I've just returned from the latest Tempus ALIGN planning meeting and ALIGN events as part of ANQA Q-Week in Yerevan. The events were held in YSULS Brusov University and in AUM American University of Armenia. On behalf of the ALIGN EU expert group, I presented discussion documents on 'ALIGN recommendations to HEIs' and on 'ALIGN recommendations to Governments'.
Below are some of the ALIGN recommendations for governments, in the spirit of discussion and development and mindful of the fact that the Tempus ALIGN project has not yet concluded... Much of the work on these tentative, possible recommendations was started by Liza Sizinova in July August 2016, in Ukraine - thank you Liza.
The need for continued
development of each territory’s NFQ. All territories have
started this process, but the NFQs need ongoing work and refinement - a lot of
beefing up and clarification. Where possible, that the territorial NFQs work
towards international recognition.
The need for a 'correct'
and clear, internationally understandable description of awards - Batchelors, Masters and PhD.
Any territory with
'professional' (lesser) awards will have to wrestle with fitting those into
international structures like Bologna?
Each territory must decide
on whether it is going for, or moving towards self-accreditation,
Ministry accreditation, or agency accreditation, licensing, a mixture of these
systems, or parallel systems? How is accreditation/validation going to be
rolled out and blended?
Each territory must decide
on the relationship between internal and external QA?
Academic autonomy – each HEI has the right to design and implement
their own academic programmes and has responsibility to provide quality of education for these
programmes. That means that qualification resulting from a programme should be
clearly and understandable to all stakeholders, but especially to the student stakeholders. All qualifications
should clearly relate to the correct level of the NQF and, consequently to the Framework
for Qualification of the EHEA.
The need to establish
regular (every 5 years?) peer review processes -
separately for academic programmes and for HEI's?
These peer review panels
will involve EU or international experts? It must be decided how many EU or
international experts on each panel? Two is quite normal? In some territories (eg Lietuva and Croatia), the agencies
prefer EU panel members to Chair the peer review panels.
How will the powers,
responsibilities and terms of reference of the peer review panels be legally
constituted in each territory?
Early peer reviews
MIGHT (for the first two cycles (10 years)) be more developmental than
regulatory (more like what we've just done with ALIGN)? Everyone involved
(HEIs, students, stakeholders, agency, Ministry etc) will need some
time to work into the culture of peer review?
If professional standards are to be developed and implemented, they must be created with Professional bodies and according to the local market and with the assistance of the
best foreign practices. The best option - professional standards must be prepared in two languages: local and
English? Any territory-specific Professional standards need to be transparent
for students, HEIs, agencies, stakeholders (industries/employers) and international partners.
National Student Survey for final-year students – these tools can help to know about:
- The quality of the teaching and learning experience that universities
provide;
- whether
academic programme goals are achieved or not achieved during
the study
programme;
- what
HEIs need to change or improve in their academic
programmes;
At the HEI level,
involvement of students needs a LOT of work. All the HEIs are
gathering student info and are encouraging 'student self-government', but with
no clear notion as to HOW student voice should be heard, or even what should be
done with the information gathered from student surveys. Are the HEIs listening
to students and acting on their feedback and concerns where this is
appropriate? Can students clearly see the impact of their inputs and
expressions of concern?
At HEI and national level, the Student Unions need
autonomy and need to develop the student voice and student representation for
themselves.
Ranking universities that will increase competition among them and increase the level of
quality. Will this increase competition and quality?
Develop and implement a registry that will track
the number of employed graduates - which will help to
forecast labour market needs. Q: Who should develop this?
HEIs? Some National Agency?
All HEIs and programmes
should be encouraged to move towards FORMAL links with
stakeholders, industry and employers - including MoUs, short contracts, QA
supervision, insurance, health and safety etc etc..., clear for employers, lecturers, HEIs and most of all clear
for the students.
The role of employers 'as the leads on examination boards' needs to be
reviewed (and possibly removed?).
From the evidence of the Tempus ALIGN peer-reviews, HEIs clearly
need help with the following points… (this is not a prioritised list)
- The link between student
learning activities and assessment, especially summative assessments, linked to modules, ILOs, workloads &
credits.
- Blended and constructively
aligned assessment.
- EU higher education
‘terminology’.
- Student-centred learning.
- The development of Student Handbooks.
- The development of
Programme Aims and Module Aims.
- The development of module
(or course) descriptors.
- How to foster effective
student representation.
- The developmental principles and process of regular peer
review.
- The development of
Programme Self Evaluation Documentation.
HEIs in each territory
would benefit from seeing clear examples of local best practice – starting with examples from our
ALIGN peer reviews (we’re thinking module descriptors from one university, a
clear exposition of IT student feedback in another university, clear
expositions of a third university’s relationships with employers and
'workplace' teaching arrangements etc…)
Such a 'best practice toolkit' or database or website,
should be established in each territory, clearly curated and updated in a
thoughtful, considered and measured manner. Maybe a clear
curatorial role for each national QA agency here?
The development of
student-centred learning is a cultural change which is just beginning in the
HEIs involved with Tempus ALIGN. Once again the only way forward is to provide
more training and information, more international links
and mobility, to work in the HEIs and with
students and to keep developing a student-centred culture in higher education.
This will take hard work and time.