The CeQuInt Project: rationale, activities & intended

outcomes

•Axel Aerden

2

AIMS: mutual recognition of accreditation & quality assurance decisions

RESULTS OF THIS COOPERATION:• Code of good practice (2004)

• Principles for the selection of experts (2005)

• Principles for accreditation procedures regarding joint programmes (2007)

• Bilateral mutual recognition of accreditation agreements (2007)

• Qrossroads.eu (2008)

• Principles regarding learning outcomes in accreditation procedures (20010)

• Multilateral agreement regarding joint programmes (2011)

3

Internationalisation in higher education?

• Curricula with an international orientation in content, aimed at preparing students for performing (professionally/socially) in an international and multicultural context and designed for domestic students as well as foreign students (Bremer & van der Wende, 1995)

• “The process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of post-secondary education” (Knight, 2004)

• “Internationalisation of the curriculum is the incorporation of an international and intercultural dimension into the preparation, delivery and outcomes of a program of study” (Leask, 2009)

3

4

BORDERLESS (INTER)CONNECTED

DISTINCTIVE

QA & Accreditation

Assessment of Internationalisation

Quality and Internationalisation

5

Type Level Input Perspective

UMBPBenchmarking Institution

Data collection & self evaluation

Internal & External

IQRIndicators & Assessment Institution

Data collection & self evaluation

Internal & External

CHE Indicators (& Ranking) Any unit Data collection Internal (& External)

MINT Indicators (& Benchmarking) Any unit Data collection Internal (& External)

IMPI Indicators (& Benchmarking) Any unit Data collection Internal (& External)

HRK Assessment Institution Self evaluation External

ACAAssessment Institution

Data collection (& self evaluation)

External

NVAOAssessment

Programme / Institution

Self evaluation External

Instruments to “measure” internationalisation

6

Aims & objectives

• To assess quality of internationalisation• Quality assurance approach (in line with ESG)• By peers• Qualitative assessment• not based on quantitative indicators

• Internationalisation’s impact on education• To reward internationalisation• Award of a Certificate for Quality in Internationalisation

• To enhance internationalisation• Expert report with recommendations• Good Practice Workshops• Platform for sharing Good Practices

7

Envisaged benefits for HE

• Enhancement perspective• Implementation internationalisation policies• Internationalisation of curricula

• Sharing experiences & Benchmarking practices• Qualitative standards – examplary practices• Workshop on good practices• Good practices in internationalisation platform

8

9

• 15 higher education institutions • Belgium, • Denmark, • Finland, • Germany, • Italy, • Lithuania, • Norway, • Poland, • Spain, • The Netherlands, • UK

Project groups

Steering

Group

Stakeholders

Group

2012 2013 2014 2015

10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 031

2

10

Assessment methodology

2012 2013 2014 2015

10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 033

Training day

11

Pilot procedures

2012 2013 2014 2015

10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 034

12

Dissemination & Exploitation

2012 2013 2014 2015

10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 01 02 035

6

13

Intended outcomes

• Methodology to assess quality of internationalisation• Frameworks, guidelines, templates, appeal procedure

• Methodology to award Certificate for Quality in Internationalisation• Responsibilities for procedures and decision-making

• Good Practices in Internationalisation Platform• Web portal and selection procedure

14

THANK YOU AND GOOD LUCK

www.ecaconsortium.net

www.qrossroads.eu | www.ecapedia.net