CS II.4 - P. Pol
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

CS II.4 - P. Pol

on

  • 343 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
343
Views on SlideShare
343
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Total number of replies has increased by 40%Rate of return is very difficult to calculate – online questionnaires some of which went to spam – if counting only those we know got through, rate of response is 19.3 (of all those sent =14.2)

CS II.4 - P. Pol CS II.4 - P. Pol Presentation Transcript

  • IAU 14th General Conference, 27-30 November 2012 Towards a quality culture for internationalization Patricia Pol, Université Paris-Est, IAU Board member, AERES - France pol@u-pec.fr1
  • Outlines 1. A matter of decreasing risks and enhancing benefits ? 2. An increasing concern for external stakeholders 3. A shared vision for HEIs and a necessity to promote self evaluation processes 4. An attitude towards cooperative approaches : the case of joint degrees2
  • 1. A matter of risks and benefits ?3
  • 4 © IAU – October
  • 5
  • 2. An increasing concern for external stakeholders 1. The « integrated approach » : the international dimension is included in the existing guidelines of quality assurance agencies : Programmes evaluation or accrdeditation Institutional evaluation Research units evaluation (case of the French agency AERES till 2012)  Accountability / Improvement6 IAU 14th General Conference, Puerto Rico, 27-30 November 2012
  • 2. An increasing concern for external stakeholders 2. The « international-focused approach » : with specific instruments Codes (code of ethical practice in international education (Canada-1996), to international students (Australia- 1998) Reviews (IQR, Internationalisation quality review,OECD- 1999) Mapping and benchmarking (IMPI- Indicators for measuring and profiling internationaliation, 2012) Advisory services (ISAS-AIU- 2010) Quality label for internationalization of institutions and programmes (NVAO-2012)7
  • 3. A shared vision for HEIs Quality Culture and internationalisation - An issue of shared values, principles and attitudes at all levels of HEIs (and not only staff or students involved in international, mobility or quality matters) - A policy and set of strategical approaches (rational / « chemin faisant ») - A learning process and a tool for reflection8
  • 3. Necessity to promote self evaluation processes A learning process through self evaluation What does internationalisation mean for the community ? What are we trying to do at international level, where do we want to go and how ? How do we know it works ? How do we change in order to improve ?  The choice of a specific or an integrated approach can depend on the degree or « maturity » of internationalisation9
  • 3. A shared vision and self evaluation processes An issue of indicators Attitude indicators Export-import strategies / cooperation strategies (development of joint programmes/branch campuses, strategic partnership, membership in international networks) Internationalization of staff in the decision bodies, among faculty members, Language skills of the curricula and staff,  Ethnocentric, Regiocentric, Polycentric (see H.W. Perlmutter, 1974 analysing the Multinational Firms)10
  • 3. Self evaluation processes Structural indicators Numbers of agreements , rates of international students, in coming out-going mobility (staff and students), part of the budget dedicated to internationalization, size of the international office, number of international publications, research projects… Performance indicators % fund raising, evolution of the position in the international rankings? Income generated  Tools for benchmarking, mapping and understanding evolutions11
  • 4. A collaborative approach : the case of the evaluation of joint degrees Some key issues What is the added value of a joint degree ? How to set up and assess « jointness criteria » ? How to move towards joint evaluation or mutual recognition between quality assurance agencies ?  Towards specific guidelines ?12
  • Focusing on the major issues. Critical Paths. Start at the Beginning – Develop Logically and Strategically (EMQA-UE)13
  • Concluding considerations A culture can’t be decided by decret but quality can be enhanced through : - A collective responsility (HEIs leaders and staff at each level, students, associations, policy makers, quality assurance agencies) - Policies, strategies and tools for internal and external quality processes No one best way to assess internationalization but fit for purpose14
  • References Measuring and assessing internationalization, Madeleine Green, NAFSA, 2012 Internationalisation of higher education in Europe and its assessment, trends and issues, Hans de Wit, NVAO 2012 Global and regional trends in internationalization, threat to or improvement of quality ? Patricia Pol, INQAAHE-ENQA seminar, Brussels, 2011 www.IMPI-toolbox.che.de www.ecaconsortium.net/main/projects/joqar www.emqa.eu15