Ossiannilsson 131122 trakai_bm

Quality in focusEBBA OSSIANNNILSSON, PHD, LUND UNIVERSITY, SE TRAKAI 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 controlProcessmodelsGuidelinesRulesStandards

CompetecesAttitudesValuesSelf -evaluation

CommunicationTrust

Co-operatiopInclusivness

Innovation/Creativity

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

E-Learning timeline

Mu

ltim

ed

ia r

esou

rces

80s Th

e I

nte

rnet

an

d t

he W

eb

93 Learn

ing

Man

ag

em

en

t S

yste

ms

95 Op

en

Ed

ucati

on

al R

esou

rces

01

Mob

ile d

evic

es

98 Gam

ing

tech

nolo

gie

s

00 Socia

l an

d p

art

icip

ato

ry m

ed

ia 04

Vir

tual w

orl

ds

05 E-b

ooks a

nd

sm

art

devic

es

Massiv

e O

pen

On

lin

e C

ou

rses

07 08

Learn

ing

D

esig

n

99

http://scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/a-ramble-through-history-of-online.htmlhttp://halfanhour.blogspot.be/2012/02/e-learning-generations.html

Learn

ing

ob

jects

94

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).

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

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

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 sector

Van 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

16

The benchmarking process ©Ossiannilsson 2012

What to benchmark

Benchmarking team

Benchmarking partners

Analyse benchmarking information

Take action

Ossiannilsson 2011. Reprinted with permission from SCIRP

©Ossiannilsson 2012

©Ossiannilsson 2011

Ossiannilsson E & Landgren L (2011). Essential areas that benchmarking e-learning ought to cover. Reprinted with permission from Wiley-Blackwell.

On changing quality perspectives

Networking

Sustainability

Boundless education

Lifelong learning

Holistic and conceptual approach and embedded and beyond

A move from my students, my course, my resorurse… towards our´s…

Globalisation

Demography

Technical and digital development

Student involvement and student completion

Quality

Frame of references

(Ossiannilsson 2012)

  Rhizome Serendipity© Ossiannilsson 2012

General objectiveCreating 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 national

quality 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 servicesnew forms of interaction (students and staff)flexibility and personalisation

• E-xcellence is a benchmarking instrument

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)

The basic tool is the quick scan, which can be applied in three ways

E-xcellence Associates Label

Not 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

The main objectives of E-xcellence NEXT are:

(1). further European introduction

Extend local seminars European wide to 20 seminars

(2). updating and extending the E-xcellence manual

Inc. Social networking and OER

(3). broadening the partnership on European and Global level. UNESCO Global TF QA in e-learning

Objectives NEXT2011-2012

Local seminars within E-xcellence NEXT1. Kaunus University of Technology (KTU), Lithuania

Master’s degree (MSc.) in Information Technologies of Distance Education

2. Akademia Górniczo-Hutnicza (AGH), Poland

Centre of e‐Learning and Faculty of Management

3. Open University of Cyprus (OUC), Cyprus

Bachelor on Hellenic Studies

Master on Educational Studies

4. Riga Technical University (RTU), Latvia

Professional Master Program "Innovations and Entrepreneurship"

5. Universidade Aberta (UAb), Portugal

Master on Administration and Educational Management (MAGE);

Master on E-learning Pedagogy (MPEL).

6. Hellenic Open university (HOU), Greece,

Master in Business Administration (MBA)

7. Moscow State University of Economics, Statistics and Informatics (MESI), Master programs: Applied Informatics; Management

Bachelor programs: Applied Informatics; Linguistics; Management; Economics

• 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 NEXT

Has the use of the instrument had any impact in your organisation so far?

• Discussion on some important issues was initiated, involving stakeholders not involved before

• We have identified issues for further e-learning development

• The participation in the project has already led to adjustments of the QA system of the university

• It has opened a dialogue between different stakeholders

• We are working on improvement on e-learning performance along the road map

• Definitely, QA in e-learning became more important

• Since the project teachers see how to improve their courses

• Too early for an official impact, but it enhances fruitful discussions

• E-xcellence framework is very useful in the process of designing

an internal QA system on e-learning

• Not yet, some changes require decision making at thecentral level

What role could QA agencies play in relation to QA in e-learning?

• They should regard e-learning as an indispensable element of modern education

• Create an independent assessment of e-learning/on-line programmes

• They should prepare recommendations in QA and e-learning

• Provide a more detailed implementation plan

• They should both play a constructive and an accreditive role in the development of a methodology to assess quality in e-learning

• Organise workshops on QA benchmarks

What aspects did you like the most about the E-xcellence seminar?• Open discussion, sharing views and experiences

• The process of completing the Quick Scan

• Opportunity to exchange experiences between local team and experts from other countries

• Sharing experience, revealing strengths and weaknesses

• Improvement plan

• E-xcellence tool is extremely useful for improving quality

• Commitment of participants: managers, teachers, students, incl. representative of National accreditation agency

• Discussions that are relevant for future development

• It was an opportunity to revise our master degree program

Convergence in education by e-learning

Changing Communication patterns between students and tutors• Demand for increased communications• Expectations of 24x7 support• Asynchronous communication expands participation• Discussion routinely integrated within course design• Student forums and chat rooms extend informal communication

Web Resources replace text material• Information and learning resources not limited by book

ownership or library access

Networked curricula with the support of ICT and e-learning• International exchange of students via on-line platforms

OERWe expect that the QA community will meet increasing use ofOERs in the future Content – but also tools, licences, practices…

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.

Caring is sharing, sharing is caring

Footprints

W:www.oulu.fi; www.lu.se/ced

E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@oulu.fi

E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@ced.lu.se

FB:Ebba Ossiannilsson

T:@EbbaOssian

Phone: +4670995448

S:http://www.slideshare.net/EbbaOssiann

Ossiannilsson 2013