A bimonthly publication of AQU Catalunya

66

May 2013

At the Bucharest Ministerial Conference in April 2012, European ministers of higher education decided to revise the European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance (ESG). Ministers invited BUSINESSEUROPE, Education International, ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE and EQAR to prepare an initial proposal. Ministers envisage adopting the revised ESG at their next ministerial conference in Yerevan, Armenia, in 2015. The Steering Group has launched an open call for contributions to the revision process. The call addresses the Bologna Follow-Up Group (BFUG) as well as all others interested in contributing to the revision of the ESG.

AQU Catalunya has already prepared and sent its contribution. There are two documents that contain the background to this ESG revision proposal:

• Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area
• Mapping the Implementation and Application of the ESG (MAP-ESG Project)

Being familiar with these documents will help the reader to better understand what is proposed herein.

Stages of the revision

The revision is organised into three successive stages, each of which seeks to meet specific demands:

1. Making Part 1 of the ESG a more exhaustive list of the critical process in HEI;
2. Revising Part 2 and Part 3 of the ESG to redistribute certain portions of text between these two sections, specifically revising Part 3 to highlight the two types of standards contained there: some of these parts are aimed at specifying the nature and status of the QA agencies while others are focussed on the activities.
3. Writing a completely new Part 0 for the standards compiling issues related to the policy of higher education authorities.

The table below shows the general layout of the revised ESG. The most relevant proposals are identified in green. In boxes you can see details of AQU Catalunya’s suggestions:

1.1 Policy and procedures for quality assurance

Institutions should have a policy and associated procedures for the assurance of the quality and standards of their programmes and awards. They should also commit themselves explicitly to the development of a culture which recognises the importance of quality, and quality assurance, in their work. To achieve this, institutions should develop and implement a strategy for the continuous enhancement of quality.

The strategy, policy and procedures should have a formal status and be publicly available. They should also include a role for students and other stakeholders.

1.5 Strategic vision and planning

Institutions should determine the extent to which their policy and associated procedures for quality assurance and accountability contribute to the achievement of their mission. They should also commit themselves explicitly to recognising that a culture of quality, transparency and accountability are part of their values. To achieve this, institutions should include activities for the continuous enhancement of quality and accountability in their strategic planning. The strategy, policy and procedures for quality assurance and accountability should have a formal status and be part of their global strategic planning.

1.9 Learning activities and innovative teaching

Institutions should ensure that learning activities are adequate and suited to each programme. Institutions should have strategies to identify and disseminate best practices and they should promote the improvement of learning activities with an innovative teaching strategy.

Revision of Part 2

2.3 Processes fit for purpose

All external quality assurance processes should be designed specifically to ensure their fitness to achieving the aims and objectives for which they are established. These processes will normally be expected to include:

• A self-assessment or equivalent procedure by the institution subject to the quality assurance process;
• An external assessment by a group of experts including, as appropriate, student member(s) and site visits as decided by the agency;
• The publication of a report including any decisions, recommendations or other formal outcomes; and
• A follow-up procedure to review actions taken by the institution subject to the quality assurance process in the light of any recommendations contained in the report.

Revision of Part 3

3.7 Activities

Agencies should undertake external quality assurance activities (at institutional or programme level) on a regular basis. Moreover, external quality assurance procedures cannot be properly implemented when internal quality assurance processes are too weak or in the early stages. Therefore, external quality assurance procedures should be designed with a gradual, concatenated structure with the objective of:

Promoting the implementation of internal quality assurance procedures if they are not in place;

• Consolidating existing process and giving them a form that can be recognised by stakeholders and other institutions; and
• Demonstrating the effectiveness of internal quality assurance procedures to ensure the quality of the programmes offered by the institutions.

New Part 0

0.1 Higher education policy

Higher education authorities should have a policy and associated procedures for the organisation of higher education in their respective countries. They should also commit themselves explicitly to the development of a culture which recognises the importance of higher education as a public commodity that generates social and economic value and benefits. To achieve this, HEAs should implement a strategy for developing higher education and for establishing an interplay between it and other educational levels and the labour market. Said strategy, policy and procedures should have a formal status and be publicly available.

0.2 Approval, monitoring and regular review of higher education policy

Higher education authorities should have formal mechanisms for the approval, regular review and monitoring of their higher education policy and of the legal framework they have set up for higher education institutions.

0.3 Assessment of higher education institutions

Higher education authorities should assess the effectiveness and efficiency with which higher education institutions achieve their mission using published criteria, regulations and procedures which are applied consistently.

0.4 Resources for higher education

Higher education authorities should ensure that the relationship between the resources made available to HEIs and the quality of higher education provided by the institutions is consistent.

0.5 Information systems

Higher education authorities should ensure that they collect, analyse and use relevant information for the effective management of their higher education policy considering their national system and the international context.

0.6 Public information

Higher education authorities should regularly publish impartial, objective and up-to-date information, in both quantitative and qualitative terms, about their higher education programmes and activities.

Full text of the proposal by AQU Catalunya for the revision of the ESG (2013).