Presentation for representatives of Bulgarian higher education institutions, 28 January 2015, Sofia

1. European Quality Assurance
Register for Higher Education
New Developments in External Quality
Assurance in the European Higher
Education Area (EHEA)
28 January 2015, Sofija
Colin Tück

2. Topics
1. About EQAR
2. External Quality Assurance Crossing Borders
3. Revision of the European Standards and Guidelines (ESG)
4. European Approach for QA of Joint Programmes

3. 1. About EQAR

4. European Quality Assurance Register
for Higher Education (EQAR)
Register of quality assurance agencies that comply
substantially with European Standards and Guidelines
for Quality Assurance (ESG)
Established by E4 at Ministers' request
Jointly governed by stakeholders (E4, social partners)
and EHEA governments
External review of agencies by independent experts
Independent Register Committee
 Composed of 11 quality assurance experts
 Nominated by E4, but not representatives
 Takes all decisions related to registration

5. Agencies and Governments
 36 quality assurance
agencies registered
 32 Governmental
Members

6. 2. External Quality Assurance Crossing Borders

7. Recognition of International Quality
Assurance Activity (RIQAA) Project
 Research questions:
 How higher education institutions (HEIs) make use of the
possibilities to request quality reviews by foreign agencies?
 What are the national requirements in place as well as inhibiting
factors both on the side of governments and HEIs?
 What are the opportunities and challenges faced by QA agencies
and HEIs in reviews across borders?
 Implementation (Oct 2013 – Oct 2014) with EU financial support:
 Desk research on legal frameworks
 Survey and seminar for QA agencies
 Case-studies at higher education institutions
 Final project report & final conference

8. Cross-Border Openness to
EQAR-Registered QA Agencies
• Countries recognising
internationally active EQAR-
registered agencies to operate as
part of the national requirements
for external QA;
• Countries recognising foreign
agencies as part of the national
requirements for external QA
• Countries not open to external
QA evaluation by an
internationally active EQAR-
registered QA agency

9. Country Which agencies? Which HEIs? Which types of EQA? Recognition?
EQAR-reg. National req. All Some Only JD/TNE Inst. Prog. Directly Approval
BG     
DK    
LI     
RO     
AT     
PL     
KZ     
AL     
AM     
BE-Fl     
LT     
PL     
DE*     
DE*     
EE     
Characteristic of national legal frameworks

10. Number of countries outside
the EHEA in which QAAs
have carried out cross-
border reviews (2009-2013)
Number of countries within the EHEA in which QAAs
have carried out cross-border reviews (2009-2013)

11. The rationale for the review
The reviews were sometimes carried out in the context of national
reforms or to achieve accreditation for regulated professions.

12. Selection of a suitable QAA
The selection process involves considerable desk research (e.g. expertise in
different methodologies of external quality assurance, countries where agencies have
worked)

13. Results: perception and impact
Opportunities Challenges
 Development of HEIs
international profile
 Choosing a QA that fits their
needs (i.e. specialised agency)
 Recognition of degrees
 Support in the implementation of
Bologna Tools
 Increased stakeholder
engagement
 Development of QA practices and
procedures
 Identify a suitable agency
 Extensive preparation phase
 Review in foreign language
 Explaining own context
 Legislative context
 Complexity of the review (e.g.
joint and multiple degrees)

14. 3. Revision of the
European Standards and Guidelines (ESG)

15. Background and mandate
 Current ESG adopted in 2005
 Need updating taking account of developments since
 Need for clarification
 Mandate for revision by Bucharest Ministerial
Communiqué (April 2012)
 Steering Group composed of ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE, EI,
BUSINESSEUROPE and EQAR
 Drafting of the document by Drafting Group composed of QA
experts nominated by EUA, EURASHE, ESU, and ENQA
 Proposal endorsed by Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG) in
September 2014
 Subject to approval by Ministers (Yerevan, May 2015)

16. Guiding principles
 Keep the strengths: integrated concept and
understanding of QA, broad applicability, broad
ownership
 Overcome the weaknesses: vagueness, redundancies,
inconsistencies
 Update: ESG are part of the “Bologna Infrastructure”,
taking into account recent developments in QA and HE
 Guarantee adaptability to future developments
 Keep a balance between changing too much and too little

17. Scope and concepts
 Focus on learning and teaching in higher education, including:
 Learning environment
 Links to research and innovation
 The ESG are applicable to all types of HEIs and programmes
 Irrespective of mode of provision
 “Programme” understood in the broadest sense
 Higher education institutions and quality assurance agencies
 Can have policies and processes for other activities beyond the scope
of the ESG
 Need to take account of their respective context when deciding how to
implement the ESG

18. Purposes of the ESG
 They set a common framework for quality assurance
systems for learning and teaching at European, national
and institutional level
 They enable the assurance and improvement of quality
of higher education in the European higher education
area
 They support mutual trust, thus facilitating recognition
and mobility within and across national borders
 They provide information on quality assurance in the
EHEA

19. Underpinning principles
 HEIs have primary responsibility for the quality
of their provision and its assurance
 QA responds to the diversity of higher education
systems, institutions, programmes and students
 QA supports the development of a quality culture
 QA takes into account the needs and
expectations of students, all other stakeholders
and society

20. Structure
 Overall structure of the ESG remains:
1.Standards and guidelines for internal quality assurance
2.Standards and guidelines for external quality assurance
3.Standards and guidelines for quality assurance agencies
 Standards:
set out agreed and accepted practice for QA in HE in the EHEA and
should, therefore, be taken account of and adhered to by those
concerned, in all types of HE provision.
 Guidelines:
explain why the standard is important and describe how standards
might be implemented. They set out good practice in the relevant
area for consideration by the actors involved in quality assurance.
Implementation will vary depending on different contexts.

21. Current ESG (2005) – Part 1 Revised ESG (2015) – Part 1
1.1 Policy and procedures for quality
assurance
1.1 Policy for quality assurance
1.2 Approval, monitoring and periodic
review of programmes and awards
1.2 Design and approval of programmes
1.3 Assessment of students 1.3 Student-centred learning, teaching and
assessment
1.4 Quality assurance of teaching staff 1.4 Student admission, progression,
recognition and certification
1.5 Learning resources and student
support
1.5 Teaching staff
1.6 Information systems 1.6 Learning resources and student support
1.7 Public information 1.7 Information management
1.8 Public information
1.9 On-going monitoring and periodic
review of programmes
1.10 Cyclical external quality assurance

22. Current ESG (2005) – Part 2 Revised ESG (2015) – Part 2
2.1 Use of internal quality assurance
procedures
2.1 Consideration of internal quality
assurance
2.2 Development of external quality
assurance processes
2.2 Designing methodologies fit for
purpose
2.3 Criteria for decisions 2.3 Implementing processes
2.4 Processes fit for purpose 2.4 Peer-review experts
2.5 Reporting 2.5 Criteria for outcomes
2.6 Follow-up procedures 2.6 Reporting
2.7 Periodic reviews 2.7 Complaints and appeals
2.8 System-wide analyses

23. Current ESG (2005) – Part 3 Revised ESG (2015) – Part 3
3.1 Use of external quality assurance
procedures for higher education
3.1 Activities, policy and processes for
quality assurance
3.2 Official status 3.2 Official status
3.3 Activities 3.3 Independence
3.4 Resources 3.4 Thematic analysis
3.5 Mission statement 3.5 Resources
3.6 Independence 3.6 Internal quality assurance and
professional conduct
3.7 External quality assurance criteria
and processes used by the agencies
3.7 Cyclical external review of agencies
3.8 Accountability procedures

24. 4. European Approach for Quality
Assurance of Joint Programmes

25. Current Situation
 Frameworks for joint and single reviews have been tested (e.g.
JOQAR), but are often complex and burdensome, as they need
to combine national criteria:
 Not always quality-related, but often structural
 Can be contradictory (e.g. # of ECTS Master thesis)
 Sometimes only make sense nationally, but are difficult to understand to
foreign peers and agencies
 Is external QA the place to enforce national legal provisions?
 The consequence:
 “Fragmented reviews” is often the easiest solution …
 … but does it reflect the joint character of the programme?

26. Proposal - overview
 Status: BFUG mandated ad-hoc expert group to prepare
proposal, endorsed by BFUG, subject to approval by Ministers
 The idea: one agreed and consistent European framework for
quality assurance of joint programmes
 Based on the Bologna infrastructure only:
 Qualifications Framework (QF-EHEA)
 European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG)1
 No additional national criteria
 Allow for integrated, single reviews of joint programmes
 Carried out by a suitable EQAR-registered QA agency
1
The proposal is compatible with the current proposal for the revised ESG.

27. Proposal - Standards
 Standards for Quality Assurance of Joint Programmes
 Based on QF-EHEA and ESG part 1
 Applied to specific case of joint programmes:
joint development and responsibility, several locations and languages, joint
provision, …
 Issues:
 Status, joint design and delivery
 Learning Outcomes
 Study Programme
 Admission and Recognition
 Learning, Teaching and Assessment
 Student Support
 Resources
 Transparency and Documentation
 Internal Quality Assurance

28. Proposal - Procedure
 Procedure for External QA of Joint Programmes
 Based on ESG (part 2), specified for joint programmes:
panel composition, site visit(s) etc.
 To be used only if external QA at programme level is needed
 Issues:
 Self-Evaluation Report
 Review Panel
 Site Visit
 Review Report
 Formal Outcome and Decision
 Appeals
 Reporting
 Follow-Up
 Periodicity

29. Application
Cooperating HEIs
need programme
accreditation/eval.
Cooperating HEIs are “self-accrediting”
for programmes, i.e. accredited/
evaluated/audited at institutional level
Single accreditation/eval.
of JP, based on agreed
Standards & Procedure,
by any EQAR-reg. agency
Joint internal QA review
of the JP (in line with ESG), may use
agreed Standards, external
review takes account of HEIs' internal
Recognised to fulfil QA require-
ments in all countries involved
European Approach, based on ESG & QF-EHEA, and Bucharest Communiqué
(“recognise QA decisions of EQAR-registered agencies on joint and double degree programmes“)

30. Expected Impact
 Joint programmes = joint quality assurance
 More joint responsibility (i.e. for QA)
 More involvement in QA of the whole programme
 One single reference points (= the Standards)
 Simplify process to create/design programmes

31. Conclusion
 European dimension in QA is growing
 Reality is sometimes ahead of regulations
 Revised ESG and European Approach consolidate the
EHEA framework for QA
 Follow-up at national level needed after Yerevan
Thank you for your attention!
Contact: colin.tueck@eqar.eu / +32 2 234 39 11