Source: http://www.aqu.cat/elButlleti/butlleti66/articles2_en.html
Timestamp: 2018-12-19 12:29:59
Document Index: 703895791

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 3', 'art 0', 'art 1', 'art 2', 'art 3', 'art 0']

AQU Catalunya has already prepared and sent its contribution. There are two documents that contain the background to this ESG revision proposal:
Mapping the Implementation and Application of the ESG (MAP-ESG Project)
Being familiar with these documents will help the reader to better understand what is proposed herein.
Stages of the revision
The revision is organised into three successive stages, each of which seeks to meet specific demands:
Making Part 1 of the ESG a more exhaustive list of the critical process in HEI;
Revising Part 2 and Part 3 of the ESG to redistribute certain portions of text between these two sections, specifically revising Part 3 to highlight the two types of standards contained there: some of these parts are aimed at specifying the nature and status of the QA agencies while others are focussed on the activities.
Writing a completely new Part 0 for the standards compiling issues related to the policy of higher education authorities.
The table below shows the general layout of the revised ESG. The most relevant proposals are identified in green. In boxes you can see details of AQU Catalunya’s suggestions:
ESG revised version
0. ESG for higher education policy
0.1 Higher Education Policy
0.2 Approval, monitoring and regular review of higher education policy
0.3 Assessment of higher education institutions
0.4 Resources for higher education
0.5 Information systems
0.6 Public information
1. ESG for internal quality assurance within higher education institutions
1.1 Policy and procedures for quality assurance 1.1 Policy and procedures for quality assurance
1.2 Approval, monitoring and regular review of programmes and awards 1.2 Information systems
1.3 Assessment of students 1.3 Policy and procedures for accountability
1.4 Quality assurance of teaching staff 1.4 Public information
1.5 Learning resources and student support 1.5 Strategic vision and planning
1.6 Information systems 1.6 Approval, monitoring and regular review of programmes and awards
1.7 Public information 1.7 Quality assurance of teaching staff
1.8 Learning resources and student support
1.9 Learning activities and innovative teaching
1.10 Assessment of students
2. ESG for the external quality assurance of higher education
2.1 Use of internal quality assurance procedures 2.1 Use of internal quality assurance procedures
2.2 Development of external quality assurance processes 2.2 Development of external quality assurance processes
2.3 Criteria for decisions 2.3 Processes fit for purpose
2.4 Processes fit for purpose 2.4 Criteria for decisions
2.5 Reporting 2.5 Reporting
2.6 Follow-up procedures 2.6 Follow-up procedures
2.7 Regular reviews 2.7 Regular reviews
2.8 System-wide analyses 2.8 System-wide analyses
3. ESG for external quality assurance agencies
3.1 Use of external quality assurance procedures for higher education 3.1 Use of external quality assurance procedures for higher education
3.2 Official status 3.2 Official status
3.3 Activities 3.3 Independence
3.4 Resources 3.4 Resources
3.5 Mission statement 3.5 Accountability procedures
3.6 Independence 3.6 Mission statement
3.7 External quality assurance criteria and processes used by agencies 3.7 Activities
3.8 Accountability procedures 3.8 External quality assurance criteria and processes used by agencies
Revision of Part 1
Institutions should have a policy and associated procedures for the assurance of the quality and standards of their programmes and awards. They should also commit themselves explicitly to the development of a culture which recognises the importance of quality, and quality assurance, in their work. To achieve this, institutions should develop and implement a strategy for the continuous enhancement of quality.
1.5 Strategic vision and planning
Institutions should determine the extent to which their policy and associated procedures for quality assurance and accountability contribute to the achievement of their mission. They should also commit themselves explicitly to recognising that a culture of quality, transparency and accountability are part of their values. To achieve this, institutions should include activities for the continuous enhancement of quality and accountability in their strategic planning. The strategy, policy and procedures for quality assurance and accountability should have a formal status and be part of their global strategic planning.
Institutions should ensure that learning activities are adequate and suited to each programme. Institutions should have strategies to identify and disseminate best practices and they should promote the improvement of learning activities with an innovative teaching strategy.
Revision of Part 2
2.3 Processes fit for purpose
All external quality assurance processes should be designed specifically to ensure their fitness to achieving the aims and objectives for which they are established. These processes will normally be expected to include:
A self-assessment or equivalent procedure by the institution subject to the quality assurance process;
An external assessment by a group of experts including, as appropriate, student member(s) and site visits as decided by the agency;
The publication of a report including any decisions, recommendations or other formal outcomes; and
A follow-up procedure to review actions taken by the institution subject to the quality assurance process in the light of any recommendations contained in the report.
Revision of Part 3
Agencies should undertake external quality assurance activities (at institutional or programme level) on a regular basis. Moreover, external quality assurance procedures cannot be properly implemented when internal quality assurance processes are too weak or in the early stages. Therefore, external quality assurance procedures should be designed with a gradual, concatenated structure with the objective of:
Promoting the implementation of internal quality assurance procedures if they are not in place;
Consolidating existing process and giving them a form that can be recognised by stakeholders and other institutions; and
Demonstrating the effectiveness of internal quality assurance procedures to ensure the quality of the programmes offered by the institutions.
New Part 0
Higher education authorities should have a policy and associated procedures for the organisation of higher education in their respective countries. They should also commit themselves explicitly to the development of a culture which recognises the importance of higher education as a public commodity that generates social and economic value and benefits. To achieve this, HEAs should implement a strategy for developing higher education and for establishing an interplay between it and other educational levels and the labour market. Said strategy, policy and procedures should have a formal status and be publicly available.
Higher education authorities should have formal mechanisms for the approval, regular review and monitoring of their higher education policy and of the legal framework they have set up for higher education institutions.
Higher education authorities should assess the effectiveness and efficiency with which higher education institutions achieve their mission using published criteria, regulations and procedures which are applied consistently.
Higher education authorities should ensure that the relationship between the resources made available to HEIs and the quality of higher education provided by the institutions is consistent.
Higher education authorities should ensure that they collect, analyse and use relevant information for the effective management of their higher education policy considering their national system and the international context.
Higher education authorities should regularly publish impartial, objective and up-to-date information, in both quantitative and qualitative terms, about their higher education programmes and activities.
Full text of the proposal by AQU Catalunya for the revision of the ESG (2013).