Presentation at EDEN Digital Learning Europe Annual Conference, Dublin, 19th June 2023.

1. Photo by Rae Wallis on Unsplash
Mark Brown
Eamon Costello & Prajakta (Lily) Girme
19th June 2023
National QA Guidelines for Digital Education
A Multi-layered Box of Chocolates

2. “Quality is an elusive term
for which there is a wide
variety of interpretations
depending upon the views of
different stakeholders.”
(Schindler, et al., 2015, p. 4)
Photo by Rae Wallis on Unsplash
National QA Guidelines for Digital Education
A Multi-layered Box of Chocolates

3. Building on OECD study
Development of National QA Guidelines
Enhancing European Standards & Guidelines
Outline

4. 2004
2005
Before we start…
2011 2016

5. “The overarching paradox is
that online and distance
education systems with their
digital content and the persistent
record of online transactions
provide a rich source of
evidence to enable quality
assurance and audit processes.
https://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2015/10879/pdf/Ossiannilsson_et_al_2015_Qualitymodels.pdf
Before we start…

6. 1. Building on OECD study
2022
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/digital-higher-education_f622f257-en

7. QA / QE
Processes Resources
I
n
p
u
t
s
O
u
t
p
u
t
s
Gap
Digital
Education
- Macro-Level
- Meso-Level
- Micro-Level
- Nano-Level
• Multifaced and
multifunctional
• Highly contextualised
• Institutions are central
• Owned & distributed
across institutions
• Conversational,
shares experiences
and involves feedback
loops
• Dynamic as part of a
living and thriving
quality culture
1. Building on OECD study

8. 1
In 23 OECD jurisdictions, we found no national framework, standards or guidelines for digital higher education,
and no evidence of a decision taken on how to approach the quality assurance of digital higher education.
2
In 8 OECD jurisdictions, we found common standards for digital and traditional study modes, with evidence of a
decision to apply the standards for the quality assurance of on-campus instruction to digital higher education.
3
In 12 OECD jurisdictions, we identified specific standards or guidelines for digital higher education. These either
cover all types of digital education or a specific type (or types) of digital education (e.g., hybrid education).
No approach for the quality assurance of digital higher education
Common standards and guidance for the quality assurance of digital higher education
Specific standards for the quality assurance of digital higher education
1. Building on OECD study

9. 2018
https://www.qqi.ie/sites/default/files/media/file-uploads/Statutory%20QA%20Guidelines%20for%20Blended%20Learning%20Programmes.pdf
1. Building on OECD study

10. 2021
Specific
https://mfhea.mt/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Guidelines-for-FHEI-V1.pdf
1. Building on OECD study

11. 1. Building on OECD study

12. Most
Common
Least
Common
Aggregated summary…
1. Building on OECD study

13. • An abundance of QA frameworks
• Many common dimensions shared across
the different QA frameworks
• Absence of output measures of QA
• Emergence of new QA considerations
• More research needed on how institutions
implement QA/QE frameworks
Findings…
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08923647.2018.1417658
1. Building on OECD study

14. What else is missing
from current QA frameworks?
(Brown, 2022)
1. Building on OECD study

15. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines
2023
Includes
M
icro-credentials
2022

16. What in a single word is the most
important quality consideration
that you would like to see in the
new QQI guidelines?
2. Development of National QA Guidelines

17. Closed 9th June 2023
2. Development of National QA Guidelines

18. Adapted
from
OECD
2. Development of National QA Guidelines

19. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

20. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

21. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

22. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

23. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

24. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

25. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

26. https://www.qqi.ie/what-we-do/engagement-insights-and-knowledge-sharing/current-consultations
2. Development of National QA Guidelines

27. 2. Development of National QA Guidelines

28. 3. Enhancing European Standards and Guidelines
2018

29. Policy for Quality
Assurance
• Policies for quality
assurance (ESG 1.1)
Teaching, Learning
and Assessment
Learning Resources
and Infrastructure
• Design and approval
of programmes (ESG
1.2)
• Student-centred
learning, teaching and
assessment (ESG 1.3)
• Learning resources
and student support
(ESG 1.6)
• Student-centred
learning, teaching
and assessment (ESG
1.3)
• Student admission,
progression,
recognition and
certification (ESG
1.4)
• Learning resources
and student support
(ESG 1.6)
Support for
Instructors and
Students
Feedback, Review
and Performance
Monitoring
• Programme design,
approval, monitoring
and review (ESG 1.2
and 1.9)
• Information
management (ESG
1.7)
• Public information
(ESG 1.8)
• Cyclical external
quality assurance
(ESG 1.10)
• Student-centred
learning, teaching
and assessment (ESG
1.3)
• Student admission,
progression,
recognition and
certification (ESG
1.4)
• Teaching staff (ESG
1.5)
• Learning resources
and student support
(ESG 1.6)
Do we need to update ESGs?
3. Enhancing European Standards and Guidelines

30. Adapted from
EADTU 2020
3. Enhancing European Standards and Guidelines

31. > What models or approaches to
learning design inform the
development, delivery and
evaluation of programmes?
> To what extent are students
engaged in active learning through
their use of digital tools and
resources?
> How does digital innovation support
assessment for learning and student
feedback?
> How is teaching, learning and
assessment informed by best
practice in digital higher education?
INDICATOR EVIDENCE
> An explicit model of learning design
is adopted for programme
development.
> Student evaluation data and results
from national surveys of learner
engagement.
> Mapping of programme assessment
and range and variety of digital tools
> Programme development plans
implement key lessons from
contemporary theory, research and
practice
TYPE
Ways of Measuring and Reporting
> Input | Resource
> Qualitative
> Output
> Quantitative
> Process
> Qualitative
> Process
> Qualitative
3. Enhancing European Standards and Guidelines

32. Final comment…
Chocolate is always
the answer no matter what
the question!
Quality remains an elusive concept but…

33. Staring, F., Brown, M., Bacsich, P., & Ifenthaler, D. (2022). Digital higher
education: Emerging quality standards, practices and supports, OECD Education
Working Papers, No. 281, OECD Publishing, Paris,
https://doi.org/10.1787/f622f257-en.
Volungevičienė, A., Brown, M., Greenspon, R., Gaebel, M., & Morrisroe, A.
(2021). Developing a High-Performance Digital Education System: Institutional
Self-Assessment Instruments. European University Association, Brussels.
Ossiannilsson, E., K. Williams, A. Camilleri and M. Brown (2015), Quality models
in online and open education around the globe: State of the art and
recommendations. International Council for Open and Distance Education, Oslo,
Norway. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED557055.pdf
Esfijani, A. (2018), “Measuring quality in online education: A metasynthesis”,
American Journal of Distance Education, 32/1, pp. 57-73, DOI:
10.1080/08923647.2018.1417658
Brown, M. (2022). The quest for quality in digital higher education: A critical
analysis of QA frameworks. Full paper at EDEN Digital Learning Europe Annual
Conference, Tallinn, Estonia, 20th June.
Key references
2022
https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-981-19-0351-9_41-1

34. Go raibh maith
agaibh!
Thank you