1. TEEP II – A Pilot Evaluation of Joint Degrees
Staffan Wahlén
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

2. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

3. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
TEEP II
Transnational European Evaluation Project
Aim: to develop a methodology for external evaluation of joint Masters degrees
Evaluates three programmes:
CoMundus – Media and Communication
EMLE – European Master in Law and Economics
EuroAquae – Water Management
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

4. Three different programmes
Length: Comundus – 3 semesters (90 ECTS)
EMLE – 1 year (60 ECTS)
EuroAquae 2 years (120 ECTS)
Coherence: CoMundus: 4 main areas, 2 locations
EMLE: 2 main areas, 2 – 3 locations
EuroAquae: different specialities, 3 locations, professional practice
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

5. Three different programmes
Number of partners
CoMundus
EMLE
Euroaquae – 5
Age
CoMundus – since 1988
EMLE – since 1990
Euroaquae – new
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

6. Joint European project
Involves six quality assurance agencies
Based on the European standards and guidelines
Criteria inspired by the Dublin descriptors and the EUA “Golden Rules”
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

7. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Evaluation process
European Standards and Guidelines
- Self-evaluation
- Team of experts (peers)
- Site visit
- Public report
- Follow-up
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

8. Organisation and management
Both professional and academic aims
Different levels of institutional support
Different mechanisms for cooperation, information sharing
Student support services
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

9. Programme and programme delivery
The international environment provides added value and personal development
Harmonisation of teaching and assessment methods? Common textbooks; exams?
Common core – diversification?
Computer based learning platforms
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

10. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Quality assurance
Joint quality assurance
Quality assurance practices involving students, staff and external stakeholders (alumni, potential employers)
Student involvement and influence
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

11. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned
The importance of institutional commitment and support
The importance of consistent and regular co-operation, information exchange and compliance with agreements: Programme coordinator, local coordinator, teachers, students
We have seen different levels of commitment of institutional leadership. It is quite clear that such support, both financially and “politically” contributes to the sustainability and even survival of a joint programme, which may not have a clear base in a faculty.
Regular forms of co-operation and exchange in order to agree on important aspects, pedagogical as well as formal, are essential for the smooth operation of the programme. The three programmes we have evaluated all have arrangements to meet regularly and contacts in between. The difficult thing is to commit all teaching staff to pick up all the information necessary. This applies, of course, especially to teachers whose main activities are in other programmes. So one conclusion is that teaching staff (and other staff) should be as much involved in the joint programme as possible.
The partners in a joint programme represent different specialities. And these specialities may help to create a natural progression in the programme, leading up to the final thesis. This must be spelt out very clearly to the students.
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

12. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned 2
Roles of each partner clearly defined
Practicalities: information, accommodation
Common core vs special profile
Legal problems must be defined and solved:
- Joint, double, multiple degree?
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

13. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned 3
Agreement on and awareness of teaching and assessment methodologies
Use of ICT, electronic platforms
Role of thesis, supervision and assessment
Agreement on standards in terms of learning outcomes among staff and coordinators
Opportunities for staff development and staff exchange
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

14. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Lessons learned 4
Importance of a joint quality assurance strategy
Students, teaching staff, management, alumni, employers involved in quality assurance
Regular course evaluations (electronic questionnaires), monitoring and external evaluations
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

15. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Special challenges
Who should evaluate or accredit joint programmes?
European label
Different legislation in different countries (special requirements for number of credits, for thesis)
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

16. Who should evaluate joint programmes?
Mandatory evaluation (accreditation)
- agreement among national agencies
- Two agencies in co-operation
- An expert panel of 5 persons including a student representative
- Site visits to all partners, or a selection of partners
- Programme report
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education

17. Swedish National Agency for Higher Education
Who should evaluate
Voluntary evaluation (for label?)
- QA organisation (on the European Register) chosen by the programme
- The programme foots the bill
- Label awarded by ENQA
Swedish National Agency for Higher Education