1 / 11

Joint Degree Programmes: QA across national borders – ideas and strategies

Joint Degree Programmes: QA across national borders – ideas and strategies. Nick Harris Quality Assurance Agency for HE UK. QA: but for whom .. and for what?. Who is / should be interested? students universities (nation) states ‘stakeholders’ (employers etc)

gibson
Download Presentation

Joint Degree Programmes: QA across national borders – ideas and strategies

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. Joint Degree Programmes: QA across national borders – ideas and strategies Nick Harris Quality Assurance Agency for HE UK

  2. QA: but for whom .. and for what? Who is / should be interested? • students • universities • (nation) states • ‘stakeholders’ (employers etc) What is being quality assured ? • the study programme – what’s offered is delivered’ ? • the award – what’s required to ‘pass’ ? • what ‘graduates’ can actually do – ? • generic ‘stuff’ .. what ‘society’ and employers expect .. ? • specific ‘stuff’ .. knowledge & understanding ? licence to practice ‘ stuff ’

  3. Different places .. different (QA) approaches? whose award ? national awards .. or an institution’s accreditation or not ? • external accreditation ( by a [national] ‘agency’ ) .. or not • programme accreditation • institutional accreditation • ‘professional body’ accreditation • ‘quality labels’ .. a ‘good thing’ .. or not ? the bases of QA • ‘learning outcomes’ / ‘competencies’ • input measures .. curriculum content, hours, staff ‘quality’ etc • mixture of both

  4. What should QA consider? Should there be questions about .. • the [ type(s) of ] institution (s) ? • (just) what the programme intends to deliver ? .. and how ? • what the programme actually delivers ? • what the students think of it all ? (surveys etc) • what the students achieve ? .. • ( assessment .. and external examiners ) • ‘consistency’ .. is it needed or not ?

  5. Who should be involved? External • professional ‘inspectorate’ / peer reviewers ? • academics and pedagogical experts only ? • administrators and ‘quality professionals’ ? • student(s) (on the panel) ? • stakeholders ? Internal .. • teaching / research staff • administrators • students • alumni

  6. What makes a joint ..?.. s different / special ? • an integrated programme .. delivered in and enhanced by different contexts .. • not ‘academic tourism’ nor a ‘pick and mix’ but they come in a variety of forms • simplest .. students all study exactly same programme in 2 or more places .. students study in all of the partner institutions but not usually like that • more common .. core studied in 1 or more places .. and optional bits in different places • typically means that students will not study in all of the partner institutions delivering the programme • ( Joint ) degrees sometimes give specific legal rights

  7. Different places .. different rules ? YES .. BUT .. local needs to follow local laws / rules • and often these are only concerned with local ‘bits’ But an integrated programme should have integrated QA • this doesn’t mean the same QA everywhere

  8. The EUA Golden Rules • .. cooperation and coordination • .. [ know who is responsible for what decisions ] • .. identify key pre-conditions • .. should be guided by curiosity and [build] trust in what is different • .. based on transparency and honesty • .. trustworthy communications between all partners • .. sense of common ownership • .. shared academic values .. expressed as agreed quality principles • .. broad involvement and participation of all relevant stakeholders • Quality assurance is a shared and integrated responsibility of the network as well as a responsibility to be taken by each participating institution.

  9. Different places .. different rules .. .. some solutions ? QA the ‘bits’ at a local level and .. ‘ hope ’ .. ( ‘take care of the pennies and the pounds take care of themselves’ ) ? • but what about local differences in the QA of the ‘bits’ • do local differences really matter ? mutual recognition agreement amongst QA agencies .. • joint programme just ‘done’ once .. but by whose ‘rules’? something ‘in between’ .. • local rules ‘beefed up’ for joint programmes • to take some account of integration of QA across the network

  10. but there are two things we can be sure of ..good QA needs attention to detail .. .. and needs to be carried out with care ..

  11. Nick Harris n.harris@qaa.ac.ukEUA - institutional perspectives.. EMNEM .. European Masters New Evaluation Methodology .. ENQA - agency perspective .. TEEP II .. QA of trans-national joint masters

More Related