a committee, installed by the
Senate, to develop ideas about the implementation of
Quality assurance in your institution. You are invited to
write a report for the Senate with a strategic plan.
 The Senate made clear you must make an analysis of
the current situation and see what should be done to
get a robust QA-system
 Furthermore, the Senate like to organise in 2013 some
program evaluations and in 2014 an institutional self
evaluation.