Webinar - Joint degrees: curriculum development and learning outcomes 19 th of January 2018 1
Outline of the webinar What one should know before starting a joint programme? (20 min) Programme design - Alignment of Programme LO with course LO (20 min) Learning outcomes in joint programmes (20 min) Quality assurance of joint programmes (20 min) 11:00 12:30 2
What one should know before starting a joint programme? Raimonda Markeviciene Bonn January 19, 2018
Shared or joint efforts? Shared: Shared Have in common programmes Distributed in portions Added value for students! For Institutions???? Joint Programmes Joint: United or combined Affecting or involving two or more. Added value for students and institutions
Challenges for truly Joint programmes (1) National regulations National degree system and programmes Accreditation and QA issues Deadlines and academic calendar University regulations Language requirements Possible other restrictions (No of students, different interpretation of definitions) Different academic cultures Approaches and expectations Grading and assessment Graduation requirements
Challenges for truly Joint Programmes (2) Bridging differences in fees Financial framework Covering costs of programme Building a sustainable financial framework Regulations for graduation and students credentials Final exams vs accumulative model of exams Name of the degree Format of diploma and Diploma Supplement University databases (language ) Administrative burden Possibly different financial aspects Different aspects of working with students
Implementation aspects of JP Application phase Student selection Enrolment/ registration, visas Orientation measures Services for applicants and students Studies and graduation (programme with explicit mobility LO) Academic calendar Grading scales Credit transfer Individual consultations Graduation documents Finance and quality management Mobility Agreement on tuition fees Formation of budget and its division among partners Diversification of financial support, external funding Agreement on internal QA system Additional funds for specific services Cultural integration Visas, accommodation Consultations
Agreement template 1. Description of the programme 2. Legal Framework 3. Cooperation aspects (Coordinating inst. Boards, Committees) 4. Promotion of the programme 5. Student administration (application; criteria for admission, selection, enrolment, examination, recognition; mobility, students rights) 6. Financial management 7. Services (Insurance Prevention and safety) 8. Quality assurance 9. Staff exchange 10. Duration 11. Application of Law and dispute resolution 12. Intellectual property rights 13. Confidentiality
Legal provisions Registration of the programmes Legal provisions at all partner countries and institutions: Diploma and Diploma supplement requirements Legality of JP and JD Accreditation rules University regulations National regulations Finding compromise between legal regulations and academic practice
Will European Approach for Quality Assurance of Joint programmes endorsed in Yerevan in 2015 help?
Economic incentives Seed money Funds for core activities Joint programme
Cost/benefit analysis Important to consider the economic orientation of the University. Consider intangibles valuable for the Universities. Reduce costs of the programme by combining activities. Practitioners opinion Tuition, enrolment, service Fees Scholarships
Alternative solutions to funding can institution help? Fees Scholarships Practitioners opinion Identifying sponsors; Grants from the governments (national, regional); Grants from the University; Others agencies; Found an advisory board for support; Industry; Research projects Consortium policy set in the agreement
Main features of JP: cooperation aspect Coordination Bilateral partnership might not have coordinator. Big consortiums have coordinating institution (rotation possible) Board Composed of local academic coordinator nominated by each partner Committees Established to ensure proper integration of the programme (QA, Admission, etc) Programme is promoted by each partner but consortium has promotion strategy, policy and allocates funds
Main features of JP: Student administration (1) Admission One application form for the consortium irrespective of the mobility scheme or partners involved Common admission criteria Administration Different starting points are possible. Consortium agreement is signed with student, mobility paths clarified. Ideally are registered at those institutions upon admission decision. Students rights and obligations are defined by each institution and consortium Consortium selection committee takes responsibility Common consortium budget might be created and used for consortium s activities
Leadership and involvement at all levels Practitioners opinion Institution Courses of partners at your institution s database All students enrolled at your institution Department Faculty Customized approach to consortium agreement Involvement of all actors at the institution
Main features of JP: Student administration (2) Mobility Progression Variety of mobility models. Number of choices might be possible Strives for common examination and grading criteria at all partner institution. Graduation involves several partners Mobility period defined by partners specialization and curricula timing Study period at partners is part of the programme One joint diploma or national diplomas One common Diploma supplement with clearly identified JOINT programme
Grading Usually each institution uses its grading scheme, predictably grading culture Partners must invest considerable efforts to agree on grading and graduation procedures (to meet requirements of different institutions) JP - grade comparison tables are tolerated and encouraged
Maintaining external contacts Practitioners opinion Sponsors Network with industry and business. Research institutes Professional and scientific associations. Create an advisory board from industry, other universities, etc., to keep that unit in connection and in tune with these interlocutors and their fields. Create reputation
Obstacles to sustainability Changing environment? Do we need to change approaches? Practitioners opinion No student interest The need to have sensors to identify market of the discipline and how the course should be redesigned according to the new niches of employment High costs High costs for institutions for low number of students Advertisement, recruitment, selection Costs for students if no extra grants and difference in tuition fees
External factors and suggestions for sustainability Secure support at the institutional level and full integration at the faculty level Institutionaliz e the processes Compatibility as a sustaining factor for the JD which relies on individual contributions of each network partner Show the advantages of these type of courses for the University Secure reserves, establish contacts with business Job market Vision and mission of each partner Internationalisation, Mobility culture Programme level and network level factors (content + effective coordination) Legal framework Brand the programme within the institution and its context Student Support Study process framework; flexibility Institutional anchoring Society Sustain the student cohort, keep alumni connected
Lessons learned: Strong management is essential There are topics of secondary importance in setting up JP or running it; situation does not change at you partner universities; funding will be coming from where it comes; involving everybody is enough learn to listen and hear everybody involved
No one can whistle a symphony. It takes a whole orchestra to play it. H.E. Luccock Thank you for your attention!
Programme design Alignment of Programme LO with course LO D r. S a n d r a K r a z e BA School of Business and Finance Riga, Latvia January 19, 2018, Bonn
25 Outline 1 EQF and programme design 2 What are Programme LO? 3 Challenges for JP learning outcomes
26 Programme design ESG on Design and Approval of Programmes Qualification Framework as a platform for QA The structure of the programme, the number of ECTS and workload allocation The quality of LO formulation, how realistic are LO?
27 Programme Learning Outcomes(LO) 1 EQF states the level descriptors for competences to be achieved for Bachelor s Master s and a Doctoral study programme 2 Programme learning outcomes describe knowledge, skills and attitudes that graduates of a study programme will be able to demonstrate 3 Various authors (D.Kennedy, A.Vickers,A.Gibbs,R.Wagenaar) advise on different ways how to formulate programme LO:essential not to mix with aims, objectives, avoid using too vague language( know, understand), be able to assess LO, not too many LO, focus on an active verb
28 Programme LO and rules for writing LO 1 LO of a joint study programme would indicate knowledge and skills that they would acquire on the graduation 3 QF descriptors specify cognitive aspects, skills to be demonstrated 2 QF would specify for all study programmes of the same cycle, e.g. Bachelor s knowledge and competences 4 LO are specific to a particular study programme but align with QF descriptors
29 Challenges for a joint study programme 1 Programme learning outcomes must be assessed: in joint programmes graduation requirement would be Bachelor s or Master s degree thesis written in English or other common requirements: graduation examination etc. 3 Course LO should align with programme LO, requirements of professional standards are included 2 Course unit or module LO could be assessed during projects, examinations, various types of other tests 4 Assessment methods and criteria need to be clearly explained
Grid for mapping programme LO and course units/modules 30 Programme learning outcome Course 1 Course 2 Course 3 LO 1 LO 2 LO 3 LO 4 LO 5 LO 6
Recommended formulations for LO of a programme On completion of this joint study programme, students are expected to be able to: 31 1 Demonstrate the basic and specialised knowledge of science 3 Analyse risks, apply risk models 2 Identify, analyse and solve HRM problems 4 Communicate with customers in accordance with In joint programmes you have a joint agreement on programme LO
32 Programme benefits 1 Joint study programmes have multi- faceted skills set 4 Company placements 2 Programme explains additional benefits, advantages for a labour market 5 Wider research opportunities for students and academic staff 3 Integrated semester or a year abroad
Learning Outcomes in Joint programmes Raimonda Markeviciene Bonn January 19, 2018
Students study at several institutions (various modes) Developed and agreed by several institutions,teachers agree on programme requirements Teachers teach at partner institutions Joint programmes - European invention
Programme like any other Services for applicants and students Studies and graduation Finance and quality management International aspects make them different Mobility Diverse student body Combination and mix of teaching traditions Flexible administration sensitive to partners needs
In terms of curriculum development: Synchronized individual programmes at each partner institution Mobility influences programme model, programme model influences mobility Study components are offered by partners from independent programmes
? How many mobilities and mobility paths 1 Minimum one mobility (two partners) 38? Many mobility paths (e.g 38 for a multiple partners)
I know where I will go next! Mobility scheme must be clearly described Indication of various differences depending on choice of partners Mobility and profiling should be connected
Description of essential elements pointing to the programme profile Profile of JP Clear indication of goals and added value of the programme in the joint format
Challenges of joint programme profile Mobility might lead to different Specializations and degree titles Programmes often interdisciplinary Specialization acquired through mobility Clear graduation documents (diploma and DS) are crucial for recognition
Two-year MA in Journalism, Media and Globalisation http://mundusjournalism.com/two-year-ma-in-journalism-media-and-globalisation/ Example The first year of the degree is spent in Denmark Students learn to combine academic, theoretical knowledge with journalistic skills, and to analyse, interpret and generate knowledge about the global changes that increasingly challenge traditional boundaries....opportunity to customise your talent to an international level If politics is your thing, then the study profile 'Media and Politics' at the University of Amsterdam might be the specialisation for you. If you know you are interested in the changing world of media, you might choose the specialisation 'Journalism and Media across Culture' at the University of Hamburg. Financial journalism has changed a lot in the last decade and if you can see yourself shaping the future as a journalist, then the study profile 'Business and Financial Journalism' at City University of London If you would like to expand your expertise in terms of reporting on or from developing countries, nations at war or countries undergoing specific hardships, then you choice might be to study the 'War and Conflict' specialisation at Swansea University The graduates will be awarded with a unique joint degree certificate. The title of the degree is 'Master of Art (MA) in Journalism, Media and Globalistion'. Aarhus University and the student s specialisation university are both award-issuing institutions.
Joint programme as an academic product Student mobility Teacher mobility Virtual mobility (Distance; e- learning) What mobility aims at and how this is incorporated in LO? Joint programmes
Programme follows the logic of a standard programme development: all units should be related to each other in one way or another Programme Learning Outcomes = Final Level Unit LOs = Final Level Unit LOs = Final Level Unit LOs = Final Level Unit LOs HORIZONTAL integration V E R T I C A l Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS
Programme coherence in joint format Programme and module Learning outcomes worked out and agreed by partners Teaching mode and content depend on partners' agreement Teaching itself - on traditions prevailing at the institutions
Match three interdependent elements! Competences Learning Outcomes Coherence comes from programme design and constant evaluation
Competences developed by the programme Agreement on them reached by the partners Those fostered by mobility clearly identified? They are necessary for the stakeholders?
Competences underpin Learning outcomes statements Learning outcomes describe what a learner is expected to know, understand and be able to do after successful completion of a process of learning. they must be assessed therefore they need to be obtainable and measureabl e they need to contain an appropriate active verb involve students in undertaking work and therefore have a workload associated with them need to be written in a holistic context taking into account the Learning and Assessment Feedback should be given in relation to Learning Outcomes
Programme follows the logic of a standard programme development: all units should be related to each other in one way or another Programme Learning Outcomes = Final Level Unit LOs = Final Level Unit LOs = Final Level Unit LOs = Final Level Unit LOs HORIZONTAL integration V E R T I C A l Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS Higher Level Unit LOs Lower Level Unit LOs Initial Level Unit LOS
Course Course Course Course Course Course Course Learning outcomes defined for each programme component under different national/institutional systems
Finally Learning outcomes By whom and when? Agreed on by the partners Description of how they will be tested Mobility learning outcomes identified Presented in programme desription
Thank you!
QUALITY ASSURANCE OF JOINT PROGRAMMES D r. S a n d r a K r a z e BA School of Business and Finance Riga, Latvia January 19, 2018, Bonn
53 Outline 1 The aim of Quality Assurance 5 A joint programme administration 2 Internal Quality Assurance Process of a joint programme 6 QA on the level of a study programme 3 QA and a legal framework 4 QA on the level of HEI
54 The aim of Quality Assurance 1 Set standards for a joint programme that are based on agreed tools 4 Ensure sustainability of a study programme 2 Ensure a joint character of all programme aspects 5 Focus on the improvement because of a fast changing environment 3 Enhance and add value to the programme in terms of stakeholder needs and for accountability 6 Be aware of Rankings and Proposals set by Advisory Committes
ESG setting a common framework for quality assurance 55 1 They provide guidance and point out areas that are important for quality of all levels 4 The role of HEIs is to translate that into definite actions 2 Standards allow diversity and different ways for implementation 5 HEI is responsible for quality assurance 3 Standards indicate what should be reached 6 QA takes into account the diversity and needs of students, faculty, employers, public etc.
Internal Quality Assurance Process of a joint programme 56 1 To be aware of the policy of QA as a part of strategic management Agreement between partners on fundamental principles outlined in Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in EHEA(ESG): 2 3 4 To investigate QA practices adopted at partner universities To know a legal framework that allows to implement a joint programme To decide on the type of programme: double, multiple or a joint degree programme
External Quality Assurance 57 The aim is to: Assure standards on programme and HEI level in relation to national laws as well as international standards 1 Support the improvement of quality of a study programme 2 Demonstrate the quality to all stakeholders 3
58 QA and a legal framework, a close link with external QA 1 A legal framework should allow HE institution to implement a joint degree, decide on the type of a joint programme: double, multiple or a joint degree 4 To be aware whether programme accreditation is a legal requirement for one of the partners or all partners, agree on the accreditation EQAR registered agency that will conduct it 2 HE institutions that offer a joint degree should be recognized by relevant national authorities of their countries 5 Avoiding additional national criteria and ensuring the trust between the partners 3 Accreditation requirements: find out how national authorities recognize the accreditation decision of EQAR registered agency
59 QA on the level of the HEI- setting up a consortium Sharing of responsibilities among partners, study programme coordinated and offered jointly by partners A common understanding of quality assurance and ESG(2015) Student enrolment: international and domestic Funding activities, dealing with insufficient funds Mobility Common admission requirements Staff training policy
Programme administration:a consortium 60 The need for a cooperation agreement which includes: Denomination of the degree or degrees awarded in the programme Setting up a joint internal Quality Committee that monitors all programme delivery Responsibility sharing and discussion of academic and administrative issues, including financial matters Agreement on measurements, activities, plan, responsibilities, owners Graduation regulations and assessment requirements, recognition principles Regular monitoring and feedback analysis, frequency of meetings
61 Agreement on assessment strategy Understanding on type of assessments, examinations and regulations A consistent application of jointly agreed assessment methods and grading system Agreement on transparency tools: Diploma Supplement ECTS,Language passport Europass mobility EQF National QF
62 Admission standards 1 Admission requirements should be clearly defined, procedures explained 4 Problems arising from different tuition fee levels, thus it requires a clear agreement on tuition fees and reducing the differences in the amount of tuition fees 2 Student enrolment administration: requires common admission requirements 5 Agreement on funding certain activities and how to deal with insufficient funds 3 Tuition fees, scholarship system for foreign and domestic students
63 Mobility structure 1 Statement on recognition including recognition of prior learning 2 The selection of courses, the level of flexibility in choosing courses at partner universities 3 Analysis of potential difficulties: too rigid time schedule, risk prevention
64 Staff development 1 Understanding stakeholders needs 2 Agreed strategy for staff development: training options, mobility, decision management, teaching style
65 QA on the level of a joint programme design 1 Qualification Framework as a platform for QA; the structure of the programme 5 A common understanding on the level of competence when defining programme and course learning outcomes 2 Agreement on the programme profile 6 On the level of teaching strategy : a common understanding of assessment 3 Agreement on credit allocation (ECTS) 7 The level of flexibility and transparency 4 Mutually complementary in terms of achieved programme LO and content
66 Quality Committee 1 A team in charge of programme implementation consisting of different stakeholders 4 Discussing results achieved 2 Data collection, measurements, surveys and data analysis: a specific aspect that is addressed in terms of Quality 5 Feedback and actions to be taken 3 Simulation activities for analysing the survey results
67 Programme improvement Improved employability of graduates Improved student satisfaction, staff satisfaction, the quality of surveys conducted and the analysis of feedback, problem identification Improved programme deliveryelimination of overlaps Can you see the impact? Higher ranking achieved for HEI and the progarmme( U- multirank) Improved decision making on the level of the institution, improved communication and information exchange Ability to deal with a changing environment: digitalization, robotics, new providers of programmes, various aspects of internationalization
The aim of Peer Learning Activity(PLA) 68 EC has prepared a concept Note on Peer Learning Activity The aim of PLA is To enhance quality culture beyond formalized QA measures 1 To build shared values and motivation among HEI 2 To increase the role of leadership and communication 3 (EC, DG for Education and culture: Enhancing Quality Culture in HE: govevrnment incentives and the role of HEI leadership, Concept Note for PLA, Oslo, Nov, 2017)
69 Focus of PLA 1 How HEI are motivated by natinal/regional authorities? 4 What roles does HEI leadership play in QA? 2 Quality culture practices and how they can be measured? 5 How does QA changes? 3 What are the main obstacles? (EC, DG for Education and culture: Enhancing Quality Culture in HE: govevrnment incentives and the role of HEI leadership, Concept Note for PLA, Oslo, Nov, 2017)
70 PLA Policy level: 1 Regulations 1 Quality for stakeholders: Students and graduates 2 Funding 2 Adminsitartive and academic staff 3 Organisation 3 Employers 4 Information exchange/support 4 Society
The way forward 71 New trends for enhancing the quality of Teaching & Learning Teaching & Learning To enhance the quality of study programmes: a joint programme as one of tools 1 To focus on student-centred learning,motivate and reward quality in teaching 2 To increase the role of leadership and communication in falitating pedagogical training 3
72 Conclusions 1 Quality of a joint study programme must fit for the purpose 2 Quality concerns everyone involved: administrative staff, management, academic staff, responsibility of students 5 6 Different ways of reporting survey results: student perspective and academic staff perspective Involvement of different stakeholders, especially graduates, alumni, employers 3 Quality can be ensured through various forms: audits, evaluations, feedback analysis relating to certain aspects of the study programme 7 Focus on students cognitive and practical skills achieved from Student and Teachers perspective 4 Arrangement of simulation activities for evaluation meetings for discussing survey results 8 International accreditations as additional quality labels for rankings
Thank you for participation!
References 74 1. Gibbs.A.,Kennedy D.,Vickers A. (2012)Learning Outcomes, Degree Profiles, Tuning Project and Competences,In Journal of the EHEA, No.1 2. Kennedy D.(2007)Writing and Using Learning Outcomes.A Practical Guide,University College Cork,Ireland 3. ECTS Users Giude. Brussels:DG for Education and Culture.(2015)retreived from ec.europa.eu/education/tools/ ects_en.htm 4. Wagenaar,R.(2014) Competences and learning outcomes:a panacea for understanding the new role of HE? Tuning Journal for HE 5. Enhancing Quality Culture in Higher Education:government incentives and the role of HEI leadership,concept Note for Peer Learning Activity,Oslo2017 6. European Comission(2008) European Qualifications Franmework 7. ESG Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the EHEA(2015),Brussels,Belgium
Any questions? 75
Contact: bologna@daad.de Website of the webinar: https://eu.daad.de/service/veranstaltungen/2017/de/60074- webinar-joint-degrees-curriculum-development-andlearning-outcomes/ 76