Internal quality assurance at university college cork
Download
1 / 57

Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 167 Views
  • Uploaded on

Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork. Dr. Norma Ryan University College Cork – National University of Ireland Cork. Dr. Norma Ryan. Biochemist Director, Quality Promotion Unit, UCC Irish Bologna Expert Past-Chair, Irish Higher Education Network

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork' - foy


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Internal quality assurance at university college cork

Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork

Dr. Norma Ryan

University College Cork – National University of Ireland Cork


Dr norma ryan
Dr. Norma Ryan

  • Biochemist

  • Director, Quality Promotion Unit, UCC

  • Irish Bologna Expert

  • Past-Chair, Irish Higher Education Network

  • Member, Governing Authority, UCC

  • Member, Senate of National University of Ireland

  • Member, Irish Universities Association Quality Committee


Internal quality assurance at university college cork
UCC

  • A University located in the South of Ireland, with 18,000+ students, and one of the highest annual research income of all the Irish Universities

  • Has a particular focus on delivering Fourth Level Ireland (graduate studies) and lifelong learning


Mission
Mission

  • To create, preserve, and communicate knowledge and to enhance cultural, social and economic life locally, regionally and globally.

    VISION

  • To be a research-led university of international standing with impact in Munster, Ireland, Europe and the world


Colleges of ucc
Colleges of UCC

  • Arts, Celtic Studies & Social Sciences

  • Business & Law

  • Medicine & Health

  • Science, Engineering & Food Science


Universities act 1997
Universities Act 1997

  • Legislation that established all Irish Universities as independent autonomous institutions

  • Requires all Irish Universities to put in place quality assurance procedures


Section 35 quality assurance
Section 35: Quality Assurance

  • To promote the improvement of the quality of education of students and all related activities

  • Responsibility for process rests with the University


National agenda
National Agenda

  • In 2003 Irish Universities Association published:

    A Framework for Quality in Irish Universities

  • In 2007 second edition published

  • Principles outlined in Framework compatible with the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education


Irish universities quality board
Irish Universities Quality Board

  • Independent body established by Irish Universities in 2003

  • Purpose: to assist the Universities in the quality agenda and to conduct reviews of the effectiveness of the Quality Improvement /Quality Assurance reviews on behalf of the Universities.


Qi qa
QI/QA

  • QI: Quality Improvement

  • QA: Quality Assurance


What is quality
What is Quality?

  • ‘Fitness for Purpose’

  • ‘Fitness of Purpose’

  • ‘Making the best use of resources available’

  • ‘added value’


Quality assurance
Quality Assurance

  • Ensuring we do what we say we are doing

  • Ensuring what we do is a ‘quality’ job


Examples of qa
Examples of QA

  • Peer review of research

  • External Examiner system

  • Accreditation of degrees

  • Employability of graduates


Qi qa procedures
QI/QA Procedures

  • Focussed on quality improvement with rigour of quality assurance as a starting position

  • Well-established and documented

  • Reviewed internally and amended as deemed appropriate, e.g.

    • Implementation of detailed procedures for development and approval of Quality Improvement Plans following quality reviews.

  • Developed and amended using a collegial approach


Quality reviews
Quality Reviews

  • Focus on ownership of review by unit under review

  • Focus on all activities of unit

  • All types of unit (academic, administrative, support service) reviewed under same principles and guidelines


Strategy in ucc
Strategy in UCC

  • Quality Promotion Committee of Governing Body

  • Reviews scheduled over 6 year period by Quality Promotion Committee


Quality promotion committee
Quality Promotion Committee

  • Committee of Governing Body with executive authority

  • Chaired by President of UCC

  • Has representatives of

    • Academic Staff

    • Administrative and Support Staff

    • Governing Body external members

    • Students


Quality promotion unit
Quality Promotion Unit

  • Facilitates the implementation of Quality Improvement/Quality Assurance (QI/QA) procedures in UCC

  • Assists in the Follow-Up procedures following a QI/QA review of a unit


Methodology
Methodology

  • Self-Assessment

  • Peer Review

    • Institutional/National/International

  • Follow-Up

    • On-going Quality Improvement


Reviews must involve
Reviews must involve

  • Students

  • Staff of institution

  • Employers

  • Past graduates/Alumni

  • Other stakeholders


Questionnaires
Questionnaires

  • Used to obtain views of staff, students and others

  • Available on web sites

  • Some are linked specifically to guidelines for preparation of Self-Assessment Report


Evaluation process 1
Evaluation Process 1

  • Appointment of unit co-ordinating committee

    • Guidelines on web site

  • Conduct of surveys of opinions of stakeholders

    • Questionnaires

    • Focus meetings

    • ????

  • Assistance can be provided by QPU upon request


Evaluation process 2
Evaluation Process 2

  • Nomination of members of Peer Review Group

    • External advisor to nominate a panel of external experts.

    • Unit to nominate a panel of external stakeholders

    • QPC to appoint internal members

    • Unit to be offered an opportunity to identify any conflict of interest prior to letters of invitation


Evaluation process 3
Evaluation Process 3

  • Appointment of internal and external peer reviewers by Quality Promotion Committee

  • Production of Self-Assessment Report

  • Agreement of timetable for conduct of visit


Evaluation process 5
Evaluation Process 5

  • Peer Review Visit & Report

  • Follow-up action

  • On-going quality improvement


Self assessment report
Self-Assessment Report

  • Includes assessment by students

  • All staff of department must be involved

  • Includes views of past graduates

  • Incorporates views from

    • accrediting bodies

    • External Examiners

    • internal stakeholders

    • external stakeholders


Self assessment report1
Self-Assessment Report

  • Includes analysis of

    • Teaching

    • Learning

    • Research

    • Scholarly activity

  • Includes commentary on actions taken for improvement since last Quality Review and Research Quality Review


Self assessment
Self Assessment

  • Às appropriate, must include assessment of

    • Staff profile

    • Teaching

    • Research

    • Services provided

    • standards

    • Support services, including facilities

    • Contribution to society


Structure of sar
Structure of SAR

  • Core: ‘Overall Analysis & Recommendations’

  • Appendices: contain factual details


Overall analysis recommendations
Overall Analysis & Recommendations

  • Succinct and comprehensive

  • Details Mission of Department

  • Details Aims & Objectives

  • Summary of Unit activities

  • Relates all activities to Mission and Strategic Plan of UCC


Overall analysis recommendations contd
Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd)

  • Benchmarking

  • Details of how you plan to show you have achieved your Aims & Objectives

  • How is quality measured?


Overall analysis recommendations contd1
Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd.)

How is success measured?

Emphasis on strategies for improvement of quality


Summary of department
Summary of Department

  • 1 page executive summary on each of following:

    • Department Structure and Organisation

    • Teaching

    • Research

    • Consultancy Activities

    • Public Profile


Swot analysis
SWOT Analysis

  • S - Strengths

  • W - Weaknesses

  • O - Opportunities

  • T - Threats

  • All staff involved

  • Leads to recommendations for improvement

  • Support for facilitator available from QPU upon request


Evaluation of teaching
Evaluation of Teaching

  • Evaluation by students

  • Questionnaires

  • Focus groups

  • Views of external stakeholders

  • Teaching portfolios

  • Peer review


Evaluation of research
Evaluation of Research

  • Peer reviewed publications

  • Books/chapters in books

  • Supervision of graduate students

  • Research grant income

  • Other scholarly activity


Appendices academic units
Appendices - Academic Units

  • Unit Details

  • Profiles of all staff - academic, administrative and support

  • Unit Planning and Organisation

  • Teaching and Learning

    • strategy

    • Reports of extern examiners

    • Reports from accrediting bodies. E.g. Medical Council


Appendices contd
Appendices (contd.)

  • Research & Scholarly Activity

    • Metrics from Research Quality Review

    • Strategy

  • Staff Development Objectives

  • External Relations

  • Support Services

  • Methodology used in preparing Report

  • Additional documentation that Unit may wish to submit


Appendices admin central service units
Appendices - Admin & Central Service Units

  • Unit Details

  • Profiles of all staff

  • Unit Planning and Organisation

  • List of Client Groups for Unit

  • Service Standards for the Unit

  • Staff Development Objectives

  • Unit Budget

  • Methodology used in preparing Report


Documentation
Documentation

  • Provided to review group by QPU:

    • Strategic Plans

      • UCC

      • College/Operational Area

      • Teaching & Learning

      • Research

      • Student Experience

    • Student statistics

    • Research profiles

    • Financial details

    • Previous Quality Review Report and Follow-Up report


Documentation contd
Documentation (contd)

  • Research Quality Review Report

  • Actions taken by Unit/University following Research Quality Review


Examples of other documents
Examples of other Documents

  • Policy documents produced by Unit

  • Procedural Manuals

  • Guidelines/Manuals/Handbooks

  • Audit reports produced by external bodies


Peer review
Peer Review

  • Evaluation of Self-Assessment Report

  • Site Visit to meet with staff and students

  • Report on findings

  • Recommendations for improvement

    • To Unit

    • To University


Peer review report
Peer Review Report

  • Comments on findings

  • Recommendations

    • Acted upon by unit

    • Acted upon by institution


Follow up 1
Follow-up - 1

  • Discussion

  • Draw up Quality Improvement Plan based on recommendations

  • Implementation


Follow up 2
Follow-up - 2

  • On-going quality improvement

  • Re-visit one to 2 years later to discuss developments

  • Re-visit six years later in a formal review


What happens report
What happens report?

  • Review Report is considered by

    • Staff of Department

    • Quality Promotion Committee of Governing Body

    • Budget decision makers in UCC

    • Governing Body


Recommendations in report
Recommendations in report

  • Discussed with Head of Unit and Head of College/Vice-President and the Director of Quality Promotion Unit

  • A Quality Improvement Plan is agreed upon and acted upon by unit in first instance


Publication of report
Publication of Report

  • Review Report is published on University web site.

  • Annual Report of Quality Promotion Committee to Governing Body also published. Report provides a synthesis of findings and issues as well as full details on each review


Follow up
Follow-up

  • Unit submits a report on actions taken and outcomes within 18 months of completion of the review to the Quality Promotion Committee

  • Report on progress is considered by Governing Body and published.


Review of qi qa process
Review of QI/QA process

  • A major review of the process and its effectiveness in UCC and the other Irish Universities was conducted in 2005 by the EUA.

  • The review was commissioned by the IUQB and the HEA on behalf of the Universities.

  • The Report endorsed and commended the quality processes in place.


Major successes
Major Successes

  • Acceptance of quality review process

  • Appreciation of need for self-reflection

  • Embedding of a quality culture in all areas of the university initiated

  • Ownership by unit being reviewed seen as a benefit to unit

  • Follow-up procedures ensuring actions taken on recommendations for improvement


Challenges
Challenges

  • To reduce the workload for departments/programme boards of study/units in gathering data

  • To ensure University acts on recommendations requiring resources


Activities
Activities

  • Development of thematic reviews, e.g. of quality of total research activity of University

  • Complete second cycle of quality reviews

  • Development of improved University Information Systems providing accurate data


Embedding a quality culture
Embedding a Quality Culture

  • Role of Director of Quality Promotion

  • Emphasis on quality enhancement

  • Remit wider than management of internal quality reviews

  • Link to strategic planning

  • Performance indicators

  • Institutional data and research

  • Funding of Quality Improvement Projects


Web sites
Web sites

  • http://www.ucc.ie/quality

  • http://www.iuqb.ie

  • www.eua.be

  • www.nqai.ie

  • http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/bologna/