• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
ECTS and Diploma Supplements labels, Raimonda Markevicience
 

ECTS and Diploma Supplements labels, Raimonda Markevicience

on

  • 1,503 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,503
Views on SlideShare
1,462
Embed Views
41

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
15
Comments
0

2 Embeds 41

http://madrid2008.bolognapromoters.net 40
http://madrid2008.bolognaexperts.net 1

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

    ECTS and Diploma Supplements labels, Raimonda Markevicience ECTS and Diploma Supplements labels, Raimonda Markevicience Presentation Transcript

    • ECTS and Diploma Supplement labels Raimonda Markeviciene Madrid, 30 June-1 July, 2008
    • What is the history of ECTS/DS labels?
      • 2003
      • ECTS: 91 application
      • DS: 85 applications
      • 2004
      • ECTS: 55 applications
      • DS: 72 applications
      • 2005
      • ECTS: 46 application
      • DS: 102 applications
    • Reaction of European HEIs:
      • Why do we need it? What is the use?
      • This institution got ECTS the label???!!!
      • Who are the assessors that made this decision???!!!
      • Our institution is too big to do this
      • We are good and well known as we are to care about labels…
      • Only third rate institutions apply for the label….
      • Etc…
    • Indeed, why?
      • Not supported nationally
      • Quality assurance agencies do not care for it
      • No extra money for all the bother and hard work
    • But did anybody ask themselves:
      • Is our HEI prepared to think global and perceive international tendencies, demands and competition?
      • Does our HEI need better visibility in the process of globalization? How do labels help?
      • Can visibility be fostered by the labels?
      • What does the label mean for our students? Our partners? Ourselves?
    • Or maybe it:
      • Tells about transparency in recognisable format
      • Proves s tudent-centred / workload based approach
      • C onvince s senior management to consider administrative standards / guarantees adminstrative excelence
      • Guarantees q uality of information available to students and their proxies (parents, funders etc.) / and potential partners
      • Increases quality of mobility / provides more possibilities for joint degrees
      • Helps marketing the institution at home and abroad
      • Aid s recognition of periods of study and qualifications
      • Increases p restige / Quality: showing that ınstitution uses DS/ECTS properly
    • How does selection go?
      • Keep in mind: Checklist Users’ guide
      • Based on written evidence and at this particular point in time (3 programmes/3 course units)
      • Relative quality – the best of the bunch does not mean the best in absolute terms
      • Will the route through NA help to avoid this?
    • ECTS label – simple requirements difficult to fulfill
      • Information Package and Course Catalogue(IP/CC) for ALL I and II cycle degree programmes in local language and English (unless English is l-ge of instruction); (accessible through the Web page)
      • Correct use of credits (student workload based)
      • Recognition of study period abroad
      • Correct use of other ECTS tools (Learning agreement, Transcript of Records)
    • ECTS - Knock out criteria (Polite form: Prerequisites for assessment)
      • Not all degree programmes described;
      • Allocation of credits is not based on student workload;
      • No IP/CC version in English;
      • The dossiers for outgoing or incoming students do not fulfill basic criteria:
      • Of programmes, countries, partner institutions;
      • One or more forms are missing in the 3 X 2 dossiers.
    • The most common mistakes for IP/CC
      • No mirror information in two languages
      • Missing information items in degree and course descriptions
      • IP/CC is difficult to find on the institutions webpage
      • ECTS is used only by some departments
      • ECTS is not applied to all students
      • Credits do not equal 60 per year (no course structure diagram)
      • No information on LO
    • Istanbul recommendations for IP/CC:
      • Should institutions also describe short programmes?
      • Of course they should! Short programmes are already descrıbed ın some countrıes
      • Often short courses lead on to other courses and so the ir description is necessary though should not influence the decision on label award. (Subject to debate?)
    • Istanbul recommendations for IP/CC:
      • Credit requirements per respective period 20/30
      • For the formal programme, the credit distribution must be respected, i.e. 20 / 30/ 60... B U T
      • What can an institution do if the student could not achieve the correct number of credıts at host institution? : SENSIBLE FLEXIBILITY for mobile students
    • The most common mistakes for student documents:
      • ToR:
      • The copies of the ToR are not certified/stamps missing
      • Missing explanation of the local grading system
      • Students awarded credits though they did not pass exams
      • Missing local grades, ECTS grades and/or credits
      • LA:
      • Missing dates and signatures
      • Inconsistency between LA, ToR and proof of recognition
      • No credits indicated in the LA
      • LA not in place before the mobility
    • Istanbul recommendations on grading:
      • If not compulsory for the label (as it is the case):
      • Better not to use it, than to use it wrongly
      • DON’T REPLACE local grades and grading systems with ECTS rating scheme
      • Recommendation: working group on the proper use and implementation of the ECTS Grading System
    • The most common mistakes for proofs of recognition:
      • No information on recognition procedures
      • Not clear how credits and grades have been converted
      • Not clear what period at home institution is replaced by the period abroad
      • Recognition documents without signatures and/or stamps
      • Proofs made just for the label application
    • Istanbul recommendations on proofs of recognition:
      • Transcript of records from a database,
      • If not, they must APE (be Authentic, Plausible, and Explicit)
    • DS label - requirements easier to fulfill?
      • The DS should be issued for all students:
      • Automatically
      • Free of charge
      • In two languages (local and widely spoken foreign); Unless a country’s law foresees DS only in a widely spoken language.
    • DS - knock out criteria (Polite form: Prerequisites for assessment)
      • Not fulfilled - 4 hard copies
      • Not fulfilled (except institutions with less than four degree programmes):
      • 2 different first cycle programmes
      • 2 different second cycle programmes
      • Or
      • 4 integrated programmes
    • The most common mistakes for DS:
      • The DS does not follow official model
      • Changed or missing preamble
      • Transcripts are not included in the DS
      • Not all cycles are represented in the dossiers submitted
      • No proofs that DS is issued to ALL students and Free of charge
      • The courses taken abroad are not indicated with the original titles
      • Not clear what credits are used
      • Filled in examples instead of copies submitted
      • Confusing translation of degree titles
    • Istanbul recommendations for DS:
      • DS LABEL:
        • Should last longer than 3 years
        • Consistency in terminology: preferably use Bologna terms
    • What should a HEI be aware of when applying for the label?
      • Be aware that label is not only prestige but also responsibility
      • Be convinced that it is able to live and work according to the label standards after it got one (better proper use of ECTS and DS without the labels than the labels combined with poor practice)
      • Be aware that it puts itself under the “magnifying glass” of its partners
      • Proper fulfillment of formal application requirements is very important when applying for quality labels
    • National and European evaluation – danger or help? National European Clearer information for the evaluator Easier to see if information is transparent enough Better awareness of national legislation Better compliance to ECTS/DS “Philosophy” Relative quality in national context Relative quality in European context
      • Suggestions:
      • Look for consistency (common platforms)
      • Try judging if separate missing items hamper transparency
      • Decide if solutions offered/adopted by a HEI foster mobility and are beneficial to students
    • For fellow experts:
      • The wind is never favorable to those who don’t know where they are going.
      • Seneca
      • We have to believe in what we promote. Only our belief allows us to be critical and credible.
      • Thank you for your attention!