Using institutional renewal to build a culture of accountability and evidence-

based decisions.

MSCHE IN LATIN AMERICA

Moises Silva, Ph.D.Director of Institutional Researchand Quality AssuranceAccreditation Liaison OfficerUniversidad Mayor (Chile)

Soledad Ramirez, Ed.D.Executive Director for Academic AffairsUniversidad Mayor (Chile)

A Glimpse of Universidad Mayor

• Private and non-profit institution, founded in 1988

• Located in two cities (Santiago + Temuco)

• Organized in 10 Colleges

• 39 Professional Schools

• Conservatory of Music

• About 15,000 students

• Over 6,000 Graduates

• Over 60 Undergraduate Programs (Professional Degrees) • 35 Master Degree Programs

• 43 Other Postgraduate Programs

• Granted Full Autonomy status in 1996 (Chilean Licensing System)

• Granted Accreditation in 2005 (National System)

• Granted Candidate status in 2006 (MSCHE)

• Invited to initiate Self-Study process in 2006 (MSCHE)

4

Higher Education in Chile

• Heterogeneous institutions

• Increasing demand for effectiveness, efficiency and social relevance

• Increasing demand for integrity (accountability)

• Competition for resources

• International education

5

Quality Assurance in Latin America• Accreditation initiatives are rather new

• Institutional research capability is growing

• Trans-national experiences

And in Chile• Licensing ----- Eventual Full Autonomy

• Accreditation: Self Study - Site Visit - Effects

• State-controlled National Commissions

• Universidad Mayor: Autonomy in 1996 Accredited in 2005

6

Why International Accreditation?

• Consolidate a place, obtain a distinctive seal of quality in the Chilean environment

• Assure continuous improvement

• Facilitate student mobility and increase academic exchange

• Establish a new point of reference for the State-controlled National Accreditation System

• Become a member of a special “club”

Why MSCHE?

7

Additional Elements of the Challenge Faced

• Meet 21 Eligibility Requirements and 14 Standards (more demanding than the national system)

• Invest 5 years on an initial phase that can turn into nothing (uncertainty; longer than the national system)

• A cycle of internal reviews and external evaluations (continuous work)

• Demands from a different language and uncomfortable calendar

8

Formal Results as Today• Candidacy status granted in June 2006• Invitation to Self Study in June 2008

Some Massive Effects so Far• A transformational change - Organizational structure - Planning and budgeting - Institutional research - Human and physical resources development - Institutional curriculum (CurriculumMayor) - Information system and technology - Institutional and student learning assessment

• But mainly a cultural change

9

Planning and Budgeting: A Sensitive Area

• Resistance to change

• From central decision-making to proper campus involvement

• Educating Faculty and staff (and empowering)

• Administration and Faculty talking to one another

• “Money and heart fly together”

• Institutional Mission: Mission Impossible?

10

Initial CMY

Discipline CMY

Professional CMY

Graduate orSpecialized CMY

Bachelor Licentiate

Professional

MasterSpecialization

Professional Education

Basic Education

Management and Entrepreneurship Education General Education

DegreesCurrículumMayor (CMY)

Curriculum Blocks

Educational Areas

2 2 - 3 1 - 2 1 - 2

Years

Optional

11

Curriculum Revision to Integrate UM General Competences and MSCHE

Standard 12

• PHASE 1

– Task force to study the integration of both components

– Proposal for policies and 7 basic objectives

– Feedback from faculty and Schools chairs (over one semester of work)

12

PHASE 2

• School chairs and faculty perform thorough analysis of all courses across the curricula to determine level of tribute to 7 objectives:

– Teaching methods

– Evaluation strategies – Course content

13

Phase 3

• Analysis and needs assessment to identify weak objectives performed by Schools assisted by Academic Office (AO)

Phase 4

• Reformulation of General Ed Area of CMY

• New course structure for 2009 academic year, starting next March with participation of all Schools assisted by AO

14

Phase 5

• Generating General Education Teachers’ profile and docent selection

Phase 6

• January 2009 :General Ed Instructors Training Program; and

• General Ed Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan to be developed by instructors assisted by AO

15

Assessment Procedures in the CurriculumMayor (CMY) and Design of the Educational Effectiveness Assessment System:

Organizing Facts and Experience

16

17

Review of assessment procedures in the CurriculumMayor (CMY) and

Design of the Educational Effectiveness Assessment System

• At each stage or block of the CMY two elements were identified:

- students’ main activities- assessment procedures

performed

Some examples

18

Initial Stage

• Activities

– Freshmen induction– Classes– Seminars– Field work– Laboratories– Beginning stage

completion– Teachers

roundtable– Students web work

• Assessment procedures

– Students opinion– Tests– Exams– Likert scales– Students reports– Competence evaluation– Outcomes analysis– Teachers evaluation

19

Discipline Stage

Activities

• Classes, seminars and workshops

• Laboratory work

• Practicum

• Study trips

Assessment procedures

• Tests, exams, reports

• Portfolios, rubrics

• Students reports

• Supervisor evaluation

• Portfolios and reports

20

Professional Stage

Activities

• Professional Practicum

• Internships

• Integrated seminar

• Dissertation

Assessment procedures

• External evaluation and supervisor’s report

• Students report and supervisor’s report

• Exam

• Written research project with external evaluation

21

The System’s Main Features

• All elements are linked

• There are summative evaluation events after each stage or curricular block

• There are faculty group analysis of students learning outcomes, and actions are taken

• There are quantitative and qualitative methods

• Alumni follow up activities are included

• It is a dynamic on going cycle of events

22

Some closing remarks• UM is fully understanding that student learning is the University business

• Organizational learning is taking place

• A move towards an evidence and accountability culture is in progress---------------------------• Assistance of MSCHE workshops, officers and consultants and other organizations is important

• MSCHE role in QA may be extended

• MSCHE action in Latin America is being noticed

• Has been a highly beneficial experience

23