This article was downloaded by: [University of Winnipeg]On: 25 August 2014, At: 11:05Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Tertiary Education and ManagementPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rtem20

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellencein Higher EducationJuha Matti Kettunen aa Turku University of Applied Sciences , Turku, FinlandPublished online: 09 Jun 2011.

To cite this article: Juha Matti Kettunen (2011) Evaluation of the Centres of Excellencein Higher Education, Tertiary Education and Management, 17:2, 151-161, DOI:10.1080/13583883.2011.565790

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2011.565790

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Tertiary Education and ManagementVol. 17, No. 2, June 2011, pp. 151–161

ISSN 1358-3883 (print)/ISSN 1573-1936 (online)/11/020151–11© 2011 European Higher Education SocietyDOI 10.1080/13583883.2011.565790

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellence in Higher Education

Juha Matti Kettunen*Turku University of Applied Sciences, Turku, FinlandTaylor and FrancisRTEM_A_565790.sgm

(Received 10 September 2010; final version received 20 February 2011)10.1080/13583883.2011.565790Tertiary Education and Management1358-3883 (print)/1573-1936 (online)Original Article2011Taylor & Francis1720000002011Dr JuhaKettunenJuha.Kettunen@turkuamk.fi

This study presents an evaluation of the centres of excellence in higher education in Finland. Thisapproach is an example of enhancement-led evaluation aiming to improve the long-term develop-ment of education. The study presents the Degree Programme in Civil Engineering of the TurkuUniversity of Applied Sciences, which was awarded the distinction as a centre of excellence. Thepedagogical development of the degree programme is essential to achieve high quality in operationand outcomes. The methods of active learning are efficient in engaging students in working lifeand improving learning outcomes. The results of this study are useful for those who want toimprove the quality of higher education.

Keywords: quality; assessment/evaluation; higher education policy/development; curriculum design and development; teaching methods

Introduction

The evaluation of the centres of excellence enhances the quality of education athigher education institutions. The evaluation provides information on the pedagogi-cal decisions, teaching processes and outcomes that the institution has achieved.The evaluation encourages the institutions to improve the quality and effectivenessof education and disseminate new, innovative pedagogical approaches. The evalua-tion may be a starting point for long-term development of teaching and learningprocesses, networking and collaboration.

The evaluation of the centres of excellence aims to assess the operation and thelearning outcomes of education units in higher education (Saarela et al., 2009). The

*Turku University of Applied Sciences, Rector’s Office, Joukahaisenkatu 3 A, Turku 20520,Finland. Email: juha.kettunen@turkuamk.fi

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

152 J. M. Kettunen

evaluation at the institutional level is close to the Assessment of Higher EducationLearning Outcomes of the OECD, which is a ground-breaking initiative to assesslearning outcomes on an international scale by creating measures that would be validfor all cultures and languages (Nusche, 2008). The discipline-specific strands ineconomics and engineering correspond to the evaluation of the centres of excellence.The purpose of these fields of education is to provide students with expertise toprepare them for a career in business and industry.

The purpose of this study is to analyse the evaluation procedure of the centres ofexcellence in Finland and summarise the experiences of the evaluation and develop-ment steps for a better future. The study investigates the active learning approach,which aims to engage education in the development of companies and other organi-sations in the region. The study presents the Degree Programme in Civil Engineer-ing of the Turku University of Applied Sciences, which applied the approach ofactive learning and was nominated as a centre of excellence for the years 2008–2009.The topic of the study is important, because the construction industry employs morepeople than any other industry in Finland.

The assessment of outcomes in the Degree Programme in Civil Engineering indi-cates that the employment of the graduates is excellent, the theses written bystudents have been useful for the construction business and many innovations havebeen made. The degree programme has clearly promoted economic growth andemployment in the region. These outcomes support the results of the previous studythat active learning improves positive student attitudes towards the learning process(Mohammed, 2008) and improves the learning outcomes (Ernst & Colthorpe, 2007;Rao & DiCarlo, 2001; Reddy, 2000).

This study is organised as follows. The second section explains the evaluation ofthe centres of excellence by the Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council(FINHEEC) based on the evaluation of operation and outcomes. The third sectiondescribes the Degree Programme in Civil Engineering of the Turku University ofApplied Sciences. The fourth section describes the main characteristics of the activelearning of the degree programme. The fifth section presents the outcomes of thedegree programme. Finally, the results of the study are discussed and summarised inthe concluding section.

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellence

The quality assurance agency FINHEEC, commissioned by Finland’s Ministry ofEducation, has the role of evaluating candidates for centres of excellence at theFinnish higher education institutions. The evaluations at the universities of appliedsciences were made in 2000, 2002, 2005, and 2008–2009 (Saarela et al., 2009). TheMinistry of Education designates the centres of excellence on the basis of evaluationsmade by the evaluation panel and FINHEEC. As a result of these evaluations, theMinistry of Education allocates performance-based funding for the selected centres.

The purpose of the evaluation of the centres of excellence is to enhance the qual-ity and impact of education and to encourage institutions to undertake long-term

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellence in Higher Education 153

development. These evaluations supplement the audits of the quality assurancesystem and thematic evaluations (FINHEEC, 2007). The evaluation of the Finnishquality assurance agency consists of these forms of evaluations at the moment. Inaddition, the Ministry of Education annually evaluates the effectiveness of highereducation institutions based on the statistical data.

The aim of the evaluation of the centres of excellence is to establish the qualitativeobjectives set by the institution for its own activities. Other aims are to evaluate whatprocedures and processes the institution uses to maintain and develop the quality ofits education and other activities, whether the quality assurance of the institutionworks as intended, whether the quality assurance system produces useful and rele-vant information for the improvement of the processes, and whether it brings abouteffective improvement measures.

In a letter of assignment dated 8 May 2007, the Ministry of Educationrequested FINHEEC to designate four to six centres of excellence in education atthe universities of applied sciences for 2008–2009 by 30 November 2008. Theletter said the institution can apply the nomination for the centre of excellence forits organisational unit, which may be a faculty or a corresponding education unit, adegree programme, or the whole institution. Support services are not excludedfrom the evaluation. At a later date, the Ministry of Education informed the insti-tutions that it will allocate performance-based funding to the centres designated byFINHEEC.

Table 1 describes the evaluation targets for the centres of excellence. The evaluationof the centres of excellence is divided into two parts: operation and outcomes.

The evaluation of operation describes the planning, core processes, evaluationand development following the principle of the quality cycle (Deming, 1986; Tague,2004). The concept of the quality cycle, also known as the Deming Cycle, practi-cally always is used one way or another in the quality assurance of Finnish highereducation institutions.

The evaluation methods are participatory self-evaluation and peer evaluation. Theparticipatory self-evaluation guides the applying units to examine their history, pres-ence and future. It leads them to analyse the development of their activities toachieve the objectives in a systematic manner. They can, for example, compare theiractivities with national average figures in higher education. The peer evaluation iscarried out by members from other universities of applied sciences who are familiarwith the stipulations and the operating environment.

The evaluation panel was nominated by FINHEEC in May 2008. The evaluationpanel had the chairman from the HAMK University of Applied Sciences andmembers from the Satakunta University of Applied Sciences, the Oulu Region JointAuthority for Education, the University of Helsinki, the Stadia University of AppliedSciences and the Union of Students in Finnish Universities of Applied Sciences.Two secretaries came from FINHEEC. The evaluation panel had pedagogical andother necessary expertise.

By the end of the call for submissions, 31 March 2008, FINHEEC received a totalof 20 proposals for the centres of excellence. The evaluation panel studied the written

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

154 J. M. Kettunen

proposals and scored them. Based on the written reports of the self-evaluation, theevaluation panel decided to conduct evaluation visits to the selected best nomineesand extend the preliminary evaluation. The aim of the visits was to ascertain that theoperations and results were as described in the applications and to evaluate the qualityof education. Finally, the evaluation panel made its proposal about the four to sixcentres of excellence to FINHEEC.

At its meeting in November 2008, FINHEEC nominated five centres of excellencebased on the proposal of the evaluation panel. The nominated centres of excellenceare the Degree Programme for Multilingual Management Assistants of the Haaga-Helia University of Applied Sciences, the Security Management unit of the LaureaUniversity of Applied Sciences, the Degree Programme in Nursing and Health Careof the Rovaniemi University of Applied Sciences, the development of entrepreneurshipin the Degree Programme in Agriculture and Rural Development of the SavoniaUniversity of Applied Sciences and the Degree Programme in Civil Engineering ofthe Turku University of Applied Sciences.

Degree Programme in Civil Engineering

The Turku University of Applied Sciences is a multi-disciplinary institution locatedin southwest Finland. It has 9,200 students, 750 full-time employees and 35 degreeprogrammes for the bachelor’s degree. Three of the degree programmes are taught in

Table 1. Evaluation targets for the centres of excellence

OperationDescription of the education unit and linkages with the strategic plan and pedagogical outlines of the institution: • Core competence• Collaboration with working life• Networking within and outside the institution• Integration of education with research and development• Planning, operation, evaluation and development of the education unitThe forecasting and responding to the knowledge needs of the operating environment: • Control of resources, evaluation and development• Planning process of curriculum• Learning process and guidance• Learning environments• Procedures of quality assurance

OutcomesThe outcomes of the education unit in relation to the defined objectives: • Outcomes related to students• Outcomes related to working life• Outcomes related to personnel• Outcomes of the economic performance• Outcomes of international activities• Outcomes of regional development

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellence in Higher Education 155

English. In addition, the institution has 10 degree programmes for the master’s degree.Engineering, business and health care are the biggest focus areas of the institution.

The Degree Programme in Civil Engineering has 320 students. The programme isproficient in taking into account the needs of the environment and using the meth-ods of strategic management (Kettunen, 2005, 2006, 2008). It provides studentswith versatile knowledge of design, manufacture, construction and surveying in theirspecialisation alternative to be able to work in different professions in the construc-tion business. The studies do not focus only on technical but also on the financialaspects of production. Engineers typically are employed by design and constructioncompanies in the building industry. Some graduates become employed in thenational or local technical departments of administration offices in the public sector.

The Degree Programme in Civil Engineering has developed its knowledge espe-cially in top-level micropile research. The degree programme is a partner in an inter-national project aiming for the collection of data on micropiles used in underpinnings.The field of research is important because the region has a problematic wet soil. Thedegree programme also has developed a unique database of micropile test loads forinternational use. The database will strengthen the position of the institution as a topresearch unit of micropiles. The degree programme also had the chairmanship of theInternational Society for Micropiles during the evaluation.

The degree programme has established a Restoration Centre, which is a meetingplace for the restoration specialists and customers of the region. The aim of the centreis to enhance the conservation and maintenance of the building stock in southwestFinland, to support ecologically and culturally sustainable construction, and topromote interaction between the building tradition and the various players in the field.The centre is important for the region, because Turku is the oldest town in Finland.

The degree programme combines education with applied research and develop-ment. The projects provide learning environments for students who can establishcontacts and improve their skill and capabilities for their working life. Participationin the projects is an essential learning method for meeting the challenges of theproject-based working environment. It is essential that the pedagogical methods andlearning environments correspond and create capabilities to learn in working life.

The degree programme earlier was the target of internal cross-evaluation andundertook the long-term development of its activities (Soini et al., 2008). The inter-nal cross-evaluation of degree programmes is an important element of the qualityassurance system of the institution. The internal evaluation panel has members fromother degree programmes and support services and evaluates selected degreeprogrammes (Kettunen, 2010). Based on the internal evaluation, the DegreeProgramme in Civil Engineering developed its education to take up a challenge inthe external evaluation by FINHEEC.

Active Learning in Engineering Education

Active learning is an overall term including several models of instruction thatemphasise the responsibility of learners in learning, popularised by Bonwell and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

156 J. M. Kettunen

Eison (1991). Active learning is the procedure of having students engaging in someactivity that forces them to reflect upon ideas and how they are using those ideas.Active learning can occur when students engage actively in the learning process byparticipating in activities that require them to consider their understanding andincorporate new information into their personal conceptual framework (Ernst &Colthorpe, 2008; Michael, 2006; Michael & Modell, 2003; Odedina, Clemmons, &Dukes, 2001).

Research on classroom instructional modes suggests that teaching models employ-ing active learning result in more meaningful learning than traditional lectures.Active learning engages students in activities and creates a learning environment thatpermits student ownership of the learning process (Mohammed, 2008). There areresults that active learning activities improve learning outcomes (Ernst & Colthorpe,2007; Rao & DiCarlo, 2001; Reddy, 2000). A challenge of active learning is thatstudents should be cognitively active rather than behaviourally active, as argued byMayer (2004).

An obstacle to some engineering students who are trying to learn science is theirlack of involvement in their learning process. These students sit passively as instruc-tors explain and demonstrate concepts. To counter this behaviour, active learningenvironments feature an interactive approach to engage students in the learningprocess. Active learning also is used to lower high drop-out rates in engineeringeducation. Especially the mathematical courses suppress the motivation to studyduring the first year.

Figure 1 describes active learning in the Degree Programme in Civil Engineering,which has six major components to this interactive approach, including the researchhatchery, internship, project-based study, company visits, assistant positions andtheses. The role of active learning increases over the study time. As reported bymany investigators, when students are exposed to an active learning format for thefirst time, most students go through a fairly predictable number of stages includingdenial, followed by shock and panic, then frustration, and finally acceptance. Butwhen students are familiar with the interactive classroom, they are challenged withdifferent variants of the active learning format (Silverthorn, 2006; Wilke, 2003).Figure 1. Active learning in the Degree Programme in Civil EngineeringThe research hatchery is a method of inquiry-based instruction and is considereda constructivist-based approach to education. The research hatchery is a form ofcollaborative project learning. Collaborative learning is a general format in whichstudents work in small groups on active learning activities to achieve a common goal.The purpose is to engage students in multiple and diversified activities (Case,Stevens, & Cooper, 2007). The Ministry of Education encourages the integration ofresearch, development and education. The research hatchery is an importantmethod to achieve that objective.

The research hatchery of civil engineering provides a learning environment in whichthe student can learn in research and development and community service. Theseactivities are funded mainly by external funding from companies and other fundingbodies. The experience suggests that the method of a research hatchery is more effec-tive for experienced students. Educators have found evidence that discovery learning

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellence in Higher Education 157

is less effective for novices than more direct forms of instruction (Tuovinen & Sweller,1999). The novice learners need more guidance, but as they gain confidence andbecome competent, then they may learn through discovery (Kirschner, Sweller, &Clark, 2006).

Some of the students started their study in research hatcheries during their first yearof study. The tasks are supportive in the first years, but during the later years thestudents can act as supervisors and learn leadership skills. A research manager,researcher, teacher or other member of the personnel always has the ultimate respon-sibility for the project. A research hatchery is a format that has been developed by 10degree programmes from four faculties of the Turku University of Applied Sciences.

The institution has agreed assignments on construction projects, which have beencarried out by students and teachers in collaboration with the local vocational schools.The engineering students plan the construction work, manage the construction andguide the students of the vocational schools to perform the tasks at the constructionsite. The engineering students have planned many innovative projects that are usefulin the construction business. The close cooperation with the companies helps gradu-ates find employment in the region.

The internship is 30 ECTS credits in the Degree Programme of Civil Engineeringand it is obligatory for all students. The student becomes familiar with practical worktasks especially pertaining to his vocational subjects by work practice, and learns toapply his knowledge and skills in working life. The first period of internship takes place

Figure 1. Active learning in the Degree Programme in Civil Engineering

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

158 J. M. Kettunen

at the end of the first year of study. This ensures the practice being linked time-wiseto the studies according to their objectives. The internships should be diversified andgradually demanding. The employer and the student will agree jointly on the contentsof the work assignments and the proceeding of the internship.

Project-based learning is a form of active learning whereby students seek an assign-ment in civil engineering and carry it out under the supervision of a teacher. Thestudents engage in a project and apply their knowledge and skills to a real-life situa-tion. The problems involve investigative and project management skills, decision-making, and problem-solving. Compulsory project assignments strengthen the projectmanagement capabilities and networking of students. The project-based learning isstudent-centred and usually less structured than traditional teacher-led classroomactivities. The students become more independent because they receive limitedinstruction from the teacher.

Company visits are arranged widely at the Turku University of Applied Sciences.Interview learning is a great way to gather new ideas from the experts of working life,who put the theory into a more practical framework. It allows students to learn bylooking at customers in meaningful ways, integrating data from a variety of sources,designing processes and structures and evaluating results. Many of these phasesinclude tacit knowledge which is not written in explicit form in books, articles,memos and websites (Takeuchi & Nonaka, 2004). The student teams record anddocument the expert interviews in classrooms or construction sites and transfer theknowledge to other students using videos or written documents. This method lowersthe threshold to use the expertise from working life in learning and expands thenetworks of students.

Assistant positions enable students to contract them in the planning of construc-tion sites and the planning and development of houses. The three-dimensionalbuilding design system is used to meet the particular requirements of customers andimprove productivity. The assistants cooperating with teachers and working lifehave established an intramural design company which has developed frame housesin collaboration with the company Vertex Ltd., which provides three-dimensionalplanning software.

The thesis is at least 15 ECTS credits and is written to a company or anotherorganisation. The theses are related to externally funded projects or based on assign-ments from working life. Many of the theses are multi-disciplinary and based on thecollaborative development with other degree programmes of the institution. Typi-cally, customer needs are not subject-based but favour innovative collaboration withother partners within and outside the institution.

Learning Outcomes

Civil Engineering is the most attractive degree programme in the field of technologyand transport. There were 4.1 applicants for each study place in 2007. Practically,every graduate was able to avoid unemployment: 85% of them were employed, 12%were entrepreneurs and 3% continued their studies. The results of the employment

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellence in Higher Education 159

survey indicate that 85% of the graduates became employed in southwest Finland,which indicates the high regional importance of education. Student satisfaction withthe compatibility of education and work is high.

The degree programme has studied and developed techniques which have a directimpact on the construction business. Many innovations and licensing agreementshave been made. Two production units of prefabricated houses have been estab-lished based on the Timperi frame house developed in the degree programme. Inthis way, 16–19 new jobs have been created in the planning and contracting busi-ness. The reinforcement of foundations has provided employment opportunities fordozens of students and graduates. The degree programme has three patents, theprotection of utility model and three employment inventions.

The degree programme supports international exchange. On average, the annualstudent exchange is five to seven students and the teacher exchange is about threeteachers. The international exchange has integrated with research and development.The incoming students and teachers have been taken into the research hatchery. Thedegree programme also has designed an Orthodox Church and Parish Hall inPetrozavodsk in Russia. The International Society for Micropiles, the InternationalSociety for Soil Mechanics and the Geotechnical Engineering and Deep FoundationsInstitute have provided networks and electronic meeting places for teachers andstudents.

The theses are written to the local companies. For example, the Timpuri framehouse was based on a thesis. The theses have won prizes four times in the nationalthesis competition. One thesis was awarded first prize by the Turku University ofApplied Sciences in 2007. The themes of the theses include the construction ofhouses, micropiling and protection of the environment. The main principle is thatthe theses are based on real development needs of the working life. That provides agood basis for the collaboration and employment of students.

Conclusions

The evaluation of the centres of excellence is a powerful method of developinghigher education. It encourages education units to undertake long-term develop-ment of education. The evaluation acknowledges the development of education andbrings out high quality learning practices. The Degree Programme in Civil Engi-neering of the Turku University of Applied Sciences was selected as a centre ofexcellence. The education is attractive to applicants and the graduates have a highemployment rate in southwest Finland. The feedback about the compatibility ofeducation and working life is excellent.

The pedagogical development is important to achieve high quality. The degreeprogramme has developed new methods of active learning to integrate research anddevelopment with education. The research hatchery is an excellent example of activelearning. The applied research and development of civil engineering serve educationand support the working life of the region. The engagement and outreach of thedegree programme in its region is distinctive. The research and development have

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

160 J. M. Kettunen

increased competitiveness, promoted entrepreneurship and created new jobs in theregion.

The degree programme has close collaboration with networks outside and withinthe institution. It also has an important role in the international associations in thefield. The networking helps the degree programme in education, research and devel-opment. It helps students to find exchange places abroad and employment in theregion. During the evaluation, the degree programme had the chairmanship of theassociation and it is the centre of knowledge of the International Society for Micropiles.

The evaluation of the centres of excellence by the quality assurance agencyFINHEEC is focused on the operation and outcomes of an educational unit. Theevaluation complements the audits of the quality assurance system of the institutionand the evaluations by the Ministry of Education. The evaluation of the centres ofexcellence encourages institutions to undertake long-term development of education.The evaluation procedure also can be used in other countries.

The nomination for the centre of excellence and the financial reward of 300,000euro opened gateways to closer cooperation with the recognised partners in the field.The reward was used to invest in the shareholder’s equity of Rym Ltd. in 2009. Thecompany is a strategic centre for science, technology and innovation, and has theworld-class know-how to collaborate in research and development. Another invest-ment was made in the FINEDU Foundation in 2009–2010. The foundation aims toexport Finnish know-how of civil engineering to Russian construction markets.

The evaluation of the degree programme had a notable impact on the educationaldevelopment of the faculty. The new concept of innovation pedagogy was createdduring the evaluation and was written in the strategic plan of the institution for2010–2013. Innovation pedagogy is based on the multi-field needs of working life,integrates applied research and development and entrepreneurship with flexibleeducation and promotes regional and international networking. Innovation peda-gogy is the mixture of theory and practice in a balanced manner and aims to increasethe external impact of the institution. These outlines were described in detail in theaction plan, which also included, among others, the emphasised guidance ofstudents, the development of virtual learning and the increase in student exchange.

References

Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (AEHE-ERICHigher Education Report No. 1). Washington, DC: Jossey-Bass.

Case, E., Stevens, R., & Cooper, M. (2007). Is collaborative grouping an effective institutionalstrategy? Using IMMEX to find new answers to an old question. Journal of College ScienceTeaching, 36(6), 42–47.

Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Center for Advanced EngineeringStudy.

Ernst, H., & Colthorpe, K. (2007). The efficacy of interactive lecturing for students with diversescience backgrounds. Advances in Physiology Education, 31(1), 41–44.

Ernst, H., & Colthorpe, K. (2008). Instructional design and assessment: Expanding voluntaryactive-learning opportunities for pharmacy students in a respiratory physiology module.American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(2), 1–6.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014

Evaluation of the Centres of Excellence in Higher Education 161

FINHEEC. (2007). Audits of quality assurance systems of Finnish higher education institutions: Auditmanual for 2008–2011 (Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council 10:2007). Tampere:Tammer-Paino. Retrieved April 27, 2010, from http://www.kka.fi/files/147/KKA_1007.pdf

Kettunen, J. (2005). Implementation of strategies in continuing education. International Journal ofEducational Management, 19(3), 207–217.

Kettunen, J. (2006). Strategic planning of regional development in higher education. Baltic Journalof Management, 1(3), 259–269.

Kettunen, J. (2008). A conceptual framework to help evaluate the quality of institutional perfor-mance. Quality Assurance in Education, 16(4), 322–332.

Kettunen, J. (2010). Cross-evaluation of degree programmes in higher education. Quality Assurancein Education, 18(1), 34–46.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction doesnot work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential,and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

Mayer, R. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The casefor guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19.

Michael, J. (2006). Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Educa-tion, 30(4), 159–167.

Michael, J. A., & Modell, H. I. (2003). Active learning in secondary and college science classrooms: Aworking model for helping the learner to learn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Mohammed, A. R. (2008). Effects of active learning variants on student performance and learningperceptions. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2). RetrievedApril 27, 2010, from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v2n2/articles/PDFs/Article_Mohamed.pdf

Nusche, D. (2008). Assessment of learning outcomes in higher education: A comparative review ofselected practices (OECD Education Working Paper No. 15). Paris: OECD.

Odedina, F. T., Clemmons, C. D., & Dukes, N. (2001). Multifaceted active-learning approach toteaching pharmacy health care and behaviour. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education,65(3), 276–283.

Rao, S. P., & DiCarlo, S. E. (2001). Active learning of respiratory physiology improves performanceon respiratory physiology examinations. Advances in Physiology Education, 25(2), 55–61.

Reddy, I. K. (2000). Implementation of a pharmaceutics course in a large class through activelearning using quick-thinks and case-based learning. American Journal of PharmaceuticalEducation, 64(4), 348–354.

Saarela, M., Jaatinen, P., Juntunen, K., Kauppi, A., Otala, L., Taskila, V.-M., … Kajaste, M.(2009). Ammattikorkeakoulujen koulutuksen laatuyksiköt 2008–2009 [Polytechnics’ quality ofeducation services in 2008–2009] (Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvoston julkaisuja 2:2009).Tampere: Esa Print. Retrieved April 27, 2010, from http://www.kka.fi/files/668/KKA_209.pdf

Silverthorn, D. U. (2006). Claude Bernard distinguished lectureship: Teaching and learning in theinteractive classroom. Advance in Physiology Education, 30(4), 135–140.

Soini, J., Häkkinen, T., Kantola, I., Mertsola, M., Scheinin, M., Seikola, A., … Tuohi, R. (2008).Rakennustekniikan koulutusohjelman arviointiraportti—vankalta perustalta monimuotoista tutki-mus-ja kehitystoimintaa [Construction engineering evalution report—a sound basis for diverseresearch and development] (Turun ammattikorkeakoulun raportteja 76). Tampere: JuvenesPrint.

Tague, N. R. (2004). The quality toolbox. Retrieved January 25, 2010, from http://www.asq.org/quality-press/display-item/index.html?item=H1224

Takeuchi, H., & Nonaka, I. (2004). Hitotsubashi on knowledge management. Singapore: Wiley.Tuovinen, J. E., & Sweller, J. (1999). A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery

learning and worked examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 334–341.Wilke, R. R. (2003). The effect of active learning on student characteristics in a human physiology

course for nonmajors. Advances in Physiology Education, 27(4), 207–223.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f W

inni

peg]

at 1

1:05

25

Aug

ust 2

014