Improving Quality, Enhancing Creativity: Change Processes in European Higher Education Institutions

1
Improving Quality, Enhancing Creativity Change
Processes in European Higher Education
Institutions Quality Assurance for the Higher
Education Change Agenda (QAHECA)
2
(c) Patrick Sanders, prhsuk_at_yahoo.co.uk
3
OVERALL OBJECTIVE

• To develop recommendations, both for internal and
  external QA, which is
• Future oriented
• Focused on the change process
• Geared towards enhancement
• Aiming to strengthen creativity and innovation in
  higher education

4
(c) Patrick Sanders, prhsuk_at_yahoo.co.uk
5
MOTIVATION (1)

• QA is under construction
• Pitfalls
• Over-bureaucratisation
• Standardisation, compliance behaviour
• Backward orientation
• QA fatigue
• -gt Stifling creativity and innovation
• Linkage between internal and external quality
  processes
• Need for
• Focus on institutional responsibility
• Student-centred teaching and learning

6
MOTIVATION (2)

• Pre-History
• Quality Culture (2002-2006) 150 institutions in
  30 countries
• EMNEM- European Masters New Evaluation
  Methodology guidelines for internal QA of joint
  master programmes (2006)
• Creativity in Higher Education (2006-2007) 32
  institutions in 20 countries
• European Forum for Quality Assurance E4 (2006-
  present)

7
(c) Patrick Sanders, prhsuk_at_yahoo.co.uk
8
STRUCTURE OF THE PROJECT

• Partner consortium
• EUA
• The Higher Education Academy, UK
• National University of Ireland, Maynooth
• ACQUIN, Germany
• Steering committee
• Chaired by Lothar Zechlin, former rector of the
  University of Duisburg-Essen
• Funded by
• the European Commission in the framework of the
  Lifelong Learning Programme

9
WORKING METHOD

• HEIs (23) and QA agencies (7)
• selected by Steering Committee through
  competitive open call
• Development of recommendations through
• A series of 3 seminars
• Testing phase between second and third seminar
• Third seminar sharing the experiences and
  conclusion

10
KEY COMPONENTS, DRIVERS AND ENABLERS
11
(c) Patrick Sanders, prhsuk_at_yahoo.co.uk
12
RECOMMENDATIONS (1)

• Context sensitive to take into account
  disciplinary characteristics, various
  organisational cultures, the historical position,
  the national context.
• Enhancing the institutions capacity to change,
  commit to a developmental approach
• Quality assurance should be inclusive engaging
  the whole institutional community, not just
  considering QA as the special purview of a
  specific QA unit (strategic planning, educational
  development and staff development)
• Ensure the engagement and capacities of key
  actors in quality assurance processes.

13
RECOMMENDATIONS (2)

• Partnership between institutions and agencies for
  creating space and trust for critical
  self-reflection
• Allow risk taking and failure
• Sharing experiences in QA encouraging a
  dialogue, learning from others experiences,
  whether good or bad

14
(c) Patrick Sanders, prhsuk_at_yahoo.co.uk
15
CONCLUSION OUTLOOK

• diversity of the perspectives participants
  brought from across Europe
• having the agencies and HEIs discussing together
• internal and external QA processes should be in
  balance
• interaction between them

16
A FEW QUESTIONS

• Can and should we aim to measure preconditions of
  creativity? How?
• Using the ESG as a background, do you find other
  recommendations useful? Name and explain why!
• How might this project go on? Do you have ideas
  for focussing the both topics (creativity and QA)
  together during the next years?
• Do Quality assurance requirements conflict with
  innovative and enhancement activities? 

17
Further informationhttp//www.eua.be/index.php?i
d529
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!