1 / 30

Quality - what are we measuring?

Quality - what are we measuring?. Jim Murdoch, University of Glasgow European Law Faculties Association. I keep six honest serving men. What? - measuring-rods Why? - rationale When? - change through time How? - methodology Where? Who ? - appointment of reviewers

aiko-woodard
Download Presentation

Quality - what are we measuring?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Quality - what are we measuring? Jim Murdoch, University of Glasgow European Law Faculties Association

  2. I keep six honest serving men... • What? - measuring-rods • Why? - rationale • When? - change through time • How? - methodology • Where? • Who? - appointment of reviewers • Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)

  3. Why not ?

  4. What is quality assurance? • ‘inspection, compliance, bureaucracy, report writing, form-filling, self-justification, standardisation, piles of unread [paper], and procedures of such baroque (even, on occasion, rococo) elaboration that they resemble the wilder architectural fantasies of the 18th century Tsars’ • Chief Executive, QAA [UK], October 2004

  5. What is quality assurance? • Stratification - competition between law schools • Academic life as ‘nasty, brutish and (for the non-productive) short’ - competition between individuals • Wasteful of academic time - detracting from teaching and research • Brownsword, [1994] 21 JoLaw &Soc 529-544

  6. Why?

  7. What is quality assurance? • ‘It is a way of defining and securing good learning through effective support for students. It is a chance to demonstrate… the transmission of knowledge and the development and transformation of individuals is recognised and discharged professionally’. • Chief Executive, QAA [UK], October 2004

  8. What is quality assurance? • Collective achievement • Responsiveness • Recognising success • Accountability to ‘stakeholders’ • Enhances mobility

  9. How?

  10. Methodology • QA is a means to an end, not an end in itself. • The more paper generated in the name of QA, the less is likely to be read or understood. Less should be more. • There is no justification for more ‘bureaucracy’. • Chief Executive, QAA [UK], October 2004

  11. Methodology • Development of agreed framework • length / intensity (credit scheme) • content : knowledge / skills (‘benchmarking’) • Self-assessment • Peer review • Peer assessment • accreditation / grading / consultancy / identification of ‘best practice’

  12. What?

  13. What are we measuring? • Subject provision and overall aims • Curriculum • Teaching and learning • Learning resources • Teaching quality enhancement • Assessment and achievement • Student support

  14. Subject provision and overall aims • Overall aims and intended learning outcomes of the programme? • Appropriateness of aims/ILOs in terms of developments in learning and teaching • Do staff and students understand aims and ILOs?

  15. Subject provision and overall aims • Aims are implicit, not explicit • ILOs are not stated, or fail to spell out development of knowledge / skills (generic and law-specific) / or the inculcation of attitudes and values • Staff and students do not know/understand

  16. Curriculum • Effectiveness of curricular content and design in achieving ILOs • Academic and intellectual progression within the curriculum • Inclusion of recent developments in the subject; and reflection of best practice in pedagogy

  17. Curriculum • Input-driven curriculum & student overload • No conceptualising (core; contextual; legal values; professional) [ACLEC Report] • No progression through the programme; and recent developments ignored/avoided

  18. Teaching and learning • Effectiveness of teaching and learning in relation to aims and curriculum • Range and appropriateness of teaching methods employed • Student participation & workload

  19. Teaching and learning • Traditional teaching methods (didactic) & not ‘student-centred learning’ • No proper link between T&L and assessment • Student workload not properly addressed

  20. Learning resources • Teaching and support resources (physical, human and material) • Effectiveness of utilisation (including induction, mentoring and staff development).

  21. Learning resources • Unfavourable staff-student ratios • Inadequate accommodation / support resources (library/IT/audio-visual) & support staff • Inappropriate academic staff deployment / lack of staff development

  22. Teaching quality enhancement • Effectiveness of evaluation and use of quantitative data and qualitative feedback • Commitment to enhancement and continuous improvement • Constant review / remedial action in respect of: curriculum, teaching and learning, resources and assessment.

  23. Teaching quality enhancement • No evidence of quality control and enhancement mechanisms such as: • course review through course questionnaires • staff-student liaison committees • procedure for scrutiny of new course procedures

  24. Assessment and achievement • Effectiveness of assessment in measuring achievement of ILOs • Discrimination between different categories of performance • Effectiveness of assessment in promoting student learning (& use of diagnostic and formative assessment)

  25. Assessment and achievement • ‘One size fits all’ assessment • Assessment driving surface-learning • Reliability and validity questionable

  26. Student support • Academic support strategies • Recruitment and induction • Overall academic guidance and supervision

  27. Student support • Poor drop-out / completion rates • Poor recruitment and induction processes • ‘One size fits all’ support

  28. BUT… does it work?

  29. Methodology • Fairness - consistency? • Reliability - methodology? • Utility - competing purposes (vfm / encouraging improvement / public info)? • Brownsword, [1994] 21 JoLaw &Soc 529-544

  30. What should be measured? - the next phase • Institutional audit • ‘Enhancement’ strategies • ‘Employability’ strategies

More Related