Subject-specific International Accreditation for Technical Profiles

Subject-specific International Accreditation for Technical Profiles

Mila Zarkh November 6-8, 2014 Lviv

I. Who we are and what we do

• One of the first subject-specific agencies in Europe (1999)

• Expertise in international accreditation of programmes from the fields of Engineering, Informatics, Natural Sciences and Mathematics (as well as a range of further profiles)

• European and Global player: award of European Quality Labels (EUR-ACE by ENAEE, EURO-Inf® by EQANIE, Eurobachelor/Euromaster by ECTNA); accreditation and consulting worldwide

Experience in capacity building and quality development: Support of newly established agencies

Technical Committees – fields of ASIIN expertise

3

Actual number of Technical Committees:

Techn. Comm. 8

Agricultural and

Nutritional Sciences

Techn. Comm. 8

Agricultural and


Techn. Comm. 1

Mechanical Engineering/

Process Engineering

Techn. Comm. 1


Process Engineering

Techn. Comm. 2

Electrical Engineering/

Information Technology

Techn. Comm. 2



Techn. Comm. 3

Civil Engineering/

Surveying

Techn. Comm. 3

Civil Engineering/

Surveying

Techn. Comm. 5

Physical Technologies, Materials and Process

Engineering

Techn. Comm. 5


Engineering

Techn. Comm. 6

Industrial Engineering

Techn. Comm. 6


Techn. Comm. 7

Information Management

Techn. Comm. 7


Techn. Comm. 4


Techn. Comm. 4


3Persons fromUniversities

3Persons fromuniversities of

applied sciences

3Persons from

industry

1-2Student members

Techn. Comm. 9

Chemistry

Techn. Comm. 9

Chemistry

Techn. Comm. 10

Biology

Techn. Comm. 10

Biology

Techn. Comm. 11

Geosciences

Techn. Comm. 11

Geosciences

Techn. Comm. 12

Mathematics

Techn. Comm. 12

Mathematics

Techn. Comm. 13

Physics

Techn. Comm. 13

Physics

Actual number of Technical Committees:

Techn. Comm. 8

Agricultural and


Techn. Comm. 8

Agricultural and


Techn. Comm. 1


Process Engineering

Techn. Comm. 1


Process Engineering

Techn. Comm. 2



Techn. Comm. 2



Techn. Comm. 3

Civil Engineering/

Surveying

Techn. Comm. 3

Civil Engineering/

Surveying

Techn. Comm. 5


Engineering

Techn. Comm. 5


Engineering

Techn. Comm. 6


Techn. Comm. 6


Techn. Comm. 7


Techn. Comm. 7


Techn. Comm. 4


Techn. Comm. 4


3Persons fromUniversities

3Persons fromuniversities of

applied sciences

3Persons from

industry

1-2Student members

Techn. Comm. 9

Chemistry

Techn. Comm. 9

Chemistry

Techn. Comm. 10

Biology

Techn. Comm. 10

Biology

Techn. Comm. 11

Geosciences

Techn. Comm. 11

Geosciences

Techn. Comm. 12

Mathematics

Techn. Comm. 12

Mathematics

Techn. Comm. 13

Physics

Techn. Comm. 13

Physics

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013e

10 68 169 288564

846

12401498

17792064

2439

28793244

As of: 28.02.2013

ASIIN Accreditation Activities

4

ASIIN recognized this as a specialized agency in a early stage:

With the replacement of the framework regulations, it develops together with its stakeholders our so-called TCs.

More than 1600 European engineering

programs are accredited with a EUR-ACE label.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

November 2013

Plan 2014

ASIIN as leading partner in developing pan-European LO schemes (I)

• TC 01 (Mechanical Engineering/Process Engineering)

• TC 02 (Electrical Engineering/Information Technology)

• TC 03 (Civil Engineering, Surveying and Architecture)

• TC 05 (Physical Technologies, Materials and Processes)

• TC 06 (Industrial Engineering)

5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2011 2012 2013

Mo

re t

han

85

lab

els

in 9

co

un

trie

s

EQANIE

ASIIN

British Computer Society

ANECA

ASIIN takes a lead in developing pan-European LO schemes (II)

• TC 04 (Informatics/Computer Science)

• TC 07 (Business Informatics/ Information Systems)

6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Jahr

ASIIN

ECTNA

Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC / UK & Ireland)

Società Chimica Italiana (SCI / Italy)

Uniwersytecka Komisja Akredytacyjna (UKA / Poland)

ASIIN takes a lead in developing pan-European LO schemes (III)

• TC 09 (Chemistry)

• TC 10 (Life Sciences)

• TC 11 (Geosciences)

• TC 12 (Mathematics)

• TC 13 (Physics)

7 ASIIN-Jahrestagung 2013

ASIIN is the only field specific agency which is offering the entire range of accreditation of all MINT-areas.

International degree programme accredited

Joint-Programme accredited

Accreditation Request received / procedure started

As of: 28.01.2013

More than 100 accredited degree programmes worldwide

ASIIN e.V. Accreditation Activities

8

Stand: 28.01.2013

ASIIN-Participation in DAAD-projects in QA system development

Tempus-projects (e.g.: PICQA: Promoting Internationalization and Comparability of Quality Assurance in Caucasus area)

ASIIN-experts participation in QA procedures (z.B.: Slovenia, Montenegro, Lithuania, Croatia)

ASIIN International Projects

9

Possible synergies for cooperation with Technical Universities of Ukraine

10

• Consultation on the process of setting up the quality assurance agency

• Consultation/workshops on enhancement of the quality assurance and monitoring systems

• Joint application for ERASMUS+ projects

• International accrediation – with renowned European quality labels

Possible procedure for building up a QA Agency

11

• designing a process map for the Agency

• consulting on the development of the criteria:

International best practices adjusted to local needs

• consulting on QA principles, policies and establishement of a QA-culture

Capacity building for staff, peers, and accreditation council

Ukrainian-Polish Forum orgnaized by the

Rectors‘ Association of Technical HEI of Ukraine and of the

Rectors‘ Conference of Technical Universities of the

Republic of Poland

held from November 6-8 2014 in Lviv

Mila Zarkh, M.A. Project Manager at CEENQA

Quality assurance

in Higher Education:

the international dimension

I. CEENQA: who we are and what we do

• founded in 2001 (oldest QA-agencies network in Europe)

• registered in Düsseldorf, Germany

• non-governmental and non-profit organization

• Main goal: “the cooperation between the member

organizations in the field of quality assurance in higher

education and contributing towards the development of the

European Higher Education Area”

• Membership to CEENQA: open to organizations recognized

by the educational authorities of their countries as national or

regional QAAs in higher education

November 7, 2014 Mila Zarkh, M.A. 2

Structure of the presentation

• I. Who we are and what we do:

CEENQA and ASIIN

International experience / fields of expertise

• II. Two organisations – double synergy effect for

Ukraine

Why and how to partner with us

• III. International accreditation – a detailed overview

(additional part)


4

I. Who we are…

• Albania (APAAL)

• Austria (AQ)

• Bosnia and Herzegovina (HEA, HEAA)

• Bulgaria (NEAA)

• Croatia (ASHE)

• Czech Republic (ACCR)

• Estonia (EKKA)

• Germany (ACQUIN, ASIIN, FIBAA, AHPGS)

• Hungary (HAC)

• Kosovo (KAA)

• Kazakhstan (IQAA)

• Lithuania (SKVC)

• Latvia (AIKNC)

• North Cyprus (YÖDAK)

• Poland (UKA, PKA)

• Romania (ARACIS)

• Russia (NAA, NCPA, AKKORK)

• Slovakia (AC)

• Slovenia (SQAA)

• Turkey (TEPDAD)

28 members in 20 countries + 1 European member:

• European network EAPAA

9

CEENQA’s links to other organizations

• CEENQA is ENQA Affiliate since 2006 (cooperation agreement)

• CEENQA has Cooperation agreements with – ECA, 2008

– INQAAHE, 2008

• Member agencies: – All are Bologna Signatories

– ENQA members: 14 agencies

– INQAAHE members: 19 agencies

– ECA members: 5 agencies

– EQAR members: 10 agencies

... and what we do

• A network of agencies in Eastern Europe: QA and quality

development in transformation contexts

• Annual meetings on most up-to-date topics and challenges of

the QA world

• Joint data base of experts in progress

• Joint European Projects (TEMPUS: BIHTEK, ALIGN,

BHQFHE; UNESCO Scoping Study; ESF-project QUALITAS )

• Regular exchange via e-mail , newsletter and forum 5

6

Expertise in international projects and capacity

building

BIHTEK Benchmarking as a Tool for Improving HE

Performance

ALIGN Achieving and Checking the Alignment Between

Academic Programs and Qualifications Frameworks

(Armenia, Russia, Ukraine)

BHQFHE

Bosnia and Herzegovina Qualification Framework

for Higher Education

UNESCO

Study

A consulting request from INQAAHE – Follow-up of

the QA results after the political shift

QUALITAS Institutional accreditation of Romanian Universities

II. Possible synergies for Ukraine

For the future agency:

• Joint Erasmus Plus projects – deadline in February 2014!

• Benefit from data base of experts

• Benefit from regular exchange with other agencies

For the universities:

• Attendance of annual meetings

• Request for capacity building workshops on Internal Quality

Assurance possible


Additional material

I CEENQA‘s analysis of good practicesI. CEENQA s analysis of good practicesand weaknesses of quality assurancein Eastern Europe

II ASIIN dit ti dII. ASIIN accreditation procedures

November 7, 2014 Mila Zarkh, M.A.8

Key insights from the QA in Eastern Europe

After two decades of QA in the region, there is already

• progressing emancipation, internationalization and

independence of QA

• partly development of National Qualifications

Frameworks and sectorial frameworks

• good follow-up procedures

• new approaches to funding and generation of

alternative incomes: Consulting to HEIs, further

projects, donations etc.

10

Positive tendencies

• Inclusion of international experts in the Governing

Boards of the QAAs

diversity and impartiality

reducing conflict of interests;

• key stakeholder and international peers in the external

reviewers’ panels (bilingual/reports in EN enhance

international recognition)

Good stakeholder inclusion in various QA activities;

• National Qualifications Frameworks in most countries

11

Positive tendencies

• Evaluation procedures correspond to the

international practices

• Accreditation criteria are developed by

benchmarking the international good practice

• Several East European agencies are already

externally reviewed (e.g. ENQA)

• Increased involvement of the EQAAs in the

international networks seems to be a trend.


Aspects for further improvement

• Governments and ministries’ interference EQA is still very

tangible

• first tools measuring and assessing alignment of study

programmes with these NQFs have been launched

most of the systems have not started the process of

alignment yet;

• Multiple QA tools – institutional registration and

accreditation, programme evaluation and accreditation,

attestation, monitoring, supervision etc. generally positive

diversity, BUT:

frequently duplicate work and increase the burden on

HEIs instead of using energies

13

Aspects for further improvement

• Better capacity building of the QAA staff members, peers and

IQA experts needed

• inadequate staffing to ensure system-wide research and

further enhancement of the system;

• risk of underfunding (lack of alternative revenue sources)

• direct transfer of international criteria without further

refinement to the local needs

• Further development of accountability mechanisms (IQA)

• Lack of inclusion of stakeholders into the decision-making

processes;

14

Any further question?

Your contact to CEENQA:

Mila Zarkh

Project Manager

Robert-Stolz-Straße 5

40470 Duesseldorf

Germany

Tel. +49 211 900 977-38

Fax.+49 211 900 977-99

[email protected]

www.asiin.de


mailto:[email protected]

http://www.asiin.de/

13

The accreditation process: a step-by-step guide

14

Additional information: Accreditation procedure according to ESG

Relevants areas for accreditation

1. The aims and learning outcomes of the study programme

2. Curriculum design

3. Teaching staff

4. Facilities and learning resources

5. Study process and students‘ performance assessment

6. Quality management

7. Time table of the study programme

8. Quality of research

Official Request

Contract

Self-Assessment draft

Application

Peer‘s final recommendation

Formal checkup

Submission of final self-assesment

Peer-Review Decision

Response to the report

Accreditation report - first version

On-site visit Technical Committee(s)

(Recommendation)

Accreditation Commission for Study Programs

(final decision)

Our programme certification procedure – state of the art elements

HEI must turn in the Accreditation Request

Discussion in ASIIN‘s Technical Committee(s)

HEI will receive tender letter

(including benefits, price and a proposed timeline)

Initiation of the Accreditation Process

• Self assessment report must be compiled by the university

• It is based on the internal QA-system

• Compilation takes 6-12 months to prepare

• Univesity staff (administrative and academic) needs to contribute content

Preparing the Self-Assessment

Preparation and discussion

of the draft of the self assessment

Turning in the final version

of the self assessment

Checkup & Finalizing

Preliminary meeting – discussion of first draft of the self assessment 1.

2. Final version of the self assessment

3. Questions of the auditors

The course of an accreditation process

• ASIIN has a pool of about 1,500 peers • Standard team for initial accreditation: 4 ASIIN peers representatives from

– Technical Universities or Universities (more research oriented; 1-2 peers)

– Universities of Applied Sciences (1-2 peers) – Industry (1 peer)

• Principles: – Independence – Expertise – Comprehensiveness – Authority

• If possible, appointment of foreign peers

A Peer Review - The Audit

Internal discussion of auditors

Discussion with representatives of institution‘s administration

Discussion with professors responsible for the development of the programme

Discussion with academic staff

Discussion with students

Review of exams (written, final, projects…)

Visitation of the institution (laboratories, library, …)

Final internal discussion of auditors

Final meeting with institution‘s representatives

The on-site visit

Audit and production of auditors‘ report

4.

5. Comments by university (submission of additional information material, if required)

6. Final recommendation by the auditors


Discussion in relevant Technical Committee(s) 7.

8. Discussion in the Accreditation Commission

Decision and conclusion


24

Submission of the final self assessment report • Audit (+8 weeks) • Audit report (+2 weeks) • Comments by the HEI (+4 weeks) • Recommendation of the peers (+1 week) • Recommendation of the Technical Committee(s)

(+4 weeks) Decision of the Accreditation Commission

(+2 weeks)

total duration: approx. 5-6 months

Time frame

Accreditation decision

Begin collecting data and implementing quality assurance processes immediately - five years to next accreditation visit!

Report and certificates delivered three (to four) weeks after the accreditation decision

Accreditation without reservations: Timeline

Accreditation decision

Fulfillment of requirements due: about nine months later

Four years to next accreditation visit!

Limited accreditation: Timeline

Accreditation as instrument of quality assurance

The accreditation process has a two-fold function as instrument of quality assurance:

• For the entire system of higher education, programme accreditation serves to uphold quality standards established within the relevant academic community (this explicitly includes research and industry) by identifying programmes that do not reach these standards.

• For the university, programme accreditation is an instrument of quality improvement by providing feedback on the achievements, on strengths and on room for improvement – each in relation to established and accepted standards.

27

Principle of peer review in accreditation

The accreditation process is based on the principle of peer review:

• Peer review is the process of subjecting one‘s work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field.

• Peer review requires a community of experts in a given field, who are qualified and able to perform impartial review.

28

Peer review in accreditation

• Peer-based reviews of degree programmes are conducted by “equals”, i. e. by colleagues from the relevant academic field(s).

• Review teams represent the academic community and prospective employers.

• Peers are involved on all levels of the accreditation process (review team, technical committees, programme accreditation commission).

29

30

ASIIN-Philosophy: learner centered approach

Educational Objectives

learning outcomes / competence

profile

job / career profiles

Input of HEI

support processes / framework conditions

e.g. student services,

staff resources,

infrastructure,

programme structure,

curriculum,

didactic concept

Outcome

correspondence of educational

objectives and learning outcomes

results of outcomes assessment and internal/external

evaluation

Assessment of the process: coherence of goals, input + outcomes

31

The procedure has two legs: internal & external assessment

internal / „self-“

assessment within the applicant

organisation against the standards

external assessment by peers & bodies of examining

organisation

SER / evidences

& indicators

Report

Certificate

Standards („criteria“, „requirements“)

Certification procedure

32

Cycling thinking – also in assessment procedures!

g g

act plan

act

check

do

check

plan

do

university

Corrective

action

requirements of stakeholders

university‘s own strategy

All systemic approaches to quality share the cyclic principle.

All assessment procedures should follow the cyclic logic:

Ask for the cycles!

Mila Zarkh, M.A.

ASIIN Consult

Project Manager // International Office

Phone +49 211 900 977-38

Fax +49 211 900 977-99

[email protected]

www.asiin.de

Robert-Stolz-Straße 5

40470 Duesseldorf

Germany

Thank you for your attention!

12

Subject-specific International Accreditation for Technical Profiles

Education

mathematics techn

physics techn

chemistry techn

biology techn

geosciences techn

industrial engineering

information management

nutritional sciences