Guidelines on quality assurance and development

Department 1: Educational sciences Susanne Weis & Mario Gollwitzer

Quality development work group Winfried Gebhardt Dean of department 1 Universittsstr. 1 56070 Koblenz

Method Centre Universitt Koblenz-Landau Fortstr. 7 76829 Landau

1 Preface ............................................................................................................................... 3 2 Basics................................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 2.2 Definition of terms ................................................................................................... 3 Guidelines .............................................................................................................. 7

3 Procedures for quality assurance and development ......................................................... 10 3.1 3.2 3.3 Procedural principles ............................................................................................ 10 Participants in the process and their functions ...................................................... 11 Standardised and non-standardised instruments of quality assurance .................. 12

4 Organisational and institutional framework ....................................................................... 17 5 References ........................................................................................................................17 6 Appendix ...........................................................................................................................18

1 Preface
The debate on "quality assurance at universities is located at an interface between development of the Bologna process for harmonisation of the European educational architecture on the one hand and the many long discussions, concepts and procedures of quality assurance itself on the other hand. Both strands must be taken up to appropriately position the university of Koblenz-Landau; this also means that the university-internal debate does not need to "re-invent the wheel". In the context of the internal task of universities, they are according to the European standards and guidelines of the ENQA (cmp. HRK 2007, p. 303f.) , to develop "a concept (and corresponding procedures) to secure quality and standards of their programmes and degrees" and to also implement it in the scope of a strategy. "The strategy, the concept and the procedure are to receive a formal status and be accessible to the public. Furthermore, students and other actors are to be assigned individual roles." The present concept is to be a template for subject-, department- and campuscomprehensive procedures for internal quality assurance and development in studies and teachings at the university of Koblenz-Landau. On this basis, the self-control function of the departments and university management is to be supported in its tasks according to 5 HSchG with the objective of continuous improvement and further development of the university teachings.

2 Basics
2.1 Definition of terms a. Quality assurance and development When the English language speaks of "Quality Assurance and "Controlling, the German Bologna documents render this as "Qualittssicherung und "-kontrolle. If "education", however, is not defined as a "product" that can be solely produced and controlled by "input", but rather by a communications and interaction context with intense development that may only exert its full effect much later, the limits of "final measurement of results" or "securing" of characteristics in the above sense become clear. Within the educational discourse, the issue of a term for a project under development is referred to repeatedly. For example, LangWojtasik states that there is no consensus on a standardised quality term. "Alignment with educational standards for safety and measurability of educational qualities in the scope of output-oriented educational research is an option that is subject to constant change (LangWojtasik 2008, p. 117). Quality development therefore is always a "work in progress. In spite of all critique and the ideas of result measurement of quality in the educational sector and connected to this their controllability by technology, the reverse conclusion that the efforts in or for studies are to be left wholly to chance, i.e. that they are not subject to communicative determination and personal, as well as structural, influence, is not correct. In contrast, previous considerations indicate that what is considered "quality-relevant" for a course of study, subject or department must be defined specifically under consideration of special requirements and subject cultures. Every course of studies or subject must determine for itself what it defines as "teaching quality". Once the term of quality is defined, the next step must be determination of how "quality of teaching and studies

can be empirically observed. What are the criteria and indications for quality in teaching and studies? How would it be possible to tell that teaching quality is great, average or less than perfect? The search for criteria and indicators for quality in teaching and studies can be committed to a standardised or un-standardised procedure; indicators can be highly subjectspecific (achievement of certain learning objectives) as well as universal ones (like the ratio of persons terminating their studies). The decisive matter is that the discussion of the quality term and the indicators for quality are as un-ideological as possible and as critical as required. Within educational facilities, one can ask how the parties involved understand their core performances or what key processes and support structures are required to warrant them. Quality development in this sense is based on continuous empirically informed dialogue and consequences from it. Translated into a language of measurability discourse, however, the basics of the required "empirical information "would first need determination of what is to be measured, explanation of why this and nothing else is measured, actual measurements being conducted on what is claimed to be measured and the standards used for assessment being justified (Lang-Wojtasik 2008, p. 117), as well as of what cannot or only partially measured.

b. Object of quality assurance and development The present concept understands the object of quality assurance and development as that which can be combined in the core performance to be rendered by the university as a whole in the area of studies and teaching. This core performance is defined as responsible warranty of a working study process for all matriculated students. To explain the individual elements of the phrasing: The adjective of "responsible refers to responsibility towards three perspectives:

the students and their perspectives for life as connected to their studies (cmp. GG sect. 2/1 and 12/1), the factual requirements and epistemic logics of scientific technical disciplines (cmp. GG sect. 5/3), a democratic society in the sense of perception of a public educational task that not only, but also, comprises the objective of "employability.

"Warranty includes all measures that are meant to enable content-related and organisational securing of the processes (i.e. more than a lecture or seminar). At the same time "warranty" must be distinguished from also legally bound - "guarantee, which cannot be assumed unilaterally according to the above understanding of education, as well as from pure "provision", which would not meet the interaction principle of education. The phrase of "working explicitly refers to the quality dimension in the sense of a combination of "good" and "functional" under the present conditions. The word chosen is not "successful", because this would primarily focus on a result already achieved. Again, note that success is not solely determined by the university's influence (in the sense of structural "lack of determination" of education; cmp. e.g. Helsper et al. 2003), but also by social-structural and community-policy framework conditions.

The "study process" comprises in the temporal overall perspective from initial information to completion of studies two components with equal rights and value. On the one hand, these are the core elements of "teaching" and "learning", targeted at conveying and achieving subject-specific knowledge (as excellently as possible) and the corresponding (also application-related) competences. On the other hand, reflecting skills described with the term of "studies" are of central importance; they are targeted at "dealing with", "questioning", "discovering", "understanding", "developing", "criticising", "differentiating" or "separating what is important from what is not". "Employability" can and must in particular under the conditions of an expanding "knowledge society" - only be understood as a sum of both components of the study process, and must not be reduced to "input stimulation" (teaching) and "content acquisition" (learning). The phrase of "all matriculated students indicates the target group in total. However, possibly required internal differentiation within the students also must be considered (by aspects such as gender, ethnical group, age, etc.). c. Key processes and support structures If the above "warranty of a working study process" is assumed to be a core performance in the area of "studies and teaching", the second step must be asking about which so-called "key processes" and "support structures" within the university contribute to it. Identification of the corresponding actors and actor groups is connected to constitution of the field where the object of quality development is located. It also becomes clear that the responsibility for the quality of "working study processes" is not solely in the hands of the students and teachers but also limited by the above framework conditions. In the context of "university" as an educational institution, the area of "research", which, while not the core business of the "studies and teaching" industry, is still to be explicitly considered in connection with the claim of research-oriented studies, is also particularly important. Thus, the following aspects can be assembled as structural elements forming the basis for quality development considerations in the sense of "warranty of working study processes".
a. Key processes c. Reference structure Research and Information promotion of young Contact studies counselling scientists support Self studies b. Support structures Stude nt infrast ructur e

Library/ E- Administ Media ration

Diagram 1: On the structure of the field of "warranty of working study processes" at the university

Key processes The key processes include contact studies, private studies and the offer of information, counselling and support. An understanding of a "working study process" must comply with the different cultures of subjects, different objectives of courses of studies, the heterogeneity of the students and viable expectations of society and labour market. Thus, criteria for the success within the studies can be differently interpreted and weighted. Therefore, the areas are at first only differentiated formally to achieve a matrix that offers the contact points for the respective course of studies 5

for potential quality development measures. "Contact studies describes those forms of studies that are mainly performed under the direction of teachers. Generally, however, internal events (such as lecture, lecture series, seminar, exercise, colloquium, workshop, teaching partnership etc. from the institutes or central facilities such as the key competence program) and offers by external partners (teaching project, practical training, guest lecture, etc.) must be differentiated. Additionally, the form in the sense of its media-didactic setup (such as presence, online or blended) and the question of integration of examination aspects within the events are also relevant for evaluation and quality. In the area of "private studies, i.e. responsible processing of study contents on one's own, appropriate form and criteria for access and adequate equipment are important for quality assurance. This applies for "learning sites", such as library/ies, PC pools, lab rooms and places, digital teaching and learning platforms and free spaces for self-organised student group and individual work. Regarding the key processes in the area of "information, counselling and support, university-wide offers, different sections include general student counselling, the women's office and university-wide orientation phase (OPA), as well as general information media, as opposed to course of study-specific forms such as print and online offers of the institutes or teachers, subject study counselling, office hours of the teachers, targeted initiation and introduction events, graduation celebrations and alumni work, student and examination-preparing counselling, services offered by a practical training office, a career service or interaction with the job office. Support structures Support structures make an important supporting contribution to "warranting a working study process"; these structures include administration and offers in the area of student infrastructure. In the scope of the corresponding quality development, the offers named here are not important as an ends in and of themselves, but mainly under the consideration of if and in how far they support key processes. Here, the library(ies), as well as other working platforms from the area of new media, as they are, for example, provided by the MOSEL project of the IWM or the virtual campus Rhineland-Palatinate (VCRP) are of central importance. In the scope of quality assurance and development, they also must be evaluated from an institutional point of view that exceeds the above individual user view in the sense of "private studies. In particular the organisational side is secured by "administrative facilities" such as the students' office, examination office or management of certain courses of study, while a democratic participation is warranted by the corresponding university-policy bodies (such as the faculty's student body, student parliament, committees, student members in the department councils, senate, etc.).

In the context of "student infrastructure", the following must be considered among others: the facilities of the student union (such as student restaurant, student dorms, psycho-social counselling, etc.), the financing sector (Bafg office and the corresponding information and counselling options, also on scholarships, etc.), university sports, presence of "SommerUni, theatre AG, etc. and, in a wider sense, also infrastructure aspects such as copy service, PNV or parking spaces. Reference structure. A "working study process must comply with different, potentially contrary claims. This also includes appropriate connection of teaching and research. The subjects and departments are to contribute to scientific quality, but also teach in a practice-oriented fashion. They are to prove a high research level and integrated students and young scientists in research processes, while also complying with the needs of those students who are not mainly striving for a scientific career. The features for a working connection of teaching and research can be different depending on subject and department. Therefore, sites and institutions must be created where the different requirements can be exchanged on subject level. Concretely, integration of teaching with research means that students participate in research as closely as possible and are given an early insight into the subject's research. Furthermore, the interface between teaching and research is anchored in promotion of young scientists. This is achieved both by supporting promotions and habilitations on the level of teachers, institutes and departments. On the other hand, facilities such as the interdisciplinary promotion centre (Interdisziplinres Promotionszentrum; IPZ) or the method centre of the university of Koblenz-Landau provide the corresponding structures. Furthermore, the departments and university management strive to ensure the framework conditions required for connecting teaching and research for working student practice based on their structure and staff plans (e.g. by setting up qualification employments [former at employments] and junior professors) and in the scope of appointment proceedings.

2.2 Guidelines The following considerations mainly refer to the level of a course of study as the relevant unit for implementation of quality objectives and criteria for the areas of "studies and teaching". They are based on a quality understanding that focuses on the compatibility to objectives and study conditions. However, it is essential that the objectives are aligned with those on other levels, such as regarding comprehensive principles of the university as a whole. 1. "Working study practice is to be understood as a multi-dimensional educational performance that must comply with the concurrent appearance of different, potentially contradicting claims. "Working study practice" is targeted at an appropriate and balanced treatment of these requirements by all parties involved. Its core is the question of what means of specialist science excellence and labour-market oriented closeness to practice can be warranted. For this, requirements regarding conveying of (a) subject-specific standards, (b) general key competences in profession and society, (c) studies-related external expectations of potential employers and (d) expectations of the new students must be considered in the light of a workable and realistic implementation of these objectives under the present study conditions or technical options. Conveying these different requirements on subject level is a sophisticated, continuous task that requires development and definition of a joint subject understanding or joint understanding of objectives. 7

2. "Working study practice" is based on a subject or self-understanding that in particular in the sense of the objectives and competences phrased in the study units and modules of a course of studies was coordinated by the teachers of the subject. The definition of the understanding and objectives, as well as their continuous adjustment to changing framework conditions are one of the central tasks of the subject representatives also in cooperation with students, graduates, labour market representatives and the university management. However, mutual understanding of the subject is not to be confused with detail regulation; what is to be striven for is not a subject understanding that negates the plurality of content and paradigms but in the sense of freedom of research and teaching mainly includes continuous communication of wishes, standards, joint features and differences. 3. The definition of objectives is no sufficient criterion for "working study practice" if these objectives are not communicated and implemented accordingly. Since technical transfer, individual development and later application horizons must be phrased abstractly in the module descriptions of study regulations, continuous understanding on their concrete interpretation is another central requirement for working study practice in addition to transparency of objectives and the relevant assessment criteria. 4. "Working study practice" is characterised by diverse connection capabilities. This means that lectures and sections of the course of studies are based on each other and possibly trans-disciplinarily complement each other sensibly. Furthermore, connection capability also means that the study offer is aligned with the knowledge and skill potential of new students and the expected requirements after a course of studies. Connection capability of the study sector to the area of research also must be considered; this means in particular in the context of increasing science importance in many professional areas that students are given the possibility to participate in research as much as possible. The content-related and organisational integration of contact study offers (i.e. lectures, seminary, exercises, excursions, etc.) and the activities of private or independent studies (e.g. by reading, tasks to be processed on one's own or in working groups) must be considered. 5. In addition to contact and private study options, the corresponding support offer for students is also one of the key processes of "working study practice. Good support in the sense of academic exchange is the basis for mutual respect and mutual trust. This includes both professional information and personal counselling to support developmental possibilities of the students, as well as early or continuous feedback for assessment of individual performance or correctness of the choice of study subject. In an ideal case, support starts where students make a decision for a studies subject and location. Suitable aids (e.g. "selfassessment) can contribute to optimising such decisions. Appropriate support also differentiates by the students' individual need for support, which is usually highly fluctuating.

6. "Working study practice" is not an arbitrary or accidental concept. It is to be recorded, documented, communicated, assessed and accordingly developed further in the scope of regular monitoring. Adequate indicators for working study practice also require subjectoriented and course-of-studies-specific interpretation. The respective collection and assessment process must include all groups. An understanding of "working study practice" must comply with the different cultures of the subjects, subject groups and courses of study, while being compatible with general university-wide and educational policy objectives. Criteria for the success of "studies and teaching" therefore can be oriented weighted differently depending on subject. 7. To warrant a "working study practice" in the above sense, the teachers' side also requires continuous professional exchange or the corresponding further education options (e.g. for didactic or media-supported concepts). This is important in particular regarding young scientists. However, this does not mean any standardisation of contact studies, but in the sense of freedom of research and teaching alignment with the specific demand of the teacher, in particular since diversity and originality is proven to characterise sustainable education. On the other hand, "diversity" must not be mistaken for "arbitrariness". Quality assurance and development also means to openly target problems and developmental requirements in teaching also on a personal level and to look for possible solutions. 8. In addition to the key processes, "working study practice" also requires the corresponding framework conditions or an adequate infrastructure that enables and facilitates implementation of contact and private studies for all parties involved as well as support and counselling. These support structures include, among others, the work of the university administration and the offers of the student union. 9. A procedure for quality development in the area of "studies and teaching" means that first the already established methods and instruments are to be verified for their further suitability (e.g. teaching reports, performance measurement forms, teaching valuation versions, statistic recording of key figures on the overall number of students and graduates in a longitudinal and cross section, e.g. in the president's report). Supplementary, new procedures must be developed and implemented according to context (in particular regarding the competence basis demanded by the Bologna process). Integration of the many approaches into a comprehensive concept, procedure and strategy of the university of Koblenz-Landau on quality development in studies and research is required for content and organisation .

10. Considering the complexity of objective, process and actor structures at a university of the size and setup of Koblenz-Landau, it appears appropriate to draw up a concept, to perform and to take responsibility for quality assurance and development on a localised level according to context, and to coordinate and align contents for it on a central level in the sense of a developmentally open, process-dialogue-centred overall procedure based on a consent on objectives with accompanying documentation, evaluation and target-oriented discussion within a representative committee structure aligned with the different courses of study under cross-department cooperation.

3 Procedures for quality assurance and development

3.1 Procedural principles The procedure for quality assurance and development to be described in this section is based on the following principles:

Quality assurance and development is a process aligned with controlling and sustainable optimisation. There is no single quality term (and therefore also no single quality criterion); in contrast, quality appears in many different facets at different weight. The definition of these quality facets and determination of their weight is the result of a discourse to be led within each subject or department. It follows that the departments are primarily responsible for quality assurance and development measures. They have the right to autonomously perform quality assurance, but also the obligation to proceed with the greatest of care and to prove this care. Quality assurance and development are based on empirically informed dialogues. Empirical information is the basis of quality development dialogues. The empirical information relevant for any individual case and their integration is to be decided on on department level. Empirical information of the departments requires an effective and efficient support structure. The method centre supports the department is collection, preparation and integration of quality-relevant data. When collecting quality-relevant data, we differentiate between two types of data: (1) data of general, non-subject-specific interest for the question of quality of teaching. This data is collected routinely; it includes, among others, subjective assessment of certain quality features of a lecture by the students. It is collected quantitatively in a standardised form. (2) Data of specific interest for the question of quality of teaching. This data is collected according to the requirements of subject or department-specific agreements (and then possibly un-standardised or qualitatively). It supplements or is an alternative to standardised data under consideration of subject-specific peculiarities. Quality assurance and development is not limited to the collection and preparation of data either quality or quantity-related. The objective of sustainable improvement of quality in teaching and studies can only be achieved if the persons responsible in the departments commit to

10

taking the required controlling measures to ensure or improve achievement of defined quality standards. 3.2 Participants in the process and their functions a) University management. The university management assumes overall responsibility for quality assurance and quality development of the university. It initiates, coordinates and control quality assurance and quality development measures of the participating institutions and in particular supports the departments and the central facilities in provision, collection and assessment of the required data and information. It draws up a university report on quality assurance and development at regular intervals and submits it to the senate for consideration. b) Senate The senate decides on the guidelines for quality assurance and development and the partial basic regulations for quality assurance and development in teaching of the university of Koblenz-Landau and regularly consults on the quality assurance and quality development reports drawn up by the university management. c) Departments and their managements The departments and the central facilities are responsible for concepts and performance of quality assurance and development in the courses of studies they are responsible for in the form of empirically-informed quality development dialogues. For this purpose, they set up one or several (depending on the number of courses of study) internal committees or charge present committees (e.g. for "studies and teaching) with the respective tasks. The departments decide with their own competence and responsibility on the suggestion of the internal committees on The standardised and non-standardised methods of data collection or information generation they intend to use where and when (it is recommended to at least use the standardised student and workload surveys offered by the method centre); The criteria by which they are to be assessed; The results to be derived from the insights gained;

How to implement this in concrete measures. At regular intervals, they draw up so-called quality assurance reports (to replace the previous teaching reports) that are collected by the university management, assessed and submitted to the senate. d) Students. The students actively participate in quality assurance and development, both by participating in the required surveys (standardised and non-standardised) and by participating through their elected representatives in all relevant committees. e) Centre of methods, diagnostics and evaluation (short: method centre) The method centre is a coordination site where scientists from the area of empirical research methods, psychological and pedagogics diagnosis and evaluation research are combined. It renders services in the area of method sciences, method consulting, diagnosis and evaluation for our university and customers outside of the university. In the scope of quality assurance in studies and teaching, the method centre acts as a scientific service office that complies with the tasks described in the following: 11

12

1. Development and maintenance of the instruments for surveys among students and alumni 2. Organisation and administration of standardised surveys 3. Assessment of the results and proper and data-privacy-law-compliance for archiving and deletion of the data after the end of the corresponding deadlines 4. Result feedback of the survey of students to the respective authorised recipients 5. Participation in the (further) development of the guidelines on quality assurance and development in coordination with the departments and university management As a scientific service provider, the method centre is the contractor of the departments that decide on the time, scope and type of evaluation in coordination with the university management and in compliance with the partial basic regulations for quality assurance f) Administration On the one hand, the administration provides the departments and central facilities with the statistic data and information required for comprehensive quality assurance and development on request, on the other (like the departments) it develops concepts for quality assurance and development of the university administrative action and ensures their implementation. 3.3 Standardised and non-standardised instruments of quality assurance For implementation of the empirically informed quality assurances and quality development dialogues in the departments, it is mandatory to have a diversity of different (partially also differently relevant) empirical data. A difference must be made between data that is already present in university administration (controlling, student offices, etc.) and data that first needs to be collected. On the other hand, there must be a difference between data collected with the help of standardised methods and data generated with non-standardised methods. What data is to (and can be) collected in which way depends on the object and question of the respective examination and must be decided on from case to case by the relevant departments as carriers of quality assurance and development. No matter how the decision is made in any individual case, a definition and operationalisation of the quality features relevant for studies and teaching (possibly only temporary or to be continually verified for quality and optimised) is indispensable for this. the core performance (and thus "quality") in studies and teaching is, as defined above, responsible warranty of a working study process for all matriculated students.

Regarding the dimension of "warranty, it can be asked whether the university or the respective courses of study offer the organisational and content requirements to enable a successful study process. In particular, this includes aspects of feasibility of studies, connected to the equipment of teaching units or lectures, examination organisation and the offers of student counselling. On a concrete operational level, feasibility of studies includes, among others, availability of lesson materials in the form of electronic and other media, media equipment in the lecture halls, lack of overlaps of lectures, organisation of examination and counselling offers and provision of sufficient freedom for private studies. Organisational securing of the process and thus also feasibility of studies also includes a realistic estimate of the workload for a lecture (including preparation and follow-up) and thus for the complete module.

The dimension of "responsibility can be limited with the question of whether the courses of study strive to fulfil the public educational order that has the equal objectives of forming individual personalities and training graduates qualified for working life. On an operational level, this includes, among others, the acquisition of key competences (e.g. reflection and self-reflection, ability to judge, social responsibility), sufficient professional qualification and thus creation of the requirements for successfully entering professional life. The dimension of "responsibility, however, also includes the question of whether or not the technical and contents standards set up in the course of studies concept are implemented in everyday studies. Translated into an empirically recordable dimension, this partial construct includes the question of whether the competences described in the module can be gained in the lectures of a module.

A question that can be derived from the definition of "study process is adequacy of "teaching" process design as one of the two main components of the study process. On an operational level, one process element is the design of a lecture by the lecturer. This includes structure, didactics, degree of stimulation and the psycho-social climate of a lecture, as well as possibly reference to relevant practical questions.

The second main component of the definition of "study process comprises the partial process of "learning. This includes diverse aspects that can be structured in process and result features. Result features include the completed acquisition of technical knowledge and specific skills and abilities (such as ability to deal with critique, ability to judge and to apply). Process features include, e.g., applied learning strategies, mainly in the area of private studies, and other requirements for learning, such as previous knowledge of the students. Successful acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities, i.e. learning success in the narrower sense, is usually equated with examination results in the scope of studies. This includes test results as well as the results of module and graduation exams and qualification work. In the superordinate sense, successful learning can refer to the graduation independently of the grades; thus, quitting the studies is to be considered as a lack of learning success from an individual point of view.

13

The process features can also include the requirements for successful learning. This includes previous knowledge, interest and motivation for studies, key competences already gained such as learning strategies and method competences, previous school and training performance and available resources such as financial and family requirements. The partial constructs of the core performance of studies and teaching defined by this are the concept basis for construction and selection of suitable collection instruments. This step-by-step reduction of the term of quality from the superordinate definition of core performance to operationalisable partial constructs may be the required prerequisite for empirical determination of quality, but also shows clearly the limits of empirical determination of quality. In particular, this applies regarding standardised approaches. The feature recorded by standardised procedures can only be one indicator of the intended construct in this case the "warranty of a working study process. Still, empirical information gained from standardised procedures can help in controlling study processes if weaknesses can be shown for an indicator. For example, it can be helpful for a lecture concept if the workload measurement shows that it is too high as compared to the planned workload. It can also be helpful information for a course of studies and teaching plans if a survey among the students at the onset of a course of studies shows that required competences were not or only partially acquired during the previous school education. It can also help if the student survey shows a general dissatisfaction with the setup of individual lectures. Standardised procedures reach their limits when the defined partial constructs of the core performance of studies and teaching cannot or only insufficiently transferred to quantifiable indicators due to their complexity and (subject-specific) individuality. In particular, this applies for the competences described in the module manuals. It is recommended (as an alternative or supplement) to use non-standardised methods that are more open than standardised ones and therefore increase the range of empirical information (but also structure it better). These non-standardised instruments, however, have to be developed and used by the departments at their own responsibility. Diagram 2 gives an overview of the standardised and non-standardised methods that can be used in the scope of quality assurance and quality development. A difference is also made between necessary and optional instruments.

14

Diagram 2:

Overview of the standardised and non-standardised instruments on quality assurance and development
Element of core indicators performance Equipment of lectures Overlap freedom Warranty Examination organisation Support offer Workload Support structure Questionnaire workload and feasibility of studies (WLS) questionnaire Administration data Instrument sect* Status** Formal characteristics

3-part online duration 5-7 min each

S/~S

Acquisition of key competences Professional qualification

Alumni-survey practice conferences Questionnaire on achieving learning objectives (standard references B.Ed.)

S ~S

O O

To be collected from administration by departments (for description see below)

1-page questionnaire, to be completed in lecture

Responsibility Implementation and achievement of the qualification objectives according to module handbooks in the lectures

Group discussions Learning portfolios, diaries Guideline interviews with students Course of studies conferences

S ~S ~S ~S ~S S ~S ~S

O O O O V O O

(for description see below)

Lecture features: Structure and didactics, stimulation content, psychosocial climate, practice-relevance

TRIL2BM1-3 Group discussions Learning portfolios, diaries

2-page questionnaire, duration approx. 10 min (for description see below) To be collected from the examination offices by the departments

study process

Learning success: Examination results in Examination office qualification tests, duration of data studies, termination Private studies: Provision of time windows, instructions, counselling

Learning portfolios, diaries, learning sponsorships

~S

Students

Prerequisites: Previous knowledge interest Motivation Learning strategies Key competences Previous performance financ. Prerequisites Social structure : sex, age, etc.

Initial survey on studies (StEiB)

15-page questionnaire duration approx. 30min. Filled in in the lectures or at home. Target group: all freshmen

Data of student offices

S/~S

* **

S=standardised; ~S=not standardised V=mandatory; O=optional

To be collected from the student offices by the departments

15

Description of the standardised procedures The questionnaire on workload and feasibility of studies (WLS; s. Appendix A) is a three-part questionnaire that is completed at different times during a running semester. This is done online. The students are asked by email to participate . The Trierer Inventory on lecture evaluation (TRIL) is available in three versions (s. Appendix B): for evaluation of input events (usually lectures: TRIL2BM1), discussion events (usually seminars: TRIL2BM2) and exercises (TRIL2BM3). The questionnaire is completed on paper in the lesson, ideally approx. 4-6 weeks before the end of the lecture period. Thus, the lecturers receive feedback in time to talk about it with their students. The questionnaire on achieving the learning objective is the result of a multistage procedure. In a first step, the lecturers indicate the qualification objectives from the module description that are relevant for their lectures. In teaching-related courses of study, this also includes whether or not the curricular standards of the state of Rhineland-Palatinate are implemented. In a second step, the lecturers phrase teaching objectives assigned to the qualification objectives. Then these learning objectives are rendered as a questionnaire by the method centre. Finally, the questionnaire is completed by the students around the end of the semester. The appendix includes an example for a lecturer questionnaire (Appendix C) and the resulting student questionnaire including the teaching objectives phrased by the lecturer (Appendix D). The initial studies survey (StEiB, s. Appendix E) is used to ask freshmen on the transfer from school to university (selection of subject and location of studies, taking up studies and usefulness of information given by university facilities), the study requirements (financing, dealing with typical initial problems; previous performance, acquisition of key competences in school and their relevance for studies) and objectives in studies. This questionnaire is to be distributed in large freshmen lessons and either completed on site (with the consent of the lecturer) or at home and handed in at a central office. Time for completion is approx. 30 minutes. The departments are able to add subject-specific questions. An alumni survey is already regularly performed with all graduates of the state of Rhineland Palatinate by the Zentrum fr Qualittssicherung of the Mainz university (ZQ, also see Hochschulevaluierungsverbund Sdwest e.V.). Graduates of the university of Koblenz-Landau who completed university in 2005 were the first to take part in the survey. The survey includes not only information on subject, type and location of graduation, but also questions on a general final assessment of the studies (satisfaction with and success of studies, realisation of original objectives) and on the transfer from studies to working life, acquisition of key competences by the studies and their relevance in working life. Further graduates are to be asked in future. If applicable, surveys are to be performed by the universities directly in future. The departments are able to add subject-specific questions.

The student offices and examination offices provide the departments with information on examination results, results of graduation papers, students terminating studies prematurely and students changing to another course of studies on request. Description of non-standardised procedures

Group discussions with selected student groups (from individual lectures or years) to supplement TRIL and as an alternative for the questionnaire on learning objective achievement Guideline interviews with selected student groups as an alternative to the questionnaire on learning objective achievement Non-reactive procedures: study diaries, portfolios where present in the 16

17

respective courses of study and their systematic evaluation as an alternative for the questionnaire on learning objective achievement and supplement to TRIL

Course of studies conferences with all participating groups as an alternative to the questionnaire on learning objective achievement Practice conferences with representatives of professional practice, in particular institutions with whom cooperations were entered into for practical trainings (as a supplement to the alumni survey)

4 Organisational and institutional framework

The present concept draws up the conceptual and content aspects of a campus- and subject-comprehensive quality assurance and development concept at the university of Koblenz-Landau. Implementation of the concept on a department and university level still requires additional organisational and institutional framework conditions that can only be created by the parties involved. This includes implementation of a communicative basic structure and basic regulations by which implementation of measures can be verified and reviewed. To create these prerequisites and implement the new university law, the university management had a template drawn up for new partial basic regulations on quality assurance and development in teaching, which determines the statutory framework and general basic principles. They are to be discussed in the departments and considered and passed in the senate. To supplement these partial basic regulations, a partnership on quality assurance and development is to deal with concrete organisational and practical questions and basic procedural issues.

5 References
Gnahs, Dieter (2005): Qualittsentwicklung in der Weiterbildung jenseits von ISO und EFQM. Deutsches Institut fr Erwachsenenbildung. Online in the internet: http://www.diebonn.de/esprid/dokumente/doc-2005/gnahs05_01.pdf (version 02 March 09). Helsper, Werner/Hrster, Reinhard/Kade, Jochen (editor.) (2003): Ungewissheit. Pdagogische Felder im Modernisierungsprozess. Weilerswist. HRK, Hochschulrektorenkonferenz, ServiceStelle Bologna (2007) (editor.): Bologna-Reader II. Bonn. Lang-Wojtasik, Gregor (2008): Schule in der Weltgesellschaft: Herausforderungen und Perspektiven einer Schultheorie jenseits der Moderne. Weinheim. Walter, Thomas (2006): Der Bologna-Prozess. Ein Wendepunkt europischer Hochschulpolitik? Wiesbaden.

6 Appendix
Appendix A: Fragebogen Workload and Studierbarkeit (WLS, Teil 1-3) Appendix B: Trierer Inventar zur Lehrveranstaltungsevaluation (TRIL) in den drei Varianten InputVeranstaltungen (TRIL2BM1), von Diskussionsveranstaltungen (TRIL2BM2) and von bungen (TRIL2BM3) Appendix C: Dozierendenfragebogen zur Lernzielerreichung am Beispiel eines Moduls B.B.2 (Statistik) aus dem B.Sc.-Studiengang Psychologie Appendix D: Fragebogen zu Lernzielen an die Studierende am Beispiel des Moduls B.B.2 (Statistik) aus dem B.Sc.-Studiengang Psychologie Appendix E: Studieneingangsbefragung (StEiB)

18