The document summarizes a presentation about quality assurance in e-learning. It discusses moving from inspection to inspiration by focusing on dialogue. It provides context of operations in Europe and models for quality assurance. It also discusses a case study from Norway and perspectives after 40 years in distance education with a focus on student needs, accessible technology, and a quality culture. Recommendations are made to use standard evaluation methods adapted for online learning and ensure learner support and best practices.

1. A QualityDialogue-
From Inspection to
Inspiration
Ingeborg Bø,
Norway
European Foundation for Quality in E-learning
1

2. A Quality Dialogue
To
From
Inspiration
Inspection
Ingeborg Bø
EDEN Senior Fellow, Norway
2

3. I shallspeakabout:
Quality through dialogue
The context within which we are operating
Models for quality assurance
A case study from Norway
Thoughts at the end
3

4. http://www.youtube.com/visitnorway#p/u/38/Jz_fo5-wfUk
Iceland
Finland
Norway
Sweden
Scotland
Denmark
4

6. 6

7. 7

8. My golden learningperspectives
- after 40 years
8

9. My golden learning
perspectivesafter 40 years
in distanceeducation:
alwayskeepthestudent´sneedsin mind
usetechnology to thebenefitoflearningand
make it accessible
ensurehighqualitythrough a qualityculture
9

10. My referencepoints
 NADE - Norwegian Association for Distance and
Flexible Education www.nade-nff.no
 EDEN – European Distance and E-learning Network
http://www.eden-online.org
 ICDE – International Council for Open and Distance
Education www.icde.org
 EFQUEL – European Foundation for Quality in
E-learninghttp://www.qualityfoundation.org
10

11. EuroeanFoundationforQuality in E-Learning
EFQUEL
http://www.qualityfoundation.org/
A membership organisation, 100 members
EFQUEL enhances
the quality of eLearning in Europe by
providing services for members
and support for all stakeholders
Networking: Innovation Forum 14 -16 Sept.2011, Oeiras,
Portugal
11

12. Themefor this seminar:
Higher Education
Rankings
and e-learning
12

13. Have fun
13

14. Tony Bates and Albert Sangrà, 2011
http://batesandsangra.ca
14

15. Qualityassurance and evaluation (Chapter 6)Bates and Sangrà
(2011)
Qualityassurancemethodsarevaluable for
accreditationagenciesconcernedaboutinstitutionsusinge-
learning to cut corners or reducecostswithoutmaintaining
standards.
Theycan be useful for providinginstructorsnew to
teachingwithtechnology, or strugglingwithitsuse, withmodelsof
best practice to follow.
However, the best guaranteesofquality in e-learningare a
commitment by theleadership to supportinginnovation in
teaching, instructorswelltrained in bothpedagogy and
theuseoftechnology for teaching, highlyqualified and
professionallearningtechnology support
staff, adequateresources
(especiallyregardinginstructor:studentratios), appropriatemetho
dsofworking (teamwork, projectmanagement), and
systematicevaluation.
Generally, the same standards thatapply to online
learningshouldalsoapply to face-to-faceteaching. 15

16. Recommendation9
(Bates and Sangrà)
Use standard methodsof program approval, review and
evaluation, slightlyadapted for
thespecialcircumstancesof online learning.
Ensurethatlearner support is provided in suitableways for
off-campus students.
Use a team approach, withinstructional designers and web
support staff, and best practice in online course
design, for hybrid and distancecourses.
Ensurethatthecourse design is adapted to
meettheneedsofoff-campuslearners.
Beginapplyingsomeofthesetechniques to there-designof
large face-to-faceclasses.
16

17. ” I could never have accomplished my
Master’sdegreewithoutthepossiblity to study via e-
learning,” says Mona Berg
Jenssen, motherofthreechildren, rectorof 17

18. Congratulations to Marte
Baade
Netstudentoftheyear 2010
Norway!!
She is an active student at NKI, has
completed
threecourses in childcare, passed
exams and nowdoing her fourthcourse.
She is almost blind.
”She is an excellent student, ambitious,
structured in her studies and veryactive
in the Forum supporting and encouraging
her fellow students.”
18

19.  http://gfx.nrk.no/vewStzq0
dLU3qr-
PsB61HQ4kKgZbPvcLU
SAUW9o5pssw.jpg
 The netteacher of the year 2010 Norway: Mathis Persen Bongo
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5RgrxxQSoc
19

20. TheSocial web
Facebook, twitter, linkdin, slideshare, openeducationalresources, openeducationalpracti
ses, usergeneratedcontent etc. etc.
20

21. OECD-CERI
Qualityassurance in Tertiary Education:
CurrentPractises in OECD Countries.
Viktoria Kis, August 2005
www.oecd.org/edu/tertiary/review
Qualityassuranceprocedurescan serve two
major purposes:
improvement and accountability.
There is an uneasybalancebetweenboth
purposes, whichfrequentlyraisesthequestio
nofincompatibility (Vroeijenstijn, 1995a).
21

22. A differentapproach to quality
Maria Jose Lemaitre. President in RIACES, Iberoamerican Network for QualityAssessment and
Assurance in Higher Education,
Doingthe same but better Innovate and improve
Improvement
Change: newissues,
newapproaches
Currentsituation
Innovation
22

23. The Quality Dilemma
 Lack of recognition of e-learning in many countries=
absence of standards
 Lack of differentiation between quality standards in e-
learning and conventional education
 Global versus contextualized standards
 Difficulties in selecting appropriate quality approaches
 Lack of research and exchange of practices in some regions
of the world
Dr. NarimaneHadj-Hamou
Assistant Chancellor for Academic Development. HBMEU, Dubai
President of the Middle East e-Learning Association

24. The context
24

25. EuropeanUniversityAssociation (EUA)
Recommendations on
Quality - 2009
1. Contextsensitive –Agencies
2. Developmentalapproach 2. Allowrisktaking and
failure
3. Inclusive
3. Sharingexperiences in
4. Engagingall key actors QA
1. Partnership HEI
25

26. ”ExaminingQualityCulture: Part 1 – Quality Assurance Processes
in Higher Education Institutions”
European University Association (EUA) PUBLICATIONS 2010
Quality assurance as a component of quality culture
“There needs to be a perceived value of quality assurance. Quality
culture and quality assurance are not the same thing. You can have
good QA in place but not necessarily a quality culture. The challenge
is linking the outcomes of QA to the development of a quality culture
that enhances the student experience.”
- Respondent to the survey
“Much of the quality is dependent on the informal nature of staff/student
relationships. The increasing calibration of quality indicators has led to
a concern that this relationship will become formalised and thus less
productive.” -
Respondent to the survey
26

27. Quality assurance as a component of
quality culture (EUA)
“…quality culture refers to an organisational culture that
intends to enhance quality permanently and is
characterised by two distinct elements:
on the one hand, a cultural/psychological element of
shared values, beliefs, expectations and commitment
towards quality and,
on the other hand, a structural/ managerial element with
defined processes that enhance quality and aim at
coordinating individual efforts. “
(EUA 2006: 10)
27

28. European FederationforQuality in E-learning
http://www.qualityfoundation.org
The Foundation (2005) undertakesactivities to:
 contribute to thequalityofe-learning in Europe
and providesleadership in thisfield
 promotethe European
diversityofqualityapproaches and services in
thefieldoflearning, education and training
 broadenthediscussion and
discourseoneLearningquality
 provide a single entrypoint for eLearningquality.
28

29. The OPAL Vision
Unesco, ICDE, EFQUEL, Open Univeristy
UK, AaltoUniveristy, UniversidadeCatólicaPortugese, University Duisburg-Essen
Focusonthepractisesof OER
ratherthantheresources. Better understanding
willlead to improvements in thequalityof OER and
more innovation.
Open EducationalResourcePractise (OEP)
constitutethe range
ofpractisesaroundthecreation, use and
managementof OER withtheintent to
improvequality and innovative education.
29

30. EFQUEL Innovation Forum
2010
Innovation Forum 2010
”What are
thequalityimplic
ations in an
increasingly
open context?”
30

31. EFQUEL Innovation Forum 2010
Recommendations
”HOW CAN QUALITY APPROACHES EVOLVE AND ENHANCE
INCLUSION, INNOVATION AND EXCELLENCE"
Confidence
Leadership
culture
Policy support
31

32. EFQUEL Innovation Forum 2011
CERTIFY THE FUTURE...?!
Accreditation, Certification and Internationalisation
32

33. Models for
EUROPEAN DISTANCE AND E-LEARNING NETWORK
QualityA NETWORK AND MEETING PLACE FOR
THE OPEN, DISTANCE AND E-LEARNING COMMUNITY IN EUROPE
Assurance
33

34. Different kinds ofcertification and
accreditationofe-learning
•Public accreditation. Regulatory
framework (European Network for Quality
Assurance, ENQUA)
•Certification of e-learning as part of
a broader system
(UNIQUE, EFMD-CEL)
•Certification within a system of
agreed association standards
(Commonwealth of Learning, EADTU
E-xcellence, NADE) 34

35. The UNIQUe Certification

36. History

37. UNIQUe Value Proposition
A methodology for implementing
quality Technology Enhanced Learning(TEL)
system-wide throughout an institution

38. UNIQUe Value Proposition
Access to world class expertise in the
field of TEL quality management and
implementation

39. UNIQUe Value Proposition
Sustained support and continuous
engagement with
quality improvement processes

40. UNIQUe Value Proposition
Approach enhances
entire institutional innovation policy

41. UNIQUe Value Proposition
Continually evolving criteria and
standards

42. UNIQUe Value Proposition
A clear, standardised and transparent
system for
recognition and certification

43. A Methodology for
System-Wide TEL

45. The UNIQUe Criteria
Each criterion looks at how
ICT is embedded into these processes

46. 1. Application
 Formal process
 Submission of Application Data Form:
Short questionnaire
Factual information
English
Allows preliminary formal assessment of the university’s quality in
comparison with the UNIQUE quality criteria
Two types of institutions: universities or independent institutions
within university (schools, faculties,…)

47. 2. Eligibility
 Formal acceptance of application
Start of process for quality improvement & accreditation
 UNIQUe supervising body
 No guarantee
 Introductory briefing session f2f/by phone

48. 3. Self-Assessment
Higher Management in dialogue with stakeholders
Self-critical not promotional; strenghts-weaknesses,

49. 4. Peer-Review
 Pool of independent peer-reviewers: experts in
HE, eLearning, Quality, University Management
 Teams of 3 experts / trained reviewers
 Guidebook & tools (open questionnaires,...)
 Review of SAR and questionnaire results from staff and
students & background info
 Communicate list of persons they wish to interview & schedule
 Preparatory meeting reviewers
 Peer review visit (2-3 days): interviews with higher
management & other stakeholders (students, tutors,...)
 Preliminary conclusions & feedback establish agreed upon
developments
REPORT Peer-review report incl. Steps for future development
 Agreed upon developments – check after 1.5 years
 Ratings
 Recommendations

50. 5. Awarding Body Decision
Chair + 4 expert members
Final decision
Recommendations from the reviewers
Certification 3 years
(with reporting of progress at 1.5 years)
Candidate certification: 1 year improvement
Non certification: -> 3 years

51. 6. Continuous Improvement
Development RoR = Report on Results after 18 months
Based on the steps for improvement the Peer Review
Team had recommended

52. EUROPEAN DISTANCE AND E-LEARNING NETWORK
A case study from Norway
A NETWORK AND MEETING PLACE FOR
THE OPEN, DISTANCE AND E-LEARNING COMMUNITY IN EUROPE
52

53. Norwegian Association for Distance and Flexible Education
NADE, a member organisation, founded in 1968
Formulated “Code of good practice for distance education”
Law regulating the activities from 1948 with an external
agency for quality control
New law 1993 introducing internal quality assurance
Quality guidelines developed in 1993
(Ljoså, Rekkedalet.al), revised several times, latest 2010
NADE´s standing committee on quality since 1993
NOKUT: National agency for quality assurance regulates
tertiary education according to ENQUA´s Guidelines
(ESG)
53

54. Norwegian Association for Distance and Flexible Education
Quality guidelines
 Regulated by law
 Institutions accredited by the Ministry of
Education
 Requires that the institutions have a system
for quality assurance
 The responsibility for quality guidelines lies
with NADE
54

55. NADE´sQuality guidelines 2011
A new structure with more focus on quality culture:
1. Quality management and quality work
2. Organisational issues
3. Course development
4. Information and counselling
5. Study-process (enrolment, administration and
information, tutors´ contract, tutoring, evaluation and
documentation)
55

56. 56

57. Thoughts at the end
 Let us move from inspection to inspiration
and stimulate the development of a quality
culture
 Encourage dialogue between accreditation
bodies and distance education
practitioners
 Distance education must be accepted as
an integral part of the ordinary educational
system
 Put more focusonquality in thesocial web
57

58. My golden learning
perspectivesafter 40 years
in distanceeducation:
alwayskeepthestudent´sneedsin mind
usetechnology to thebenefitoflearningand
make it accessible
ensurehighqualitythrough a qualityculture
58

59. Thankyou!
ingebob@online.no
Slides at
http://www.slideshare.net/IngeborgBoe/
59