1. Self-evaluations at the University of Helsinki Kauko Hämäläinen, professor University of Helsinki Varazdin, 11.11.2005

2. Content of the presentation Experiences of quality assurance Experiences of quality assurance evaluation of research evaluation of research evaluation of teaching evaluation of teaching –quality matrix for self-assessment evaluation of administration evaluation of administration problems and possibilities problems and possibilities

3. University of Helsinki(1640) Main tasks: research, teaching and interaction with society Bilingual (Finnish and Swedish) Bilingual (Finnish and Swedish) 11 faculties,budget EUR 475 million 11 faculties,budget EUR 475 million 38,000 undergraduate students, 60,000 in adult education 38,000 undergraduate students, 60,000 in adult education 3,500 researchers and teachers 3,500 researchers and teachers Operates on 4 campuses in Helsinki and in 20 other locations in Finland Operates on 4 campuses in Helsinki and in 20 other locations in Finland One of the leading multidisciplinary research universities in Europe One of the leading multidisciplinary research universities in Europe HY-KALVOSARJA XI/03 YLEISTÄ 2

4. Objectives of quality system meet the qa criteria of the European HE Area: ENQA meet the qa criteria of the European HE Area: ENQA be part of the HE institutions´s operational steering and management system be part of the HE institutions´s operational steering and management system cover all of the university´s operations cover all of the university´s operations be integrated as a part of the normal operations of the university be integrated as a part of the normal operations of the university be continuous, documented and participatory be continuous, documented and participatory

5. Evaluation of teaching University organised an international evaluation of the quality of its education and its degree programmes University organised an international evaluation of the quality of its education and its degree programmes all faculties were evaluated all faculties were evaluated first self-evaluation first self-evaluation second: international experts second: international experts public report public report more funding to the best and weakest more funding to the best and weakest

6. Quality matrix for the self- assessment of teaching defines the quality of teaching defines the quality of teaching essential processeses and areas in high-quality education essential processeses and areas in high-quality education areas are ranked: satisfactory,developing, good and exellent areas are ranked: satisfactory,developing, good and exellent definitions are concrete definitions are concrete sets standards for quality sets standards for quality

7. Content of the matrix interaction between teaching and research interaction between teaching and research teaching goals teaching goals leadership of teaching leadership of teaching teaching teaching learning results learning results resources resources feedback and follow-up feedback and follow-up postgraduate studies postgraduate studies

8. Use of the matrix for self-assessment as well as for setting concrete objectives for self-assessment as well as for setting concrete objectives help individual teachers and students to become acquited with matters related to quality and its definition help individual teachers and students to become acquited with matters related to quality and its definition help planning of the programmes help planning of the programmes used to set criteria when rewarding departments for exellent teaching used to set criteria when rewarding departments for exellent teaching

9. Evaluation of research Every sixth year, first time 1999 Every sixth year, first time 1999 By 21 high level international panels By 21 high level international panels Panels are nominated by the Scientific Council of the university Panels are nominated by the Scientific Council of the university Purpose: to examine the scientific quality and advice how to develop it Purpose: to examine the scientific quality and advice how to develop it Based on desk research and on-site visit Based on desk research and on-site visit Allocation of funds Allocation of funds

10. Basic material A complete list of publications A complete list of publications Selected complication of publications Selected complication of publications Sample of best publications Sample of best publications Doctoral theses and other academic actvity Doctoral theses and other academic actvity Interaction between the unit´s research and society Interaction between the unit´s research and society

11. Evaluation of administration and governance, 2005 How should the university be managed? How should the university be managed? Are the roles of academic and administration clear? Are the roles of academic and administration clear? How can we manage the ever-growing costs? How can we manage the ever-growing costs? How to make administrative processes shorter and more transparent? How to make administrative processes shorter and more transparent? Focus: Functionality, size, organisation and operation Focus: Functionality, size, organisation and operation

12. Activities evaluated Strategic planning Strategic planning Budgeting and budget monitoring Budgeting and budget monitoring Working processes of personal policy, recruitment, staff leadership, personnel training Working processes of personal policy, recruitment, staff leadership, personnel training Research administration and services Research administration and services Administraton of premises Administraton of premises

13. Evaluation process Planing: working group from university Planing: working group from university Evaluation group: membersfrom industry and other universities, everyone with internatinal experience Evaluation group: membersfrom industry and other universities, everyone with internatinal experience Self-evaluation first, then on-site visits Self-evaluation first, then on-site visits Public report Public report Development group nominated Development group nominated

14. Critical points of evaluation - Who is the owner of evaluation? - Who defines the quality? - Is self evaluation enough? - What kind of evaluation can activate development? - Flexibility to create new programmes / teaching arrangements and use of nationally or internationally accepted standards - How to find standards / criteria, which are essential for learning? - The discipline-specific and general academic standards (learning-to- learn, thinking styles, social skills etc.) - How many times same evaluation / quality method can be used? Kauko Hämäläinen 2005