1. PRO-EAST Workshop Rome, 9 – 11 May 2007 Promotion and Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards Two Cycles of European Engineering Education: Dublin Descriptors, FQ-EHEA, EQF - LLL and EUR-ACE Standards Günter Heitmann, Technical University Berlin SEFI, E4/TREE, EUR-ACE

2. 1. Need for qualitative standards in the Bologna Process and the two European Frameworks for Qualifications 2. EUR-ACE standards and its relation to European Framework Standards 3. Improving curricula and teaching / learning arrangements by orientation on Framework Standards

3. Three central aims of the Bologna Declaration of 1999: - a system of comparable and readible degrees - a system based on two main cycles - quality assurance with a view to developing comparable criteria and methodologies Second Cycle Degree SCD First Cycle Degree FCD Second Cycle Program SCP First Cycle Program FCP Hard Standard: Minimum 3 years Soft Standard (~ 5 years) (Bachelor) (Master)

4. Typical options for European HE systems 2007 Source: G. Augusti

5. 1. Need for qualitative standards in the Bologna process For comparability and recognition of degrees as well as quality assurance in the common European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010 not only structural and quantitative (cycles, ECTS, credits for cycles) but also qualitative reference points turned out to be necessary; For comparability and recognition of degrees as well as quality assurance in the common European Higher Education Area (EHEA) by 2010 not only structural and quantitative (cycles, ECTS, credits for cycles) but also qualitative reference points turned out to be necessary; The Bologna-Bergen Follow-up Conference 2005 adopted the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA ( FQ – EHEA) including the „Dublin Descriptors“ as outcomes oriented qualitative level indicators for higher education; The Bologna-Bergen Follow-up Conference 2005 adopted the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA ( FQ – EHEA) including the „Dublin Descriptors“ as outcomes oriented qualitative level indicators for higher education; In addition the European Commission in 2006 adopted a European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF – LLL) with 8 levels including the 3 Bologna cycles with the bachelor, master and doctorate level but slightly different indicators; In addition the European Commission in 2006 adopted a European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF – LLL) with 8 levels including the 3 Bologna cycles with the bachelor, master and doctorate level but slightly different indicators;

6. BERLIN COMMUNIQUE (2003): „ Ministers encourage the member States to elaborate a framework of comparable and compatible qualifications for their higher education systems, which should seek to describe qualifications in terms of workload, level, learning outcomes, competences and profile. … Within such frameworks, degrees should have different defined outcomes. » BERLIN COMMUNIQUE (2003): „ Ministers encourage the member States to elaborate a framework of comparable and compatible qualifications for their higher education systems, which should seek to describe qualifications in terms of workload, level, learning outcomes, competences and profile. … Within such frameworks, degrees should have different defined outcomes. »

7. The shift from Input to Outcomes as main challenge: Outcomes can be addressed either as programme outcomes Outcomes can be addressed either as programme outcomes or more specifically as student learning outcomes with regard to programmes, modules or other kinds of learning situations; or more specifically as student learning outcomes with regard to programmes, modules or other kinds of learning situations; Definition of learning outcomes: Definition of learning outcomes: Statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to do at the end of a period of learning; Statement of what a learner is expected to know, understand and/or be able to do at the end of a period of learning; Learning outcomes can be phrased in different terms and be more or less comprehensive, besides knowledge and skills also covering competences and attitudes. Learning outcomes can be phrased in different terms and be more or less comprehensive, besides knowledge and skills also covering competences and attitudes.

8. Expected advantages of outcomes orientation: Expected advantages of outcomes orientation: 1) increase of transparency for different groups of customers, 2) stronger emphasis on student learning and competence achievement, 3) facilitation of recognition and mobility, including recognition of prior and experiential learning, 4) better alignment and integration of teaching, learning and assessment and of education, practice and life long learning 5) improvement of quality assurance, 6) increase of accountability

9. Bologna Process: The Framework for Qualifications of the European Higher Education Area (Bergen 2005) Based on the three cycles and degree levels with the possibility to introduce an intermediate level within the first cycle (short cycle); Based on the three cycles and degree levels with the possibility to introduce an intermediate level within the first cycle (short cycle); Quantitative descriptors in terms of ECTS Credits for the first and second cycle; the third cycle not specified in terms of ECTS Credits; Quantitative descriptors in terms of ECTS Credits for the first and second cycle; the third cycle not specified in terms of ECTS Credits; Adoption of the „Dublin Descriptors“ for the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA (FQ – EHEA) as the generic outcomes based qualitative indicators for each degree level and the short cycle. Adoption of the „Dublin Descriptors“ for the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA (FQ – EHEA) as the generic outcomes based qualitative indicators for each degree level and the short cycle.

10. The „Dublin Descriptors“ as shared qualitative indicators (Joint Quality Initiative, 2005) First proposed by the Joint Quality Initiative ( see: http://www.jointquality.org ) in March 2003 focused on the first and second cycle level, 2005 enhanced by the doctorate and short cycle level descriptors; First proposed by the Joint Quality Initiative ( see: http://www.jointquality.org ) in March 2003 focused on the first and second cycle level, 2005 enhanced by the doctorate and short cycle level descriptors; http://www.jointquality.org Generic descriptors of required outcomes in 5 areas: Generic descriptors of required outcomes in 5 areas: 1. Knowledge and understanding 1. Knowledge and understanding 2. Application of knowledge and understanding 2. Application of knowledge and understanding 3. Making judgements 3. Making judgements 4. Communication 4. Communication 5. Learning skills 5. Learning skills

11. Dublin Descriptors: Knowledge and Understanding Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - have demonstrated knowledge and understanding that builds upon and - have demonstrated knowledge and understanding that builds upon and extends their general secondary education, and is typically at a level extends their general secondary education, and is typically at a level that, whilst supported by advanced textbooks, includes some aspects that, whilst supported by advanced textbooks, includes some aspects that will be informed by knowledge of the forefront of their field of study; that will be informed by knowledge of the forefront of their field of study; Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: –have demonstrated knowledge and understanding that is founded upon and/or enhances that typically associated with the first cycle, and that provides a basis or opportunity for originality in developing and /or applying ideas, often within a research context;

12. Dublin Descriptors: Application of Knowledge Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - can apply their knowledge and understanding in a manner that indicates - can apply their knowledge and understanding in a manner that indicates a professional approach to their work or vocation, and have a professional approach to their work or vocation, and have competences typically demonstrated through devising and sustaining competences typically demonstrated through devising and sustaining arguments and solving solving problems in their field of study; arguments and solving solving problems in their field of study; Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: –can apply their knowledge and understanding and problem solving abilities in new or unfamiliar environments within broader (or multidisciplinary) contexts related to their field of study;

13. Dublin Descriptors: Making judgements Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - have the ability to gather and interpret relevant data (usually within their - have the ability to gather and interpret relevant data (usually within their field of study) to inform judgements that include reflection on relevant field of study) to inform judgements that include reflection on relevant social, scientific or ethical issues; social, scientific or ethical issues; Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: –have the ability to integrate knowledge and handle complexity, and formulate judgements with incomplete or limited information, but that include reflecting on social and ethical responsibilities linked to the application of their knowledge and judgements;

14. Dublin Descriptors: Communication Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - can communicate informations, ideas, problems and solutions to both - can communicate informations, ideas, problems and solutions to both specialist and non-specialist audiences; specialist and non-specialist audiences; Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: –can communicate their conclusions, and the knowledge and rationale underpinning these, to specialists and non-specialist audiences clearly and unambiguously;

15. Dublin Descriptors: Learning skills Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the first cycle are awarded to students who: - have developed those the learning skills that are necessary for them to - have developed those the learning skills that are necessary for them to continue to undertake further study with a high degree of autonomy; continue to undertake further study with a high degree of autonomy; Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: Qualification that signify completion of the second cycle are awarded to students who: –have the learning skills to allow them to continue to study in a manner that may be largely self-directed or autonomous.

16. Functions of the Framework for Qualifications of the EHEA FQ-EHEA supposed to be an „overarching framework“ and reference for current or future national qualifications frameworks; FQ-EHEA supposed to be an „overarching framework“ and reference for current or future national qualifications frameworks; The national frameworks by referring to the European ones should allow to assign national qualifications to the Bologna levels and facilitate comparability and recognition; The national frameworks by referring to the European ones should allow to assign national qualifications to the Bologna levels and facilitate comparability and recognition; The European and National Frameworks are not understood as prescriptive for programme development but seem to have respective implications; The European and National Frameworks are not understood as prescriptive for programme development but seem to have respective implications; Discipline and subject specific standards like EUR-ACE and national ones should aim in general to comply with the generic framework standards. Discipline and subject specific standards like EUR-ACE and national ones should aim in general to comply with the generic framework standards.

17. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning (EQF – LLL) The EQF – LLL comprises 8 levels covering both vocational training and university level education and training; The EQF – LLL comprises 8 levels covering both vocational training and university level education and training; The EQF is also a „framework of framework“ as national frameworks and qualification systems should refer to it by 2009; The EQF is also a „framework of framework“ as national frameworks and qualification systems should refer to it by 2009; It is based on learning outcomes, described in terms of knowledge, skills and competence, it shall facilitate the recognition of prior and experiential learning; It is based on learning outcomes, described in terms of knowledge, skills and competence, it shall facilitate the recognition of prior and experiential learning; Levels 6, 7 and 8 compare to the three Bologna cycles, level 5 to a short cycle in higher education or respective programmes in further vocational or continuing education; Levels 6, 7 and 8 compare to the three Bologna cycles, level 5 to a short cycle in higher education or respective programmes in further vocational or continuing education; Legislative co-decision procedures under way in the Eur. Parliament in 2007 Legislative co-decision procedures under way in the Eur. Parliament in 2007

18. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning: EQF – LLL Standards for level 6 (bachelor) and level 7 (master) Knowledge: Knowledge: level 6: advanced knowledge of a field of work or study, involving a critical understanding of theories and principles; level 6: advanced knowledge of a field of work or study, involving a critical understanding of theories and principles; level 7: highly specialised knowledge, some of which is at the forefront of knowledge in a field of work or study, as the basis for original thinking; critical awareness of knowledge issues in a field and at the interface between different fields; level 7: highly specialised knowledge, some of which is at the forefront of knowledge in a field of work or study, as the basis for original thinking; critical awareness of knowledge issues in a field and at the interface between different fields;

19. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning: EQF – LLL Standards for level 6 (bachelor) and level 7 (master) Skills: Skills: level 6: advanced skills, demonstrating mastery and innovation, required to solve complex and unpredictable problems in a specialised field of work or study; level 6: advanced skills, demonstrating mastery and innovation, required to solve complex and unpredictable problems in a specialised field of work or study; level 7: specialised problem-solving skills required in research and/or innovation in order to develop new knowledge and procedures and to integrate knowledge from different fields; level 7: specialised problem-solving skills required in research and/or innovation in order to develop new knowledge and procedures and to integrate knowledge from different fields;

20. The European Qualifications Framework for Lifelong Learning: EQF – LLL Standards for level 6 (bachelor) and level 7 (master) Competence: Competence: level 6: manage complex technical or professional activities or projects, taking responsibility for decision-making in unpredictable work and study contexts, take responsibility for managing professional development of individuals and groups; level 6: manage complex technical or professional activities or projects, taking responsibility for decision-making in unpredictable work and study contexts, take responsibility for managing professional development of individuals and groups; level 7: manage and transform work or study contexts that are complex, unpredictable and require new strategic approaches, level 7: manage and transform work or study contexts that are complex, unpredictable and require new strategic approaches, take responsibility for contributing to professional knowledge and practice and/or for reviewing the strategic performance of teams; take responsibility for contributing to professional knowledge and practice and/or for reviewing the strategic performance of teams;

21. 2. EUR-ACE Standards and its relation to European Framework Standards EUR-ACE standards with regard to expected Programme Outcomes have been derived primarily from requirements at the „entry into the profession“ and not just from „academic“ requirements, taking appropriate standards in various European countries into account; EUR-ACE standards with regard to expected Programme Outcomes have been derived primarily from requirements at the „entry into the profession“ and not just from „academic“ requirements, taking appropriate standards in various European countries into account; Dual level: According to the Bologna system of cycles the expected outcomes are defined as generic outcomes for the first cycle degree (EUR-ACE bachelor) and for the second cycle degree (EUR-ACE master), with the first cycle degree already providing „employability“ and an entry into the engineering profession; Dual level: According to the Bologna system of cycles the expected outcomes are defined as generic outcomes for the first cycle degree (EUR-ACE bachelor) and for the second cycle degree (EUR-ACE master), with the first cycle degree already providing „employability“ and an entry into the engineering profession; The outcomes oriented EUR-ACE Standards aim to satisfy also the level descriptors of the Framework for Qualifications (FQ) of the EHEA but are necessarily more specific; The outcomes oriented EUR-ACE Standards aim to satisfy also the level descriptors of the Framework for Qualifications (FQ) of the EHEA but are necessarily more specific; They are supposed to function as a sectoral „framework of frameworks“, namely with regard to the quality and/or accreditation standards of national agencies devoted to engineering programmes; They are supposed to function as a sectoral „framework of frameworks“, namely with regard to the quality and/or accreditation standards of national agencies devoted to engineering programmes;

22. EUR-ACE Standards for Programme Outcomes EUR-ACE Standards for Programme Outcomes EUR-ACE standards for programme outcomes are generic for engineering and focus on 6 areas of graduate attributes and competence achievement: EUR-ACE standards for programme outcomes are generic for engineering and focus on 6 areas of graduate attributes and competence achievement: - Knowledge and Understanding: FCD: 4, SCD: 2 outcomes are specified, - Knowledge and Understanding: FCD: 4, SCD: 2 outcomes are specified, - Engineering Analysis: FCD: 3, SCD: 4 outcomes specified; - Engineering Analysis: FCD: 3, SCD: 4 outcomes specified; - Engineering Design: FCD: 2, SCD: 3 outcomes specified; - Engineering Design: FCD: 2, SCD: 3 outcomes specified; - Investigations: FCD: 3, SCD: 4 outcomes specified; - Investigations: FCD: 3, SCD: 4 outcomes specified; - Engineering Practice: FCD: 4, SCD: 3 outcomes specified; - Engineering Practice: FCD: 4, SCD: 3 outcomes specified; - Transferable Skills: FCD: 5, SCD: 7 outcomes specified; - Transferable Skills: FCD: 5, SCD: 7 outcomes specified; For the First Cycle Degree (FCD), the EUR-ACE-Bachelor, 21 outcomes are required and need to be addressed and achieved by the programme applying for the EUR-ACE label, the Second Cycle Degree (SCD), the EUR-ACE Master, requires 23 outcomes; For the First Cycle Degree (FCD), the EUR-ACE-Bachelor, 21 outcomes are required and need to be addressed and achieved by the programme applying for the EUR-ACE label, the Second Cycle Degree (SCD), the EUR-ACE Master, requires 23 outcomes;

23. EUR-ACE Standards for Programme Outcomes EUR-ACE Standards for Programme Outcomes EUR-ACE outcome standards are usually phrased in terms of „ability to...“ statements; they need to be further specified by the accreditation agencies or programme provider with regard to engineering branches; EUR-ACE outcome standards are usually phrased in terms of „ability to...“ statements; they need to be further specified by the accreditation agencies or programme provider with regard to engineering branches; Example: Engineering Design - First Cycle graduates should have: Example: Engineering Design - First Cycle graduates should have: - the ability to apply their knowledge and understanding to develop and realise - the ability to apply their knowledge and understanding to develop and realise designs to meet defined and specified requirements; designs to meet defined and specified requirements; - an understanding of design methodologies, and an ability to use them; - an understanding of design methodologies, and an ability to use them; Second Cycle graduates should have: Second Cycle graduates should have: - an ability to use their knowledge and understanding to design solutions to - an ability to use their knowledge and understanding to design solutions to unfamiliar problems, possibly involving other disciplins; unfamiliar problems, possibly involving other disciplins; - an ability to use creativity to develop new and original ideas and methods; - an ability to use creativity to develop new and original ideas and methods; - an ability to use their engineering judgements to work with complexity, technical - an ability to use their engineering judgements to work with complexity, technical uncertainty and incomplete information; uncertainty and incomplete information;

24. Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards and some open questions Implementation of EUR-ACE Standards and some open questions Are the EUR-ACE outcome standards appropriate and comprehensive enough, in particular to achieve a first degree quality compatible with global standards (Washington Accord) and the European Frameworks for Qualifications? Are the EUR-ACE outcome standards appropriate and comprehensive enough, in particular to achieve a first degree quality compatible with global standards (Washington Accord) and the European Frameworks for Qualifications? Do all 21 EUR-ACE Programme Outcomes for the First Cycle Degree or all 23 for the Second Cycle Degree need to be addressed by national accreditation standards and respectively achieved by the programme providers before a EUR-ACE label can be awarded? Do all 21 EUR-ACE Programme Outcomes for the First Cycle Degree or all 23 for the Second Cycle Degree need to be addressed by national accreditation standards and respectively achieved by the programme providers before a EUR-ACE label can be awarded? Is it necessary to introduce different levels of attainment with regard to the required outcomes and do we need respective shared performance or outcomes indicators? Is it necessary to introduce different levels of attainment with regard to the required outcomes and do we need respective shared performance or outcomes indicators? How can a EUR-ACE appropriate outcomes assessment be implemented by programme providers and evaluated by National Agencies and external reviewers? How can a EUR-ACE appropriate outcomes assessment be implemented by programme providers and evaluated by National Agencies and external reviewers? How can or should EUR-ACE standards be improved? Need for a special Quality Assurance System within National Agencies and ENAEE? How can or should EUR-ACE standards be improved? Need for a special Quality Assurance System within National Agencies and ENAEE?

25. 3. Improving Curricula and Teaching/Learning arrangements by orientation on Framework Standards Outcomes and competence based Qualification Frameworks and the EUR-ACE accreditation requirements are only reference points; Outcomes and competence based Qualification Frameworks and the EUR-ACE accreditation requirements are only reference points; Accreditation Agencies as well as programme providers may want to go beyond the described minimum standards; Accreditation Agencies as well as programme providers may want to go beyond the described minimum standards; Faculty and teaching staff has to get involved in discipline, branch, programme, subject and module related specification of learning objectives and intended learning outcomes; Faculty and teaching staff has to get involved in discipline, branch, programme, subject and module related specification of learning objectives and intended learning outcomes; A comprehensive process of alignment of programme planning, teaching/learning arrangements, an appropriate outcomes assessment and feed-back for continuous quality improvement is needed; A comprehensive process of alignment of programme planning, teaching/learning arrangements, an appropriate outcomes assessment and feed-back for continuous quality improvement is needed; Programme providers have to make evident and the external reviewers (peers) have to evaluate whether required outcomes are achieved. Programme providers have to make evident and the external reviewers (peers) have to evaluate whether required outcomes are achieved.

26. ABET - Evaluation & Assessment Cycles “2-loop Process” Input from Constituencies Input from Constituencies Evaluate Objectives Evaluate Objectives/ Assess Outcomes Formal Instruction Student Activities Formal Instruction Student Activities Establish Indicators for Outcomes to Lead to Achievement of Objectives Establish Indicators for Outcomes to Lead to Achievement of Objectives Determine How Outcomes will be Assessed Determine How Outcomes will be Assessed Determine How Outcomes will be Achieved Determine How Outcomes will be Achieved Determine Outcomes Required to Achieve Objectives Determine Outcomes Required to Achieve Objectives Determine educational objectives Determine educational objectives

27. LTSN UK: Constructive Alignment Concept map / Houghton/Biggs

28. Thanks for your attention. Waiting for questions and comments: guenter.heitmann@tu-berlin.de