Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Quality in focusEBBA OSSIANNILSSON, PHD, LUND UNIVERSITY, SE VILNIUS 23 NOVEMBER 2013
Ebba Ossiannilsson, PhD Lunds Universitet
Ossiannilsson (2012) Benchmarking (e)-learning in higher education, Doctoral dissertation, Oulu University, Finland
Agenda
Driving forces for quality
Branding /instant reputation
Digitalization
Technical innovations
Inernatíonalisation
Collaborate to compete
Social innovations
Strategical partnerships
“Learn on the go”
Ossiannilsson 2013
What´s in it for me?
Quality is in the eye of the beloved
Retrospective or prospektive?
• From control to enhancement
• Self-evaluation• Peer review• Benchmarking• Certification• Accreditation• Quality assurance
CC BY-NC Some rights reserved by Shira Golding
Quality culture – dialectic approach
CC BY Some rights reserved by SeattleClouds.com
Quality controlProcessmodels
GuidelinesRules
Standards
CompetecesAttitudesValues
Self -evaluation
CommunicationTrust
Co-operatiopInclusivness
Innovation/Creativity
Benchmarking
“The locus of benchmarking lies between the current and desirable states of affairs and contributes to the transformation process that realizes these improvements.”
Moriarty & Smallman (2009)
En route to a theory on benchmarking
Benchmarking
Benchmarking is an internal organisational process that aims to improve the organisation´s performance by learning about possible improvements of its primary and/or support processes by looking at these processes in other, better-performing organisations (van Vught et al. 2008a: 16).
The concept was first used by Camp at Xerox (1989 1993).10
E-learning
12
Epprobate is: “teaching and learning- which may represent a part or the whole of the education model in which it is used – that
makes use of electronic media and devices to facilitate access, promote evolution and
improve the quality of education and training.”
E-Learning timelineM
ult
imedia
reso
urc
es
80s
Th
e Inte
rnet
an
d t
he W
eb
93
Learn
ing M
an
ag
em
en
t S
yst
em
s
95
Open
Ed
uca
tion
al R
eso
urc
es
01
Mobile
devic
es
98
Gam
ing
tech
nolo
gie
s
00S
oci
al an
d p
art
icip
ato
ry m
ed
ia
04
Vir
tual w
orl
ds
05
E-b
ooks
and
sm
art
devic
es
Mass
ive O
pen
On
line C
ou
rses
07 08
Learn
ing
Desi
gn
99
http://scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/a-ramble-through-history-of-online.html
http://halfanhour.blogspot.be/2012/02/e-learning-generations.html
Learn
ing o
bje
cts
94
14
Background
• The Swedish National Agency of Higher Education, ELQ
• EADTU, E-xcellence+
• ESMU, Benchmarking eLearning exercise 2009
• The First dual-mode distance learning benchmarking club
15
Connectivism
Knowledge
Management
Changing cultures
Quality assurance
BenchmarkingE-learning
Rhizome
Quality
enhancement
OER/web2.0
Bechmarking
e-learning
Positioning the dissertation to its frame of reference
16
Research questions
RQ 1 How to conduct benchmarking for e-learning?
RQ 2 What are the benefits of benchmarking e-
learning?
RQ 3 What challenges are encountered when
attempting to integrate benchmarking e-learning to general quality assurance systems?
RQ 1The benchmarking process
17
Ossiannilsson 2011. Reprinted with permission from SCIRP
18
Ossiannilsson E & Landgren L (2011). Essential areas that benchmarking e-learning ought to cover. Reprinted with permission from Wiley-Blackwell.
RQ 3 on Quality - context and stakeholders?
Cc by joguldi
Shelton (2011) Institutional commitment, support and leadership
Teaching and learning Faculty support, student support; course
development Technology; evaluation and assessment
Cost effectiveness; management and planningStudent and faculty satisfaction
Other….require strong and on-going support, training, motivation, compensation, and overall policies.
Rhizome
Serendipity
22
Benchmarking benefits and values
• Self assess institutions• Better understand the
process• Measure and compare• Discover new ideas• Obtain data to support
decision making
• Targets for improvements
• Strengthen identity, strategy, implementation
• Enhance reputation• Respond to national
indicators• New standard for the
sectorVan Vught, F. (2008) A practical guide. Benchmarking in European Higher Education
RQ 2 New benefits identified, old ones confirmed
• Attitudes• Collaboration• Committment• Cultural issues• Internal dialogue• Internal processes
• Involvement• Management• Critical reflections• Teambuilding• Transparency• Trust
24
On changing quality perspectives
NetworkingSustainabilityBoundless educationLifelong learning Holistic and conceptual approach and embedded and beyondA move from my students, my course, my resorurse… towards our´s…
GlobalisationDemographyTechnical and digital developmentStudent involvement and student completion QualityFrame of references
(Ossiannilsson 2012)
E-XCELLENCE
QA in e-learning; a cooperation model between universities and QA-agencies
SEQUENT
23 November 2013, Vilnius, LT
From Paris conf EADTU 25th Oct 203
George Ubachs (EADTU)
Ebba Ossiannilsson (EADTU, Lund University)
European Association of
Distance Teaching Universities
General objective
Creating a QA in e-learning system, because:• The use of e-learning increases • E-learning is an essential element for Lifelong learning• Internationalisation of education is supported by e-learning• E-learning has become mainstream provision
Integral part of education – Integral part of QA
E-xcellence instrument launched in 2007: Complementary to the existing internal and external nationalquality assurance systems.
E-xcellence: QA in e-learning instrument
• Curriculum design, Course design, Course delivery, Services (student and staff support), Management (institutional strategies)
• E-xcellence focuses on elements in course provision that contribute to Lifelong Learning schemes, like:
ease of access to courses and services new forms of interaction (students and staff) flexibility and personalisation
• E-xcellence is a benchmarking instrument.
Why benchmarking?
The system of benchmarking includes:• The institution taking the responsibility for QA• Self-evaluation as a bases for self-improvement• Using peer reviewers as reference and input for
improvement*In a collaborative process of dialogue we create an environment of learning from each other *In a process of comparing the university’s’ performance with best practices in the field of e-learning we identify weaknesses and strengths
• Setting a roadmap for improvement
The basic tool is the quick scan, which can be applied in three ways:
The quick scan as a quick orientation (basic option) The quick scan with a review at a distance (extended option) The quick scan with an on-site assessment (most comprehensive option)
E-xcellence Associates LabelNot a label of proven excellence,
but a label to reward continuous
educational improvement.
The label is provided based on an
external review at a distance
or on-site.
Review
Label
Self-assessmentRoadmap of improvement
Essential is integration of benchmarks
Virtual Benchmarking Community
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 -> 2011 2012
E-xcellence Project
E-xcellence instrument
E-xcellence Roadmap
E-xcellence + Project
E-xcellence Associates label
TF Quality Assurance label
Goal: From project to mainstream implementation of the E-xcellence instrument European wide at the local level.
E-xcellence NEXT
E-xcellence NEXT
Institutions involved
Core Partners (2005-2012)
1 EADTU (The Netherlands)
2 Open Universiteit Nederland (The Netherlands)
3 Open University (United Kingdom)
4 OULU-University (Finland)
5 Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED) (Spain)
6 PROSE (Belgium)
Universities that used E-xcellence
7 Centre National d'Enseignement à Distance (CNED)
8 Universitat Oberta de Catalunya (UOC)
9 Estonian Information Technology Foundation (EITSA)
10 National Council for Distance Education (APERTUS)
11 Network per l'Universita Ovunque (NETTUNO)
12 European University Association (EUA)
13 Nederlands-Vlaamse Accreditatie Organisatie (NVAO)
14 International Telematic University UNINETTUNO (Italy)
15 Tallinn University (Estonia)
16 Högskoleverket / NSHU (Sweden)
17 KU Leuven (Belgium)
18 The Czech Association of Distance Learning University (CADUV)
19 University of Hradec Králové (Czech Republic)
20 Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava (Slovakia)
21 Universitäre Fernstudien Schweiz (Switzerland)
22 Hungarian e-University Network (Hungary)
23 University of Southern Denmark
24 University of Copenhagen
25 Aarhus University
26 University of Latvia
27 Lund University
28 University of Kuopio
29 University of Porto• University of Bologna• Universidade Aberta (UAb), Portugal
32 Open University of Cyprus (OUC), Cyprus
Universities that used E-xcellence
33 Riga Technical University (RTU), Latvia
34 Akademia Górniczo-Hutnicza (AGH), Poland
35 Hellenic Open University (HOU), Greece
36 Kaunas University of Technology (KTU), Lithuania
37 MESI (RU)
• European Centre for Strategic Management of Universities (ESMU), Belgium
• European University Association
40 African Council for Distance Learning (ACDE), Kenya
41 CommonWealth of Learning (COL), Canada
42 Latin American and Caribbean Institute for Quality in Distance Higher Education(CALED), Ecuador
43 Association for Asian Open Universities (AAOU)
44 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), France
45 International Council for Distance Education (ICDE)
46 EADTU Student Council, The Netherlands
36 EURASHE
37 The International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE)
Universities that used E-xcellence
European and Global stakeholders
• ENQA as Associate partner in the project NEXT• Portuguese Agency for Assessment and Accreditation of Higher
Education – (A3ES), • La Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y Acreditación
(ANECA, Spain), • Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad (VLIR), • Vlaamse Hogescholenraad (VLOHRA), • Dutch-Flemish accreditation body (NVAO), • Lithuanian Centre for Quality Assessment in Higher Education, Higher
Education Quality Evaluation Centre (HEQEC – AIKNC),• Polish Quality Assurance Agency for Technical Universities (KAUT),• Higher Education Planning, Evaluation, Accreditation and Coordination
Council (YÖDAK, TR) • Hellenic Quality Assurance Agency (HQAA).
QA-agencies reached with E-xcellence
QA-agencies and e-learning
From the ENQA Sigtuna Seminar on QA in e-learning (Oct. 2009)
•establish a solid quality assurance system in Europe •eLearning should not be evaluated separately,•There is a need for a common definition and understanding on all aspects of eLearning. •There is a need for a “common language” that would help higher education institutions and quality assurance agencies strive for the same goal. •It is important to meet and discuss quality assurance at the European level and between different stakeholders in the educational sector •to provide adequate training for academic professionals, higher education providers and quality evaluation experts.
NEXT STEP: SEQUENT
• The “SEQUENT” project aims to promote excellence in the use of ICT in higher education, with a clear goal to prepare European Universities in line with the European Modernization Agenda and to make higher education in Europe fit better to cross-border collaboration initiatives in the implementation of innovative and ICT enhanced partnerships.
OBJECTIVES• Convince governments, universities and QA agencies of the necessity to have a QA approach for e-Learning provision
• To raise awareness on Open and flexible learning among higher education institutions and networks throughout the mainstream education channels.
• Further disseminate instruments for different applications of QA and a clear summary of the available method and to promote UNIQUe and E-xcellence as examples.
• To support universities in the adoption of a QA and e-Learning strategy, through dissemination and training activities.
The benchmarking process
• Self evaluation
• Full assessment
• Road map
Further research
44
GlobalisationDemography
Technical and digital development
Student completionQuality, the entire meaning
Caring is sharing, sharing is caring
Footprints
W:www.oulu.fi; www.lu.se/ced
FB:Ebba Ossiannilsson
T:@EbbaOssian
Phone: +4670995448
S:http://www.slideshare.net/EbbaOssiann
Ossiannilsson 2013
