An Excercise on Quality in Higher Arts Education

Asst. Prof. Oğuz HaşlakoğluAKDENİZ UNIVERSITY - FINE ARTS FACULTY

Head of Painting Dept.

Artesnet.Europe project, Strand 3:

Quality Frameworks and Enhancement

Chosen Case Study for Review:

AKDENİZ UNIVERSITY - Antalya

FINE ARTS FACULTY / PAINTING DEPARTMENT

The aim of the review is to build Quality Management System

in the area of Higher Arts Education

according toBologna Principles

artesnet.europeAmsterdam Launch Campaign

School of Arts Birmingham Visit

New Generation Arts Festival by BCU / School of Arts Graduate Show Preparations

School of Arts Graduate Show Preparations

School of Arts Graduate Show Preparations

School of Arts Graduate Show Preparations

School of Arts Graduate Show Preparations

New Generation Arts FestivalMixmedia Installations

New Generation Arts FestivalMixmedia Installations

New Generation Arts Festival by BCU / Solo exhibition - Jane Prophet – (TRANS)PLANT

Evaluation Team / Critical Friends

The Mission of ET

Through the Self Evaluation Reports (SER) and the outcomes of the main site visit, the ET

evaluates the faculty/institution’s capacity for

quality management and enhancement, identify good practice and make observations and recommendations on how to make any

necessary improvements.

Faculty Self-evaluation Commission

Asst. Prof. Öznur Aydın(Chairman) The Faculty of Fine Arts, Deputy Dean

Asst. Prof. .Oğuz Haşlakoğlu(Coordinator)

Head of the Painting Department

Assoc.Prof. Eser Gültekin The Department of Architecture,

Asst. Prof Gökmen Özmenteş The Department of Musical Sciences,

Ins. Pınar Engincan Bol The Department of Interior Architecture and Environmental Design,

Ins.Defne Alkandemir The Department of Graphic Arts,

To support accreditation to the other departments in the faculty according to the Painting Department model, as a part of the studies for Institutional Quality Assurance and

Enhancement Management System. The Commission comprised of former Deputy Deans who helped to analyze the academic and administrative processes. Moreover the

Deputy Dean and the Chairman of the Commission contributed to the process by accelerating the flow of

information and documents between the Dean’s Office and the Rectorate.

The Mission of Faculty SE Comission

Preliminary visit 5th - 8th October 2008

Principle objectives are:- To gain a clearer understanding of the specific national, regional and local contexts impacting on the institution

(autonomy)- To gain a clearer understanding of the existing management

operations of the institution- To discuss the self evaluation process and the institution’s Self-

Evaluation Report (SER)- To gain greater understanding of the institution’s Quality

Management & Enhancement (QME) processes- To identify and request any missing information from the SER

- To draft a programme for the main visit, agreeing dates, discipline(s) to be reviewed, which groups to meet etc.

Main visit 24th - 27th November 2008

- The ET’s main objective is to arrive at a well substantiated view of the strategic management of quality assurance and

enhancement in the institution at both institutional and subject discipline level.

Where the preliminary visit focus was on understanding what is specific about that institution, the main visit is about finding out

if, how and with what results the institution’s strategic and internal quality policies and procedures are implemented

throughout all levels of the institution.

Issues emphasised in the Faculty of Fine Arts Final Written

Report

Student representatives and Student Union officers are non-voting

members on the University’s Boards and Committees; the ET Panel believe the regulations should change and students should be given voting rights on these Boards and Senate.

some remarks on the experience

Is this a “no pain no gain”

process?

YES

What’s the pain?

- People tend to be timid and resist for change (why bother for more work? Why someone else is telling me what to do?)

They need to be persuaded that once the quality management system is set to work, they will be indeed working less - in an unnecassary manner - but getting more for what they put in)

And that nobody is telling anything to anyone in terms of what to teach and how to teach. The quality management system only asks for evidence for independent review and strategy for developmentand planning.

- Regulations of Higher Education Institution (YÖK) concerning the higher education in general and fine arts programme in particular are yet to be in

harmony with Bologna process.

What’s the gain?For Akdeniz University Fine Arts Faculty so far at least:

-The need to develop and strategically plan a faculty identity and rally departments under two headings , namely “art and design” for a more attuned contemporary arts education.

-The need to communicate more often with the city, stakeholders, third party developers as well as other art and design faculties on a national and international level.

- Signs of good communication and self-development among colleagues (they need to talk to each other and spend more time for research in forming their own programme and learning outcomes now that more and more they feel themselves as part of the whole)

-Efficient communication among disciplines (for the first time departments try to understand each other in terms of what they do and compare their own programme/course schedules with other disciplines in order to be aware

of the difference within unity)

What’s the gain?

-Learned how to make documentation to provide evidence of what and how

we do and gained experience to be reviewed by independent observers and evaluation teams.

- Learned that the process is irreversible once it gains a certain momentum

and stick to the principles of quality management system or at least try to do so in the best way possible.

And what remains to be done, now?

Lots of work!

26/04/2009