Quality management implementation at University

Dr. Juan Viñas SalasRector Lleida University

AMSE ANNUAL CONFERENCEBARCELONA 5-7- JUNE 2008

The Legitimacy of Quality Assurance in Higher Education

One of the basic elements of EHEA is the quality in HE and the development of QA systems for HEIs;

The standards and guidelines for QA adopted by European ministers in Bergen in 2005;

The progress of implementation was reviewed again in London in 2007.

Diversity exists:

Ministers agreement in Berlin 2003: national QA systems should include a ”system of accreditation,certification or comparable procedures”.

The HE systems in Europe vary, maintlyfor historical reasons alone:

- old - new universities-public - private- comprehensive - special HEIs- etc.

EHEA with the recognition of titles and studies within European Universities makes necessary to implement a Quality Assurance program to assess similarities in teaching outcomes

Medical training has health care implications that makes it specific and different to others

AGENCIES HIERARQUIE

ENQA

NATIONAL AGENCY

UNIVERSITY SETTINGS

QUALITY EVALUATION

Evaluation Standards in Medical Education

There is a real need to: Evaluate Enhance Accountability Confront - the methods and results of all University

Higher Education in Europe for the EHEA

Quality Assurance

In Medical Education this need is worldwide for its health care implications

undergraduate medical education postgraduate training:

Specialization Continuous Medical Education

Research: Basic Applied

MEDICAL SCHOOL COMPLEXITY

interaction with the clinical service

Types of University Settings Evaluation

Institutional Evaluation: Governance General organize aspects

Specific Evaluations Quality of Teaching: - curricula - methodology

- outputs Health Care Quality Assurance

QUALITY ASSURANCE

Quality Circle Q.A. focused on:

Structure Process Results

Continuum of Quality Undergraduate Postgraduate

Accreditation or improvement Quality of:

Medical School and Health Care System

Rector’s Challenges

-Differences between Centres and Studies-Different Staff opinions-Need of more Resources-Need of European standards and guidelines

Staff vision of Q.A. Evaluations A mandatory extra-work that takes extra-time A bureaucratic extra-work that have little positive

effects of their own professional work A rectorate office imposition because of no trust

in staff and need of university marketing

A necessary complementary work for increasing quality in teaching, research and health care providing

Need of university transparency and accountability for generating society complicity and help

Actions to be implemented

Continuous information-education about the need of life-long learning in all professional aspects, not only technical: Teaching Self growing Research Management

Implication of Staff in the process Implication of Students in the process Make Staff leave the QA evaluation as a

“enjoying process”

PITFALLS TO AVOID IN QUALITY ASSURANCE

Excess bureaucracy Received as a “police inspection” Excess of extra work Few related to outcomes Not accepted as a improvement tool Conforming with the assessments Non integrated in staff normal work

Need of University Social Implication

It is a mistake to ask for more University financing just for social reasons: we are not priorities as: 1- health care

2- social settings 3-Education non university We must combine it with social needs for

producing moneyefficiency: to gain/gain

increase of general economy: I+D+I Increased value: - quality, prestige, better health

care

Justification of Quality Assurance Quality assurance and quality improvement

are two necessary objectives that all organization must assume and work towards it. There is no other option.

1. Personal ethics. To work with the maximal quality as possible is a challenge that every human being must have as a value. It is one of the different items that help one to be happy in his/here own life. The selfish increases if one works with quality.

2. Social ethics. There is a need of security in health care for every citizen

The audit criteria must be based on European standardsand guidelines:

- the more detailed criteria can be set in consultation withthe HEIs, and they are public

- the audit process involves partly a peer review, but includes also student and labour market representatives;

- the audit report must be published, and be public;

- It is worthwhile that the Quality agency gives a quality certificate to the HEI that has passed the criteria

The leadership and governance of each HEI plays an important role in the implementation of itsQA system. (But still every university already has ’quality’.)

A system that is based on a quality culture that embraces everybody in the institution.

The leadership has to be the initiator of the strategicquality improvement in the institution, and its role isfurther enhanced in the dissemination of good practices through national and international networks.

Really exists a ”Common European language” in what is quality terminology in different cultural and historical contexts and its interpretation?

- can the standards be applied consistently? - how about legal documents?

ENQA Workshop on ’Language of the EuropeanQuality Assurance’, in June 2006

Different approaches for Q.A. Assessment

Each Medical School, according with the HEI can decide itself which type of quality system it is following (ISO, EFQM, etc.) or developed their own that fits best their very strategy and tasks;

Every Medical School should be willing to go through the audit. Their motivation based largely on enhanced national and international competitiveness and visibility.

Each audit based on a specific contract between the Medical School and the Agency, and thus must not been seen as limiting its the autonomy.

Higher education institution (HEI)

HEI support institution (state)

• providing optimized programmes

• ensuring accountability

• procuring effectivity/efficiency

• inducing optimal programmes

• demanding accountability

• checking effectivity/efficiency

quality/quality assurance

Students Society (e.g., labour market)

• guaranteed quality

• transparent information

• (external) acceptance

• guaranteed quality

• transparent information

• matching needs

The way ahead:

Internal quality assurance processes need to be sufficiently financed on a continuous basis

decisions about course and program design, monitoring and approval should be informed with employers’ views - Health care Responsibles -.

quality management bodies inside the HEIs should involve students on a more systematic basis

involvement of international reviewers has to be financially supported by the government

Summary

Medical School is different as teaching implies health care system and patient’s care; its cost is very high.

Many people implicated in medical students training are not linked with University Staff: Hospital and Primary Care physicians, nurses and other Health Care Professionals, etc.

Q.A. of Medical Schools must be closely related to results, to outcomes

There are different specific models of Q.A. evaluation of Medical Schools. ENQA should agree a common European Standard Model.

Summary

Universities must give high autonomy governance to Medical Schools

Health Care providers must be linked with Medical School responsibles

Universities Quality Assurance Offices must help medical Dean’s Office work

Thank you very much