internal quality assurance at university college cork dr. norma ryan university college cork –...
TRANSCRIPT
Internal Quality Assurance at University College Cork
Dr. Norma Ryan
University College Cork – National University of Ireland
Cork
2
Dr. Norma Ryan
Biochemist Director, Quality Promotion Unit, UCC Irish Bologna Expert Past-Chair, Irish Higher Education Network Member, Governing Authority, UCC Member, Senate of National University of
Ireland Member, Irish Universities Association Quality
Committee
3
UCC
A University located in the South of Ireland, with 18,000+ students, and one of the highest annual research income of all the Irish Universities
Has a particular focus on delivering Fourth Level Ireland (graduate studies) and lifelong learning
4
Mission
To create, preserve, and communicate knowledge and to enhance cultural, social and economic life locally, regionally and globally.
VISION To be a research-led university of
international standing with impact in Munster, Ireland, Europe and the world
5
Colleges of UCC
Arts, Celtic Studies & Social Sciences Business & Law Medicine & Health Science, Engineering & Food Science
6
Universities Act 1997
Legislation that established all Irish Universities as independent autonomous institutions
Requires all Irish Universities to put in place quality assurance procedures
7
Section 35: Quality Assurance
To promote the improvement of the quality of education of students and all related activities
Responsibility for process rests with the University
8
National Agenda
In 2003 Irish Universities Association published:
A Framework for Quality in Irish Universities
In 2007 second edition published
Principles outlined in Framework compatible with the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Higher Education
9
Irish Universities Quality Board
Independent body established by Irish Universities in 2003
Purpose: to assist the Universities in the quality agenda and to conduct reviews of the effectiveness of the Quality Improvement /Quality Assurance reviews on behalf of the Universities.
10
QI/QA
QI: Quality Improvement QA: Quality Assurance
11
What is Quality?
‘Fitness for Purpose’ ‘Fitness of Purpose’ ‘Making the best use of resources available’ ‘added value’
12
Quality Assurance
Ensuring we do what we say we are doing Ensuring what we do is a ‘quality’ job
13
Examples of QA
Peer review of research External Examiner system Accreditation of degrees Employability of graduates
14
QI/QA Procedures
Focussed on quality improvement with rigour of quality assurance as a starting position
Well-established and documented Reviewed internally and amended as deemed
appropriate, e.g.– Implementation of detailed procedures for
development and approval of Quality Improvement Plans following quality reviews.
Developed and amended using a collegial approach
15
Quality Reviews
Focus on ownership of review by unit under review
Focus on all activities of unit All types of unit (academic, administrative,
support service) reviewed under same principles and guidelines
16
Strategy in UCC
Quality Promotion Committee of Governing Body
Reviews scheduled over 6 year period by Quality Promotion Committee
17
Quality Promotion Committee
Committee of Governing Body with executive authority
Chaired by President of UCC Has representatives of
– Academic Staff– Administrative and Support Staff– Governing Body external members– Students
18
Quality Promotion Unit
Facilitates the implementation of Quality Improvement/Quality Assurance (QI/QA) procedures in UCC
Assists in the Follow-Up procedures following a QI/QA review of a unit
19
Methodology
Self-Assessment Peer Review
– Institutional/National/International
Follow-Up– On-going Quality Improvement
20
Reviews must involve
Students Staff of institution Employers Past graduates/Alumni Other stakeholders
21
Questionnaires
Used to obtain views of staff, students and others
Available on web sites Some are linked specifically to guidelines for
preparation of Self-Assessment Report
22
Evaluation Process 1
Appointment of unit co-ordinating committee– Guidelines on web site
Conduct of surveys of opinions of stakeholders– Questionnaires– Focus meetings– ????
Assistance can be provided by QPU upon request
23
Evaluation Process 2
Nomination of members of Peer Review Group– External advisor to nominate a panel of external
experts. – Unit to nominate a panel of external stakeholders– QPC to appoint internal members– Unit to be offered an opportunity to identify any
conflict of interest prior to letters of invitation
24
Evaluation Process 3
Appointment of internal and external peer reviewers by Quality Promotion Committee
Production of Self-Assessment Report Agreement of timetable for conduct of visit
25
Evaluation Process 5
Peer Review Visit & Report Follow-up action On-going quality improvement
26
Self-Assessment Report
Includes assessment by students All staff of department must be involved Includes views of past graduates Incorporates views from
– accrediting bodies – External Examiners – internal stakeholders– external stakeholders
27
Self-Assessment Report
Includes analysis of – Teaching – Learning– Research– Scholarly activity
Includes commentary on actions taken for improvement since last Quality Review and Research Quality Review
28
Self Assessment
Às appropriate, must include assessment of – Staff profile– Teaching– Research– Services provided– standards– Support services, including facilities – Contribution to society
29
Structure of SAR
Core: ‘Overall Analysis & Recommendations’
Appendices: contain factual details
30
Overall Analysis & Recommendations
Succinct and comprehensive Details Mission of Department Details Aims & Objectives Summary of Unit activities Relates all activities to Mission and Strategic
Plan of UCC
31
Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd)
Benchmarking Details of how you plan to show you have
achieved your Aims & Objectives How is quality measured?
Overall Analysis & Recommendations (contd.)
How is success measured? Emphasis on strategies for improvement of
quality
33
Summary of Department
1 page executive summary on each of following:– Department Structure and Organisation– Teaching– Research– Consultancy Activities– Public Profile
34
SWOT Analysis
S - Strengths W - Weaknesses O - Opportunities T - Threats
All staff involved Leads to recommendations for improvement Support for facilitator available from QPU
upon request
35
Evaluation of Teaching
Evaluation by students Questionnaires Focus groups Views of external stakeholders Teaching portfolios Peer review
36
Evaluation of Research
Peer reviewed publications Books/chapters in books Supervision of graduate students Research grant income Other scholarly activity
37
Appendices - Academic Units
Unit Details Profiles of all staff - academic, administrative and
support Unit Planning and Organisation Teaching and Learning
– strategy– Reports of extern examiners– Reports from accrediting bodies. E.g. Medical Council
38
Appendices (contd.)
Research & Scholarly Activity– Metrics from Research Quality Review– Strategy
Staff Development Objectives External Relations Support Services Methodology used in preparing Report Additional documentation that Unit may wish to
submit
39
Appendices - Admin & Central Service Units
Unit Details Profiles of all staff Unit Planning and Organisation List of Client Groups for Unit Service Standards for the Unit Staff Development Objectives Unit Budget Methodology used in preparing Report
40
Documentation
Provided to review group by QPU:– Strategic Plans
• UCC• College/Operational Area• Teaching & Learning• Research• Student Experience
– Student statistics– Research profiles – Financial details – Previous Quality Review Report and Follow-Up
report
41
Documentation (contd)
Research Quality Review Report Actions taken by Unit/University following
Research Quality Review
42
Examples of other Documents
Policy documents produced by Unit Procedural Manuals Guidelines/Manuals/Handbooks Audit reports produced by external bodies
43
Peer Review
Evaluation of Self-Assessment Report Site Visit to meet with staff and students Report on findings Recommendations for improvement
– To Unit– To University
44
Peer Review Report
Comments on findings Recommendations
– Acted upon by unit– Acted upon by institution
45
Follow-up - 1
Discussion Draw up Quality Improvement Plan based on
recommendations Implementation
46
Follow-up - 2
On-going quality improvement Re-visit one to 2 years later to discuss
developments Re-visit six years later in a formal review
47
What happens report?
Review Report is considered by– Staff of Department– Quality Promotion Committee of
Governing Body– Budget decision makers in UCC– Governing Body
48
Recommendations in report
Discussed with Head of Unit and Head of College/Vice-President and the Director of Quality Promotion Unit
A Quality Improvement Plan is agreed upon and acted upon by unit in first instance
49
Publication of Report
Review Report is published on University web site.
Annual Report of Quality Promotion Committee to Governing Body also published. Report provides a synthesis of findings and issues as well as full details on each review
50
Follow-up
Unit submits a report on actions taken and outcomes within 18 months of completion of the review to the Quality Promotion Committee
Report on progress is considered by Governing Body and published.
51
Review of QI/QA process
A major review of the process and its effectiveness in UCC and the other Irish Universities was conducted in 2005 by the EUA.
The review was commissioned by the IUQB and the HEA on behalf of the Universities.
The Report endorsed and commended the quality processes in place.
52
Major Successes
Acceptance of quality review process Appreciation of need for self-reflection Embedding of a quality culture in all areas of
the university initiated Ownership by unit being reviewed seen as a
benefit to unit Follow-up procedures ensuring actions
taken on recommendations for improvement
53
Challenges
To reduce the workload for departments/programme boards of study/units in gathering data
To ensure University acts on recommendations requiring resources
54
Activities
Development of thematic reviews, e.g. of quality of total research activity of University
Complete second cycle of quality reviews Development of improved University
Information Systems providing accurate data
55
Embedding a Quality Culture
Role of Director of Quality Promotion Emphasis on quality enhancement Remit wider than management of internal
quality reviews Link to strategic planning Performance indicators Institutional data and research Funding of Quality Improvement Projects
56
Web sites
http://www.ucc.ie/quality http://www.iuqb.ie www.eua.be www.nqai.ie http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/
hogeronderwijs/bologna/
