Finnish Higher Education Structure and the Audit Approach

Chief Planning Officer

Karl Holm Helsinki 10.6.2014

Bachelor's degrees

Studies at universities Studies at Universities of Applied Sciences

Master's degrees

Licentiate degrees

PhD degrees

Work experience

UAS Bachelor's degrees

UAS Master's degrees?

Quality assurance of Finnish higher education

Ministry of Education and Culture:• Steering

• Decision-making

FINEEC:• National responsibility• Audits of QA systems • Other evaluations

Quality assurance at HEIs:• Main responsibility for quality and

improvement of education and other activities

• Establishment of a QA system

• Participation in external evaluations of its activities and quality systems

Our Duties

1. Assist

2. Evaluate

3. Support

4. Participate

FINEEC’s evaluation typesFINEEC currently conducts two principal types of evaluations for higher education:

• Audits of quality systems of higher education institutions (universities and universities of applied sciences)

• Thematic evaluations and programme/field-specific evaluations (the field or theme must be significant with regard to education and society, rapidly growing and developing or problematic).

FINEEC may also undertake evaluation projects

1) under a mandate from the Ministry of Education and Culture, as was the case with the selection of Centres of Excellence in Education

2) as contract work provided that the evaluations fit thematically into FINEEC's strategy.

Thematic & programme/field-specific evaluations

2013 Evaluation of education in early childhood education

Evaluation of higher education institutions’ societal and regional impact

An evaluation of international degree programmes in Finland

2012 Centres of excellence in university education Finland 1999-2012 - An evaluation

Quality management in stakeholder cooperation at higher education institutions

Enhancing quality. Audits in Finnish Higher Education Institutions 2005-2012

From the bottom up - Evaluation of RDI activities of Finnish Universities of Applied Sciences

Evaluation of the Bologna Process Implementation in Finland

FINHEEC to FINEEC in 2014

• Government programme stated that evaluation functions of Finnish education (FINHEEC, FEEC, and a Unit from the Finnish National Board of Education) will merge into one Finnish Education Evaluation Centre –FINEEC => everything from kindergarten to higher education evaluation in one centre

• Stated aim is to strengthen evaluation of education and its independence

• Better premises for international cooperation and impact

• Austerity or economic efficiency are not mentioned as motivation

• Should be cost neutral merger

Key features in Finnish HE• Development in the Finnish HE is similar to many other industrialized

western societies. In late 1990’s Finnish universities insisted in more autonomy.

• It became evident that demographic development of Finland and in many other countries, challenges the future of higher education institutions. Younger age groups were decreasing and the population was drawn by a few growing regions.

• These were the circumstances under which the new higher education and

science policy initiative of structural development was structured. The dual higher education system including universities and universities of applied sciences UAS is being restructured by the means of organizational, disciplinary and regional prioritization and profiling of institutions.

Key features…• Open and equal access for all → entrance examinations

• Dual system, universities and universities of applied sciences

• An extensive network of HE institutions covering the whole country → regional equality

• Tuition free system

• HEIs may arrange made-to-order degree education to students from of non-EU/EEA countries, but only if it is commissioned and paid by the Finnish government, another state, an international organisation, a Finnish or foreign public corporation, a foundation or a private corporation

• A fixed-term trial of charging tuition fees to citizens of non-EU/EEA countries master's programs in foreign languages scholarship scheme

Structural changes in HE

• “At least one higher education institution in every province”• Mergers of institutions

• from 20 to 14 research universities – • from 30 to 25 universities of applied sciences

• Different (regional) structures for cooperation• Mergers• Consortia• Federations • Strategic entities• Other new forms of cooperation

• One eternal question: sectorial research institutions vs. universities

Changes in legislation

• New Universities Act 2010: • universities either independent corporations under public law (majority) or foundations

under private law (Aalto University, Tampere University of Technology)• University senates/boards: external members including Chair• Personnel contract based, not civil servants; mostly employed by the rector

• Reform of the UAS Act 2014• Reform of funding (→ performance based) and steering (→ joint stock companies)• New licenses/authorization → changes in degree programs; more mergers and less

campuses?

• Universities expected to have a stronger role in the society, especially in the innovation system → EU action lines in higher education policy

Funding• Performance indicators for universities from 2013 onwards:

• Education: 41 % - B & M degrees , students completing 55 ECTS annually, open university, employment of graduates, internationalization

• Research: 34 % - Doctoral degrees, publications, external research funding, internationalization

• Other: 25 % - strategic funding, support for ”expensive” fields, national tasks

• Funding from the state budget covers about 2/3 of university budgets• Supplementary funding (Academy of Finland, Tekes, private

foundations, paid services etc.)• Universities of applied sciences:

• new system of indicators from 2014 onwards; purely performance based • significant cuts during 2012-2015 (-16 %)

FINEEC

Audits…

FINEEC audit• Finland’s response to the requirements of the Bologna process to develop a comprehensive

national higher education QA system

• Institutional approach – the same model for both higher education sectors (universities and

universities of applied sciences)

• Comprehensive approach – covers education, research and social impact – and overall

quality management

• External assessment of internal QA - reflects institutions’ autonomy and responsibility, and

a large measure of trust

• HEIs are responsible for the quality of their operations

• Each institution develops its quality system based on its own needs and goals

Enhancement-led approach

• Aim to support HEIs in the enhancement of quality and establishment of quality culture by (1)

producing information to assist HEIs to develop their activities, and by (2) exchanging and disseminating

good practices among other HEIs

• As a result of the audit, an institution either passes the audit and receives a quality label or is subjected

to a subsequent re-audit

• Institutions are neither rewarded for a positive result nor punished for a negative one – there are

no financial incentives or loss of degree-awarding powers

• No ranking among institutions is established on the basis of audits

What is evaluated and how?

• The quality system is evaluated against the HEI’s objectives, focusing on its efficiency and fitness for purpose – against the FINEEC criteria Does the system produce useful information and does the HEI use the system to

develop its activities?

• Does the quality system cover all activities and units of the HEI?

• Four stages: 1. The HEI carries out a self-evaluation and prepares the audit material2. A team of experts appointed by FINEEC reviews the material3. Site visit by the experts4. The audit results are published in a report

What is not evaluated?

The mission of the HEI Strategy Objectives Results Quality of education Quality of research and development Quality of societal interaction Quality of support services

The Aim of the Audit…

• to produce a clearer assessment of how the quality system supports the strategic leadership and the management of operations at HE institutions

• to review the evidence institutions have on the impact of the quality system on the development of operations

• audits are considered to offer better support for the continuous development of institutions

19

1. The quality policy of the HEI

2. Strategic and operations management

3. The development of the quality system

4. Quality management of the higher education institution’s basic duties:i. Degree education (three cycles)

ii. Research, development and innovation activities, as well as artistic activities

iii. The societal impact and regional development work

iv. Optional audit target

5. Samples of degree education: degree programmes

6. The quality system as a whole

The audit targets

Complete absence or major

shortcomings

There’s already something but it is still inadequate and unsystematic

The system and procedures are developed and

adequate

Work is systematic, well-established

Continuous evidence

Excellence

Audit criteria: development stages

Threshold for passing

• The audit team can propose that the institution passes the audit if none of the targets is evaluated to be ‘absent’ and if the stage of the quality system as a whole (audit target 6) is evaluated to be at least ‘developing’

• FINEEC makes the final decision based on the audit team’s proposition

After an audit

• The audit report is published

• Strengths, good practices and recommendations for further development are highlighted in the report

• A HEI that passes the audit receives a FINEEC quality label valid for six years, otherwise the HEI will be subject to a re-audit

• FINEEC organises annually a follow-up seminar for HEI’s that passed the audit three years before

• No formal consequences for the operating status of the HEI

Success of the audit framework• The Finnish audit system can be considered a success – audits as enhancement-led evaluations have

received wide acceptance

• All Finnish HEIs have established comprehensive quality systems

• HEIs and FINEEC mutually trust one another, communication open and supportive

• Audits have contributed to the development of Finnish higher education by

• Changing quality and operational cultures in HEIs

• Fostering a sense of community and a general commitment to the institution

• Inclining HEIs to learn from one another and share information and good practices with one another,

also between the two higher education sectors – mutual understanding and collaboration between

the sectors have been enhanced

• The management in HEIs is highly committed to quality work

• Students are widely involved in the institution’s quality work

• Currently, FINEEC is conducting an audit of the University of Graz (Austria)