This document discusses the progress of implementing the European Approach for quality assurance of joint higher education programs, which was adopted in Yerevan in 2015. It provides background on previous fragmented approaches to quality assurance of joint programs. The European Approach establishes consistent standards and procedures based on existing EHEA frameworks to allow for single quality assurance reviews of joint programs. While most countries would need to change laws to fully implement scenario 1, which provides for external quality assurance at the program level, some have implemented scenario 2 of relying on institutional accreditation. Barriers to further implementation include the need for legal changes and lack of pressure from higher education institutions. The EQAR is working to support implementation through information and discussion.

1. European Quality Assurance
Register for Higher Education
The European Approach – where do we
stand one year after Yerevan?
DAAD conference “Internationalization and Quality Assurance in HE”
Berlin, 1 July 2016
Colin Tück

2. Background
 Approaches and pilots for single reviews (e.g. JOQAR)
 Working, but complex
 Need to accommodate different national criteria
 Not always quality-related, but often structural
 Sometimes contradictory (e.g. # of ECTS Master thesis)
 Make sense nationally, but difficult to understand for foreign peers
 Consequence: “fragmented reviews” often the easiest solution
 Aim
 Ease accreditation of joint programmes
 Enable single reviews, reflect the joint character also in QA

3. Approach
 The idea: agreed and consistent European framework
 Standards for quality assurance of joint programmes
 Procedure for quality assurance of joint programmes
 No additional national criteria
 Adopted by EHEA ministers in Yerevan (May 2015)
Standards and Guidelines
for Quality Assurance
in the EHEA (ESG)
European Quality
Assurance Register
for HE (EQAR)
Qualifications Framework
of the EHEA (QF EHEA)
European Approach for
QA of Joint Programmes
Criteria for
registration
Based on
ESG & QF
Applied by
EQAR-reg. Agencies
Referred in
standard 1.2

4. 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“)

5. In a nutshell
Before After
Multiple, fragmented reviews Single review
Combining various national rules
and criteria
Agreed Standards, based on ESG
& QF-EHEA
Complex procedures, ad hoc
design
Agreed Procedure

6. National Implementation
 Scenarios:
1)External QA at the level of individual programmes
→ legal changes required (usually)
2)External QA at institutional level
→ in the autonomy of HE institutions (usually)
 Clusters:
 Scenario 1: 34 countries (AD, AL, AM, AZ, BG, BY, CY, CZ, EE, ES, FR, GE,
GR, HR, HU, IS, IT, KZ, LI, LT, LU, LV, MD, ME, MK, PL, PT, RO, RS, RU, SE, SI, SK, UA)
 Scenario 2: 6 countries (BA, CH, FI, MT, VA, UK)
 Mixed: 7 countries (AT, BE, DE, DK, IE, NL, NO)
 No obligatory EQA: 1 country (TR)

7. Availability of the European
Approach
Available to all higher
education institutions
(either through recognition of single
external quality assurance procedure for
programmes or by virtue of HEIs being
self-accrediting)
Available to some higher
education institutions or
only under specific
conditions
Discussions ongoing
Not available

8. Slow implementation?
 Possible reasons:
 Hesitation to lift national rules or “monopoly”
 Too small of a matter for change of law
 On “wait list” until next bigger change/reform
 Lack of pressure from HE institutions
 Lack of urgency
 But: which Bologna reform was implemented
within a year…?

9. Use in practice
 Keen interest expressed by HE institutions
 But very few practical examples yet
 Why?
 HEIs and QAAs depend on national rules
 Number of JP is not huge
 Re-accreditation following existing solution?
 Who wants to be first?

10. EQAR activities
 Information on European Approach
 Page www.eqar.eu/topics/joint-programmes.html
 Information on national implementation
 Frequent questions to follow
 Possibly: list of programmes reviewed
 Transparency where European Approach is used
 Ongoing discussion with EHEA governments
 Topic in BFUG WG2 “Implementation”
 Contribute to monitoring/stocktaking (in BFUG)

11. Thank you for your attention!
Contact:
colin.tueck@eqar.eu
+32 2 234 39 11
#EQAJP @ColinTueck @EQAR_he