TEEP II A Pilot Evaluation of Joint Degrees

1
TEEP II A Pilot Evaluation of Joint Degrees

• Staffan Wahlén

2
TEEP II

• Transnational European Evaluation Project
• Aim to develop a methodology for external
  evaluation of joint Masters degrees
• Evaluates three programmes
• CoMundus Media and Communication
• EMLE European Master in Law and Economics
• EuroAquae Water Management

3
Three different programmes

• Length Comundus 3 semesters (90 ECTS)
• EMLE 1 year (60 ECTS)
• EuroAquae 2 years (120 ECTS)
• Coherence CoMundus 4 main areas, 2 locations
• EMLE 2 main areas, 2 3 locations
• EuroAquae different specialities, 3 locations,
  professional practice

4
Three different programmes

• Number of partners
• CoMundus 7
• EMLE 10
• Euroaquae 5
• Age
• CoMundus since early nineties
• EMLE since late 80s
• Euroaquae new

5
Joint European project

• Involves six quality assurance agencies
• Programmes involving five countries each, a total
  of nine
• Experts from a total of ten different countries
• Based on the European standards and guidelines
• Criteria inspired by the Dublin descriptors and
  the EUA Golden Rules

6
Evaluation process

• European Standards and Guidelines
• - Self-evaluation
• - Team of experts (peers)
• - Site visit
• - Public report
• - Follow-up

7
Organisation and management

• Both professional and academic aims
• Different levels of institutional support
• Different mechanisms for cooperation, information
  sharing
• Student support services
• Different conditions for EU students and non-EU
  students

8
Programme and programme delivery

• The international environment provides added
  value and personal development
• Harmonisation of teaching and assessment methods?
  Common textbooks exams?
• Common core diversification?
• Computer based learning platforms
• Staff development and exchange

9
Quality assurance

• Joint quality assurance
• Quality assurance practices involving students,
  staff and external stakeholders (alumni,
  potential employers)
• Student involvement and influence

10
Lessons learned

• The importance of institutional commitment and
  support
• The importance of consistent and regular
  co-operation, information exchange and compliance
  with agreements Programme coordinator, local
  coordinator, teachers, students

11
Lessons learned 2

• Roles of each partner clearly defined
• Legal problems must be defined and solved
• - Joint, double, multiple degree?
• Practicalities information, accommodation
• Common core vs special profile

12
Lessons learned 3

• Agreement on and awareness of teaching and
  assessment methodologies
• Use of ICT, electronic platforms
• Role of thesis, supervision and assessment
• Agreement on standards in terms of learning
  outcomes among staff and coordinators
• Opportunities for staff development and staff
  exchange

13
Lessons learned 4

• Importance of a joint quality assurance strategy
• Students, teaching staff, management, alumni,
  employers involved in quality assurance
• Regular course evaluations (electronic
  questionnaires), monitoring and external
  evaluations

14
Importance of involving those under review

• In order to be agreed on all the aspects of the
  review or
• At least in order to make sure that everyone is
  involved and informed
• TEEP II had an opening conference and a closing
  conference

15
Opening conference
16
Closing conference

17
Special challenges

• Who should evaluate or accredit joint programmes?
• European label
• Different legislation in different countries
  (special requirements for number of credits, for
  thesis)

18
Who should evaluate joint programmes?

• Mandatory evaluation (accreditation)
• - agreement among national agencies
• - Two agencies in co-operation
• - An expert panel of 5 persons including a
  student representative
• - Site visits to all partners, or a selection
  of partners
• - Programme report

19
Who should evaluate? II

• Voluntary evaluation (for label?)
• - QA organisation (on the European Register)
  chosen by the programme
• - The programme foots the bill

20
Further developments

• EUAs EMNEM internal quality assurance
• TEEP II external quality assurance
• TEEP III an evaluation combining the two
  aproaches