1. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe REVISION OF THE ESG: THE DRAFT INITIAL PROPOSAL Structural Reform WG, Gent(BE), 9-10 December 2013 Stefan Delplace 1

2. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Mandate from the Bucharest Communiqué 2012 “We acknowledge the ENQA, ESU, EUA and EURASHE (the E4 group) report on the implementation and application of the ‘European Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance’ (ESG). We will revise the ESG to improve their clarity, applicability and usefulness including their scope. The revision will be based upon an initial proposal to be prepared by the E4, in cooperation with Education International, BUSINESSEUROPE and the European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR), which will be submitted to the Bologna Follow-Up Group.” 2

3. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Working structure and process Steering group, composed of representatives from EUA, EURASHE, ESU, ENQA, Business Europe, EI, and EQAR: for discussion and decision Drafting group, composed of QA experts that have participated in the Map ESG project, nominated by E4: editing ESG following decisions of SG First discussed fundamental issues among partners (principles, scope) Aim at consensus among SH in QA, while taking in the feedback received from EHEA Ministries and the opinion of broader groups through open consultations in Spring 2013 Sources: MapESG report, feedback Ministries and broad open consultation in Spring 2013 3

4. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe 7 steering group meetings, alternated with drafting group meetings as from late summer 2012 Nov 2013 BFUG meeting in Vilnius: presentation of first revised draft, with feedback from BFUG members; Structural Reform wg (until 15 December) New draft to be prepared for early March 2014; discussion on the new version at the BFUG meeting in Athens, in April 2013 Adoption of the Revised ESG for QA at the Ministerial Conference in Yerevan (Armenia) 2015 4

5. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Guiding principles for the revision * Keep the strengths: integrated concept and understanding of QA, broad applicability, broad ownership Twin purposes of accountability and enhancement are a basis for trust in HEIs Overcome the weaknesses: vagueness, redundancies, inconsistencies * A.Hopbach, presentation draft initial proposal at BFUG, Vilnius, 8 Nov. 2013 5

6. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Guiding principles for the revision * ESG as an integrated part of the ‘Bologna- Infrastructure’, taking into account recent developments in QA and HE Guarantee adaptability to future developments Strike a balance between a thorough revision and stick to the old/keep what is not outdated * A.Hopbach, presentation draft initial proposal at BFUG, Vilnius, 8 Nov. 2013 6

7. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe SCOPE, CONTEXT, PURPOSES AND PRINCIPLES The draft initial proposal for revised ESG 7

8. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Structure of ESG in this first draft of the initial proposal: Structure of three parts remains, with IQA and EQA for HEIs, and EQA for QAAs. Standards and accompanying guidelines, which explain why a standard is relevant and which give the rationale behind the standard. 8

9. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Essential Content of this first draft: Focus on student centred learning, incorporating the whole learning process. Broad interpretation of the diversity and variety of provision of HE, while maintaining the focus on the program level. Contextualizing ESG in the year 2013 and beyond means taking into account the ‘Bologna Tools’ such as qualifications frameworks (in combination with learning outcomes), recognition, Diploma Supplement and ECTS). Made ESG applicable to all HE offered in the EHEA, regardless of the mode of study or place of delivery. 9

10. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe ESG: Four purposes They set a common framework for quality assurance systems at European, national and institutional level; They enable the improvement of quality of higher education in the European higher education area; They support mutual trust, thus facilitating recognition and mobility within and across national borders; They provide information on quality assurance in the EHEA. 10

11. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe ESG: Four principles Higher education institutions have primary responsibility for the quality of their provision and its assurance; Quality assurance processes respond to the diversity of HE systems, institutions and programmes; Quality assurance supports the development of a quality culture; Quality assurance processes involve stakeholders and take into account the expectations of all stakeholders and society. 11

12. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe General remarks from BFUG for improvement Increase transparency at the institutional level to safeguard the quality of teaching (part of fight against corruption and fraud, also in HE) A further contextualisation of the ESG, as QA systems in the EHEA are in different stages of development. A clearer reference to other guidelines (e.g. The EUA ‘Salzburg II Recommendations’ and UNESCO/OECD guidelines on “Quality provision in cross-border higher education”) ‘Salzburg II Recommendations’“Quality provision in cross-border higher education” 12

13. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe EUROPEAN STANDARDS FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE, PARTS 1-2-3 The draft initial proposal for revised ESG 13

14. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe structure and content of Part 1 in the draft proposal 10 standards compared to 7 in the current version of the ESG. Standard 1.2 has been split into Standards 1.2 and 1.9 in the draft ESG. A new standard 1.3 has been introduced on the student- centred learning (SCL). Standard 1.4 addresses the student life cycle putting more stress on the admission, progression, and completion and includes a reference to RPL. Standard 1.6 emphasises the diversity of student population. The wording has been revised for 1.7 and 1.8. Standard 10 has been moved from Part 2.7 of the current version. 14

15. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Main Changes in Part 1 (IQA within HEIs) The draft revised ESG focus on the missions of HE, namely, teaching and learning, research, and public responsibility Design of programme is mentioned more explicitly, reference to LO, ECTS, national QFs and QF-EHEA, EQF and to the Lisbon Recognition Convention (LRC) Diversity of student population emphasized. 15

16. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe What could be further improved in part 1/ feedback from BFUG ESG to be more LO oriented: intended LO should meet the international standards/benchmarking; more prominence to achieved LO (Standard instead of Guideline ?) take more into account the 3rd mission of HEIs, showing variety of missions of HEIs (involving employers, prof. bodies & other SH.; importance of employability) new forms of delivery (develop new criteria, different from traditional programs);. ESG should assess WBL; could more explicitly consider teaching and learning in formal and informal contexts; also make link with the regulated professions; 16

17. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe What could be further improved in part 1/ feedback from BFUG Link HE and research should be made clearer, and theme of research could be brought into different profiles of HEIs. Importance of also dealing with broad interpretation of ‘research’; avoid disintegration /disconnection of teaching and learning from research. The importance of research for academically oriented programmes should be emphasised. QA to contribute to improved financial management of HEIs QA has to be compatible to national QF, therefore to be seen in a generic sense, as it may exist in different settings. HEIs need a clear policy on QA, and an institutional code of conduct. 17

18. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe What could be further improved in part 1/ feedback from BFUG On student involvement: more guidance for students, assess adequate knowledge fit for the programs, remedial of students Link concept of transparency with quality; mission & profile of HEIs; bring themes of research into the different profiles; contextualise quality Importance of role of supervisors in doctoral programs and in internships, and of non-academic staff ESG has to strengthen the EHEA as a European initiative, stressing the diversity of HE systems 18

19. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe PART TWO EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE 19

20. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Structure and content of Part 2 in the draft proposal Part 2 in the draft revised ESG includes 6 standards compared to 8 in the current version. The content regarding the development of procedures, standards for procedures, and criteria were slightly rearranged. Standards 2.3 and 2.5 explicitly state that the experts’ full reports should be published. Standard 2.6 on complaints and appeals is new and has been moved here from Part 3 of the current ESG. Standard 2.7 of the current ESG has been moved to Part 1 and Part 3; whereas 2.8 has been moved to Part 3. 20

21. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Main changes in Part 2 (EQA of HEIs) Standards shifted to part 1 and Part 3 or vice versa to be more in line with the scope of the 3 parts Clear structure with links (bridges) between the 3 parts (IQA addressed in any EQA process) Student participation emphasized, involvement of professional groups, employers, international experts Publication of full review reports, which are evidence-based Greater flexibility for HEIs in the external QA of their internal QA systems Relevance of complaints appeals procedure emphasized. 21

22. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe What could be further improved in part 2/ feedback from BFUG More explicitness and orientation in purpose and information provision Greater external (employers, international experts) involvement in the composition of the peer review teams Create synergies between the QA system for teaching and learning and the one for research A glossary to provide guidance as to how to interpret the ESGs in different country contexts. 22

23. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe PART THREE QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR AGENCIES 23

24. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Structure and content of Part 3 in the draft proposal In the draft ESG, there are 6 standards compared to 8 in the current version. In order to eliminate any overlaps, the current Standards 3.1 and 3.5 have been merged into the new Standard 3.1. The newly introduced Standard 3.3 attempts to expand on the concept of independence of agencies. Standard 3.5 has been moved from Part 3. In 3.4, the notion of professional conduct has been introduced. 24

25. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe Main changes in Part 3 (S&G for QA agencies) 3.2: Recognizing that a public authority does not have to be from an EHEA country. 3.3: Notion of independence explained better 3.4: Professional conduct added in particular referring to working in other than the home country; limitation to recognized HEI 25

26. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe What could be further improved in part 3/ feedback from BFUG Need for a mechanism of questioning the positive decision for accreditation made by QAAs Not enough clarity on organisational independence of QAAs and members of review team The national level is to judge on the necessity of having a thematic reflection and analysis of QAAs At national level, QAAs should be held accountable to society at large. 26

27. www.eurashe.eu Supporting Professional Higher Education in Europe 27 http://revisionesg.worldpress.com esg.revision@ehea.info stefan.delplace@eurashe.eu Thank you for your attention!