Prium Vienna 2008 Eval 2 * PRIUM Project : What is next ?

545 views
507 views

Published on

Developing appropriate quality assurance : Policies and tools - Quality Assurance and Evaluation

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
545
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
9
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Prium Vienna 2008 Eval 2 * PRIUM Project : What is next ?

  1. 1. Developing appropriate quality assurance: Policies and tools Quality Assurance and Evaluation
  2. 2. Mission and Aims <ul><li>Mission: </li></ul><ul><li>The University of Vienna’s Quality Assurance aims to ensure that permanent orientation towards quality and international standards becomes standard practice. </li></ul><ul><li>Aims: </li></ul><ul><li>To analyse the quality of research, teaching and administrative support which these require </li></ul><ul><li>To promote academic creativity and innovation </li></ul><ul><li>To develop ways to help make decisions regarding medium- and long-term planning </li></ul><ul><li>To provide public accountability </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>Organisation of Quality Assurance (QA): </li></ul><ul><li>Senate and Rectorate </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific Evaluation Board </li></ul><ul><li>Department of Quality Assurance </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>Organisation of Quality Assurance (QA): </li></ul><ul><li>Senate: Adoption of the Statute </li></ul><ul><li>Rectorate: Evaluation Plan </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific Evaluation Board (SEB): </li></ul><ul><li>“ Special institutions shall be institutions of the University, being subordinated to an independent, internationally tied expert direction.” (Organisation Plan): </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Prof. Dr. John Brennan, The Open University </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Prof. Dr. Hans-Dieter Daniel, Universität Zürich </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Dr. Dorothee Dzwonnek, DFG </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>Department of Quality Assurance (QA): </li></ul><ul><li>The University of Vienna’s department of Quality Assurance (QA) is responsible for the organisation of quality management in the following areas: </li></ul><ul><li>• Research </li></ul><ul><li>• Teaching </li></ul><ul><li>• Management and service provision </li></ul>
  6. 6. Comprehensive, peer-review-based evaluation <ul><li>Performance in research, teaching and the supporting management and service provision of these are submitted to a common quality analysis at the institutional level (faculty or centre). </li></ul>
  7. 7. Comprehensive, peer-review-based evaluation <ul><li>Statute and Evaluation Plan: </li></ul><ul><li>Faculties 2008 (5 years cycle): </li></ul><ul><li>Faculty of Computer Science </li></ul><ul><li>Faculty of Philosophy and Educational Sciences </li></ul><ul><li>Faculty of Social Sciences </li></ul><ul><li>Faculty of Physics </li></ul><ul><li>Service Units 2008 (7 years cycle): </li></ul><ul><li>Research Services and International Relations </li></ul>
  8. 8. Evaluation Interval 5 years ex-ante 5 years ex-post t+4 t+3 t+2 t+1 t t-1 t-2 t-3 t-4 t-5
  9. 9. Two stage process: Informed Peers Data, Analysis, Indicators (quantitativ) Self Assessement Report of the Faculty / Centre stage 1 stage 2 Peers´ Site Visit Peers´ Report Faculty´s Statements Follow-up Questions (qualitativ)
  10. 10. Peer evaluation Procedure <ul><li>Data, Analysis and Questions </li></ul><ul><li>Self Evaluation Report </li></ul><ul><li>External Evaluation: Site Visit and Report write-up </li></ul><ul><li>Follow Up </li></ul>
  11. 11. Data, Analysis and Questions <ul><li>Data and Analysis (faculty specific): </li></ul><ul><li>Research data and scientometric analysis of the publication output </li></ul><ul><li>Further data (people etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Data concerning teaching and results of the students´ assessment </li></ul>Self Evaluation Report <ul><li>Questions </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Structure and Strategy </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Research </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Study and teaching </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Human Resource Management </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Budget, Infrastructure and Administration </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Self Evaluation Report <ul><li>Faculty </li></ul><ul><li>Institute </li></ul><ul><li>Study program(s) </li></ul><ul><li>Persons </li></ul>Mission, Goals, Strategies  Data  Activities  Analysis - SWOT Analysis - Measures Faculty can formulate own questions Language is English (exceptions possible)
  13. 13. External Evaluation: The Peers <ul><li>Selection of Peers </li></ul><ul><li>The faculty/centre has the right to suggest peers. The following criteria should be observed: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Excellent international professional reputation </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Expertise in providing structured support to young scientists </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Knowledge in field of curriculum development </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Management experience in large academic facilities </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Experience with evaluations </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Appointment of peers is made by the head of the QA, who is not bound to the suggestions made by the head of the unit undergoing evaluation (Regulations § 5, para. 3). </li></ul><ul><li>Site visit </li></ul><ul><li>personal assessment of conditions on-site </li></ul><ul><li>personal discussions with the representatives of the faculty/centre </li></ul><ul><li>First draft of the report </li></ul>
  14. 14. Follow-up <ul><li>• Follow-up discussions with the Rector and responsible Vice Rectors </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Catalogue of measures proposed by the department of quality assurance </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Agreement between faculty and rectorate on the catalogue and on the implementation of outcomes of evaluation </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>• Start of a circle of quality </li></ul><ul><li>• Establishment of timelines </li></ul><ul><li>• Current evaluation process is completed </li></ul><ul><li>• Monitoring process begins </li></ul>
  15. 15. assessment of courses by the students <ul><li>The assessement of courses is supposed to </li></ul><ul><li>prompt the course instructors to reflect about the format and the content of their courses </li></ul><ul><li>aid in planning academic programs for the entire university </li></ul><ul><li>give an input into the self evaluation report of the faculty in the framework of the peer evaluation </li></ul>
  16. 16. Assessement of courses <ul><li>Cycle: Courses are to be evaluated at least every three semesters (about 2.500 courses/semester). Furthermore, it is possible to participate in course evaluations on a voluntary basis. </li></ul>

×