Quality Teaching, lessons learned
Fabrice Hénard-High Level Group on the Modernisation of Higher Education, 28 March
2013, Dublin
Method 1st phase-overview
Review of literature
Documentaryanalysis
Collection of quality
teachinginitiatives
Launching meeting
Online questionnaire
Site visits Telephone interviews
Pilot online
questionnaire
Jan Feb Apr MayDec March June Sept Dec Jan - Feb
IMHEGeneral
conference 8-10 Sept
UOCMeeting
1st findings
Draft report
Publication
Inception stage Observation stage Analysis- Reporting stage
29Institutions
46Quality Teaching
Initiatives
Arcada – University of Applied Sciences (Finland)
Laurea – University of Applied Sciences (Finland)
Freie Univesität Berlin (Germany)
Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz (Germany)
Mykolas Romeris University (Lithuania)
VU University Amsterdam (The Netherlands)
State University, Higher School of Economics (Russia)
Istanbul Technical University (Turkey)
UCL - Université Catholique de Louvain (Belgium)
CBS – Copenhagen Business School (Denmark)
Université de Pau et des pays de l’Adour (France)
Université de Lille 2 Droit et Santé (France)
UOC – Open University of Catalunia (Span)
University of Geneva (Switzerland)
Dublin Institute of Technology (Ireland)
The Institute of Education – University of London (UK)
University of Teesside (UK)
Universidad Nacional del Nordeste (Argentina)
Macquarie University (Australia)
McGill University (Canada)
Université de Sherbrooke (Canada)
Université de Montréal (Canada)
Tohoku Fukushi University (Japan)
Universidad Autonoma De Yucatan (Mexico)
Universidad de la Laguna (Spain)
Alverno College (USA)
City University of Seattle (USA)
University of Arizona (USA)
U21 Global (Online University – India)
Participating institutions
Environment
University
Quality teaching
initiatives
Observation Interviews Document Analysis
QTinitiatives
University
Environment
• Decision makers• Operators• Beneficiaries
• Mission• Strategies• Specialties
• International setting• National context• Regional inclusion
QTinitiatives
University
Environment
• Decision makers• Operators• Beneficiaries
• Mission• Strategies• Specialties
• International setting• National context• Regional inclusion
Method 2nd phase-indepth analysis
University Catania (Italy)
Participating institutions
UNAM (Mexico)
Universidade Católica
Portuguesa (Portugal)
Eötvös Loránd Univ.
(Hungary)
Laurea University (Finland)
Higher School of
Economics (Russia)
Cape Peninsula Univ. of Technology
(South Africa)
Open University of Catalonia
(Spain)
State University of Campinas –
UNICAMP (Brazil)
Université Laval (Canada)
Veracruz University (Mexico)
Initiatives under scrutiny Work-based pedagogical model
Future Centre for Teaching & Learning
E-platform
Curriculum officers
Extended curriculum programmes
Perception /Implementation of T&L strategy
Programme evaluation -usefulness
Professional development programmes- impact
Quality mechanisms for teaching and learning
Overview of quality teaching initiatives
Institutional and Quality Assurance Policy Institution-wide policy (strategy) Dedicated body, Quality Assurance Systems
Programme Level Policy Programme design Programme evaluation
Teaching and Learning-focused activities Support to pedagogy Support to teaching and learning environment Continuing education for teachers Student support Support to student learning
External incentives to quality teaching
A favourable climate for change Direct State incentives or regulations International influence
Competition amongst institutions The need for institutions to be recognized as a regular higher
education provider Quality teaching “because Teaching is our mission so we must
demonstrate we are performing in that field” Rebalancing Teaching-Research nexus
Quality Teaching, a future element of choice for students
Does Quality assurance enhance quality teaching?
Yes• QA stimulates the
awareness on quality teaching
• QA Agencies advise more than control
• QA enables a methodical approach to quality teaching
No• QA hardly embraces
the complexity of teaching
• How to measure quality teaching ?
• How to grasp the entire learning process?
The implementation ofquality teaching initiatives & their related actors
CBS
3 main approaches to operate in quality teaching
Operational / technical
To help teachers operate
Conceptual / Strategic
What the action of teaching means for the academic community
and what added-value is gained by students?
A learning-focused model
The function of teaching in the learning process
From scattered initiatives to a QT Policy
QualityA ssurance
Who are the players?
• McGill University
Mission
Implicit role
Composition
Good practice
Quality office
-To help on practicalities
-To collect / process data
-To provides training-Practical-Theoretical
-From 1 to 30
-To preach!
-A bridge between Top & Down
-Staffing
-To combine research with in-service training
-QA staff
-Political support
-Project manager
-Faculty of Education
Organisational structure
Quality Office Rector
Sup
port se
rvice
s (HR
, finance
…)
Head Head Head
Teachers
Students
Teachers
Students
Teachers
Students
Faculty of science Faculty of law Faculty of linguistics
New functions
New Roles
Evaluation and impacts
Free University Berlin
The evaluation of quality teaching: accepted in principle, challenged in reality
A clear awareness of the need for evaluation in teaching
The institutions appraise the progress of quality teaching support, but not so much the quality of teaching as such.
Intermediateoutcomes
Intermediateoutcomes
Outputs Outputs Immediateoutcomes
Immediateoutcomes
InputsInputs Ultimateoutcomes
Ultimateoutcomes
Hours of training
Inclusion in current practice
Knowledge gain
Teaching improvement
Learning improvement
Outputs, outcomes and impacts
Why are Learning Outcomes weakly measured?
The logical route from teaching input to learning outcome is unknown or only experimentally scrutinized
The teaching-learning interconnection is overlooked by the traditional evaluation and accreditation systems.
Unlike primary /secondary education, the higher learning results from a wider array of factors external to the education provided by the institution
How to better appraise the impacts?
21
1. Innovative teaching evaluation
2. Think in terms of synergy
1) Innovative teaching evaluation: some practices
More qualitative measurement tools Opinion surveys
Descriptors
Interpreting the subjective results of the evaluation
Triangulation of information sources
Clarifying the aims of quality teaching initiatives
Making teaching explicit before or along with any quality teaching initiatives
Teaching
Are the teachers aware of the outcomes of their teaching?
What pedagogy would be appropriate to the expected learning?
How can the institution support
teachers to achieve their mission?
Where do we want to lead our students?
Do we have the skilled teachers?Are students ready to gain
such teaching?
Innovative teaching evaluation: some practices
2) Think about synergy
Quality Teaching
IT
Human Resources
Facilities
Learning support
The impacts of quality teaching(1)
Awareness of the teachers' role beyond their discipline
Discernible impact on pedagogy
Curriculum development (aims / contents of programmes
Work environment
The impacts of quality teaching (2)
Research feeds the theoretical background of quality teaching
Research, a promising development for QT
The impacts of quality teaching (3)
When QT boosts quality culture
When QT promotes the institution’s identity
QT is a promotional tool to attract and retain teachers
Main conclusions (1)
Definitions and conceptions of QT that are highly varied and in constant flux
QT initiatives are empirical and address the institutions’ particular needs The university’s local environment shapes the extent of its commitment
to QT
QT must be thought of dynamically
An effective institutional policy for the QT involves harnessing synergy between external and internal institutional factors
Main conclusions (2)
Long-term, non-linear effort subject to multiple constraints
Commitment on the part of all university stakeholders
Balance between technical aspects of quality support and the fundamental issues raised
Innovative evaluative approaches are needed to better understand the correlation QT support/Learning outcomes
Global Overview
Corpus Knowledge
In-depth Studies
Learning Outcomes
31
1 • Raising awareness
2• Excellent Teachers
3 • Engaging students
4• Organisation for
change-leadership
5• Aligning policies
6• Innovation
7•Assessing impacts
• Evaluation• Capacity
building• Quality
expertise
Top Related