european quality assurance register for higher education · 4/28/2017 · “review eqar's...
TRANSCRIPT
European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education
Planned Europe-wide database of external quality
assurance results
CEENQA Workshop: Ways Forward to Make External QA a More Efficient Process 28 April 2017, Zagreb
Melinda Szabo, EQAR Policy Analyst
Background – policy
Yerevan Communiqué 2015: § “By 2020 we are determined to achieve an EHEA [...] where
automatic recognition of qualifications has become a reality so that students and graduates can move easily throughout it”.
ESG 2.6 (Reporting) § Full reports by the experts should be published, clear and
accessible to the academic community, external partners and other interested individuals. […]
§ Accessibility of external quality assurance results is crucial
Background - EQAR
EQAR’s Strategic Plan 2013-2017: “Review EQAR's information policy towards different target groups (governments, agencies, institutions, students), in particular: […] Explore the feasibility of a database of evaluated and accredited institutions and programmes, linking with existing initiatives where possible.”
EQAR Self-Evaluation Report 2016: “To develop specifications for a possible database of quality assured higher education institutions or programmes (depending on the national system) [...]”
EQAR’s Work Plan 2016/17
Prepare a study and operational proposal including:
1. Assessment of needs, benefits and risks 2. Analysis of existing similar initiatives 3. Specifications, design proposal 4. Estimation of one-off implementation and long-term costs
Current Accessibility of external QA results
EQAR currently provides: § Information on national systems and registered QA agencies § Indirect access to agencies' reports & results, via their individual
websites
Existing difficulties: User-friendliness of agency websites
Information up-to-date
Understanding different external QA systems Language
Which agency?
Objective for the study and sources
:
§ Identify whether HE institution, or its programmes, were subject to external QA in line with ESG
§ Access to information and report on external QA § Reliable information on quality or how it is managed § Contextualising information (e.g. national system)
§ Survey of potential users (385 respondents from 48 EHEA and 21 non-EHEA countries or regions)
§ Survey of registered QA agencies (36 of 43) § Meetings with existing initiatives and experts
Starting point for the study:
Sources:
The work process…
Potential Users
Existing initiatives
Existing initiatives (2)
§ Mainly national & institutional databases used § QA-related information mostly cover particular country/region
§ Information from various agencies § National portals (e.g. Spain, Germany) § European: Qrossroads, EUR-ACE § Non-European examples (CHEA, USDE) è Benefit from experience & built on existing data
§ Information on higher education institutions § WHED, ETER, Anabin, U-Multirank, Learning Opportunities &
Qualifications è Useful as underlying database
Accessibility vs. usefulness of a database of EQA results
Fig.1. Accessibility of external QA decisions and reports (n=384)
Figure 2: Usefulness of a database of QA results (n=384)
69%
of S
omew
hat
acce
ssib
le
Feasibility
§ Starting points § Lean approach – only what is needed and readily available
§ Institutional level – list of programmes not feasible for all
§ Registered agencies dispose of information needed
§ Automated data delivery crucial
§ Connect with existing databases (national, Qrossroads)
§ Use existing database of HEIs for basic information
§ Avoid manual intervention
Functionality
Information to include
1) Info on the institution § Name (English &official
languages) § Country § Website § NQF and QF-EHEA levels
2) External QA procedure § Quality assurance agency § Description § Level
§ Decision § Status § Date § Valid until § Report(s) and decision(s) § If programme-level:
§ Name of the programme in official language(s) and English
§ Name of the qualification(s) awarded
§ Country (if different) § NQF and QF-EHEA level
Database Features
Historic record available
Search and browsing § HEI name § By country § By agency § By date § By type of review
Full download
Can be embedded into 3rd
-party applications
Updates of the database
Database of External QA results
Registered quality assurance agencies
European Tertiary Education Register (ETER)
Basic information: name, website, etc. Updated at least annually
National sources, registered agency,
or comparable
List of HEIs
For HEIs not in ETER
Information on external QA result Entered/uploaded when published Automatic upload (XML) or manual (web interface) No manual intervention by EQAR (except sanity checks)
36 of 48 EHEA countries, 94% of HEIs reviewed by EQAR-reg. QAAs (2015)
Costs
One-off realisation costs Long-term annual costs
Agencies: • Participate in technical design • Adjust own database • Create automatic export/link EQAR staff: • Existing staff • + Dedicated staff member Subcontract: • Data model design • Technical concept • Back-end programming • Web development EUR 30 000 ~ 35 000
Agencies: • Ensure regular export/update EQAR staff: • Monitor, handle questions • Maintain HEI list • Handle sanity checks • Oversee technical maintenance • ca. 60% FTE staff ~ EUR 35 000 Subcontract: • Web server • Technical maintenance • Provision for development ca. EUR 10 500
Overview
Needs and Benefits
Fill accessibility gap
Help understand external QA
Visibility at European level
Support recognition
Efficiency gain
Challenges and risks
Ensure accuracy and relevance
Correct interpretation
Financial sustainability
Legal protection
Steps taken
§ Possibly initial technical workshop for agencies (late 2017)
§ EQAR General Assembly (May 2017) § Decisions on work plan and budget, incl. membership fees
Next steps
§ EQAR Members' Dialogue (November 2016) § Positive feedback re. enhancing accessibility
§ ENIC-NARICs, recognition officers, QAAs, students as key users
§ Updating as key challenge
§ Cost considered reasonable
• Exploring additional funding for setup (ERASMUS+)
