Bài giảng môn Anh văn - Quality in education

Quality in EducationTuning International Master's Programmes 13 December 2007Pirjo HalonenHead of Quality AssuranceContentsQuality conceptsBackground to Quality Assurance in EducationQuality - for whom?University of JyväskyläSummaryQualityDegree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfils requirementsCharacteristics: distinguishing featureRequirements: need or expectation that is stated, generally implied or obligatory(ISO 9000)Qualityexcellencevaluefitness for useconformity to requirementdefect avoidancemeeting customer’s expectationsQuality ManagementDirecting an organisation with regard to quality to establish policy and objectives and to achieve those objectives.Quality AssurancePart of quality management focused on providing confidence that quality requirements will be fulfilled.Quality Workmeans planningdoingchecking (evaluating)acting (developing, improving)Background to Quality Assurance in EducationThe Bologna process in 1999:The European Ministers of Education set a target to realise a coherent and cohesive European Higher Education Area (EHEA):Undergraduate and postgraduate levels in all European countriesEuropean Credit Transfer System (ECTS)Common framework of comparable degrees (Diploma Supplement)Recognition of studies abroadElimination of obstacles to the free mobility of students and teachersEuropean dimension in quality assuranceWhat is quality in education?Education quality is a multi-dimensional concept and cannot be easily assessed by only one indicator.Quality in Education – for whom?StudentsGraduatesEmployersStakeholdersTeachersAdministrative personnelQuality personnelFor studentsQuality of the lecturerExpertiseTeaching skillsTeaching methodsCommunication skillsApproachabilityEnthusiasmHumourFriendlinessFlexibilityFor students, cont.Quality of the curriculumFlexibilityLifelong learning – varying student pathwaysAppropriate contents of coursesAllowing to challenge practice when linking theory to the real worldUse of up-to-date evidenceFor students cont.Quality of social support systemsStudent support units - health care, student unionsPart time acceptedNetwork of other students on the course - learning from each other, motivationFor students, cont.The consequences arelearningpassing the examinations <-- motivation <-- enthusiasm of the lecturerWord-of-mouth communication follows from satisfaction with teaching.For graduatesMore working life relevance than academic relevance.Theoretical background.More guidance for studies. More time from professors to students.For employersEmployers do not place emphasis on information about the quality of a university.Most of them apply the reputation in their decision making:“grapevine” knowledge, or word-of-mouth communicationpersonal, regional, professional networksperformance of past graduatesprejudice against new universitiesFor stakeholdersIn Finland, mostly The Ministry of Education.Young graduates.Moderate studying time.Given quantitative objectives to be fulfilled.For administrative personnelExisting strategy for education improvement.Development and improvement of the quality of academic programmes.Efficiency and effectiveness of organisational structures within which the programmes can be provided and supported.Responsibilities well-defined.For administrative personnel, cont.Retaining students after a bachelor's degree.Excellent learning results.Excellent research results.Careful examination of opportunity costs.In quality auditsInstructions are extensive.The studying process from the student’s point of view is clearly defined.Curricula and teaching are well-timed.The university utilise feedback from graduates in their curriculum work.Definition, what kind of learning is expected – “in-depth learning”.In quality audits, cont.The learning path must be a process without breaks between departments.Shared practices in departments:personal curriculum (HOPS)systematic feedback systemscurriculum processcourse assessments post-graduate studiesIn quality audits, cont.Processes are well defined, assessed and developed.Guidelines to assure quality of education.The responsibilities well defined.A department of students services have been established and it has enough resources.A variety of teaching and testing methods are used.In quality audits, cont.Research of teaching  produces good practices.Pedagogic strategy.Two-way Quality!In a service process there are always two parties.In education also the students have duties.At the University of JyväskyläPresent practices are described in the quality manuals.A new education strategy is needed.Evaluation policies of the education have to be implemented.The education will be evaluated yearly.On the basis of the evaluation education will be developed.SummaryThe concept quality is defined in various ways depending on the speaker.Several approaches are needed.All the parties have rights and duties.A firm strategy is necessary to improve the quality.All the topics must be open for evaluation.ReferencesAlves H, Raposo M. Conceptual model of student satisfaction in higher education. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 2007; 18(5):571-588.Hill Y, Lomas L, MacGregor J. Students' perceptions of quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education. 2003; 11(1):15-20. Morley L, Aynsley S. Employers, quality and standards in higher education: Shared values and vocabularies or elitism and inequalities? Higher Education Quarterly. 2007; 61(3):229-249.Ross R, Gruber V, Szmigin I. Service quality in higher education: The role of student expectations. Journal of Business Research. 2007; 60(9):949–959Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area. European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education. EU Education and Culture. 2005. Yin Cheong Cheng, Wai Ming Tam. Multimodels of quality in education. Quality Assurance in Education 1997; 5(1):22–31.Kekäle T, Ilolakso A, Katajavuori N, Toikka M, Isoaho K. (2006). Kuopion yliopiston laadunvarmistusjärjestelmän auditointi. Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvoston julkaisuja 3:2006. Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvosto. Helsinki. Wahlbin C, Hieikkilä J, Hellberg M, Lindroos P, Nybom J, Corrnér S. (2007). Auditering av Svenska handelshögskolans kvalitetssäkringssystem. Publikationer av rådet för utvärdering av högskolorna 3:2007. Rådet av utvärdering. Helsinki. Jokinen T, Malinen H, Mäki M, Nokela J, Pakkanen P, Kekäläinen H. (2007). Tampereen teknillisen yliopiston laadunvarmistusjärjestelmän auditointi. Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvoston julkaisuja 4:2007. Korkeakoulujen arviointineuvosto. Helsinki. Tuomela J. (2007). Jyväskylän yliopistosta vuonna 2005 valmistuneiden maistereiden sijoittumisenseuranta. Tutkimus- ja rekrytointipalvelut. Jyväskylän yliopisto. Jyväskylä.