Quality Assurance

Quality Assurance • Procedures and Activities at • Ghent University Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Joke Claeys • Ghent University • Department of Educational Affairs • Division of Quality Management Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Internal Quality Management • Procedures: since 1993-94 • Student evaluation • - Structures: since about 1998 • . Central division for quality • management • . Each faculty has a quality cell Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Student evaluation • The evaluation of education is • considered as an essential part of • the quality system. • The users of the education, namely • the students, are ideally placed to • judge it. Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Student evaluation: what about ? (1) • An impression of the satisfaction of • students with the services offered • by the university • Specific: the perception of several • aspects of the teaching and learning • activities, namely: Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Student evaluation: what about ? (2) • The teaching process itself • The examinations • Supporting services: study • guidance, library, electronic learning • environment • Infrastructure: audiences, laboratories, • buildings,… Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Objectives of student evaluation (1) • Gives feedback upon a teacher/ • course/ program in order to change • or improve it • Supports decisions about • nomination and promotion Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Objectives of student evaluation (2) • Is required in the external assessment • Is a means for students to • systematically mention problems • and complaints • The information can be used for • comparative analyses inside the • institution Tempus Workshop Zagreb

When does student evaluation take place ? • At the start of a new semester • /academic year: • . All activities (also examination) • have finished • . Possible time gap between the • experiences and the report • . Possible influence of the examination Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Methods of student evaluation • Fase 1: Questioning the students • Questionnaires: prestructured answers • or open ended questions • anonymous • Interviews • Focus groups: panels of students • talking about the course, the teacher,… Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Fase 2: Composing action plans for change and improvement • Fase 3: Evaluation of the realisation of the action plans Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Role of the students • For long term cooperation, it’s important that they are aware of the 2nd and 3rd phase of the cycle. • No awareness of any follow up has a negative impact on cooperation Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Student evaluation: initial characteristics • Startup in 1993-94 • . One uniform questionnaire with • prestructured and open ended • questions is set up for the entire • institution • . Processing of the results was done • centrally Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Student evaluation: initial characteristics • . Results were sent to the respective • professors and the deans of the • faculties concerned • . Each faculty had an evaluation • commission, composed of the dean, 3 • professors and 2 students, which had an • obligation of discreteness Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Student evaluation: initial characteristics • . Tasks of this commission: • - take note of the results of the Qs • - make evaluation files • - make a synthetic report of each course, • containing recommendations and • corrections of the educational practice • - in a next round, follow the evolution of • the results and the adaptations made Tempus Workshop Zagreb

The main points of the initial questionnaire • Teaching • Course content • Practical training, laboratory work • Teaching and learning material • Examination • Coaching Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Evolution • 1. Since 1994, frames of reference are • made: cumulations of the results of • all the courses in a one year program • The result of a course is compared • to the whole of the study year Tempus Workshop Zagreb

2. Divergence in method and questioning • From 1996 faculties have asked to • change and add to the questionnaire for • several reasons • . Adding specific questions for specific • courses/programs • . Wanting a more detailed feedback upon • all the facets of teaching • . Wanting more information about the functioning • of the teacher in the totality of the study year,… Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Consequences: • A variety of questionnaires has • emerged, from the very detailed to • the very general -> comparability • -> validity • - Acceptance is improved Tempus Workshop Zagreb

3. Establishment of the Quality Cells • in the faculties(11 in total), 1998 • - Goal: support in all areas of • quality management • - Composition: one director of • education (prof), at least one • staff member, representants of • professors and students • - They take over the role of the • evaluation commission Tempus Workshop Zagreb

4. Method of questioning • - Originally: pen & paper, during a • populous course (1 hour) • - From 1999: electronic version; the • answering of the questions is an • individual affair, computer needed • - Now: 6 faculties pen & paper, 5 • electronic Tempus Workshop Zagreb

5. Rate of participation • - Participation has never been obliged. • - This remains a problem in some study programs • - The electronic form has a negative impact on • participation rates • - For 2003-04, the mean participation • rate for the whole institution was • about 50 %. Some programs score worse, some • better. Tempus Workshop Zagreb

6. Frequency of the evaluation per • course/teacher • - Initially all courses were evaluated • every 2 years • - Now, every teacher has to be • evaluated at least once in 3 years Tempus Workshop Zagreb

7. Use of the results • Since 1998 it’s practically an obligation to use the results of the 3 phases in the nomination/promotion files of professors. Use is made with great care. Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Examples of questions • A word version of an English • questionnaire is attached • Recently a summary of all the questions • for over 10 years has been made: • the next powerpoint presentation contains • some examples. Tempus Workshop Zagreb

Quality Assurance