Application Guide of the Internal Evaluationprocedure

Α.δι.π.

ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΗ ΔΗΜΟΚΡΑΤΙΑ
Α.ΔΙ.Π.
ΑΡΧΗ ΔΙΑΣΦΑΛΙΣΗΣ
KAI ΠΙΣΤΟΠΟΙΗΣΗΣ ΤΗΣ ΠΟΙΟΤΗΤΑΣ
ΑΝΩΤΑΤΗΣ ΕΚΠΑΙΔΕΥΣΗΣ / HELLENICREPUBLIC
H.Q.A.
HELLENIC QUALITY ASSURANCE AND ACCREDITATION AGENCY

Quality Αssurance in Higher Education

Application Guide of the Internal EvaluationProcedure

Edition 1.0

July 2007

ΛΕΩΦΟΡΟΣ ΣΥΓΓΡΟΥ 44
117 42 ΑΘΗΝΑ / 44 SYGROU AVENUE
11742 ATHENS, GREECE

Table of contents

Preface

1. The Internal Evaluation procedure and timetable

1.1. Quality Assurance Unit (QAU)

1.1.1. Establishment and term

1.1.2. Responsibilities

1.2. Internal Evaluation Group (IEG)

1.2.1. Establishment and term

1.2.2. Responsibilities

2. Means and procedures

2.1. Means for implementing the Internal Evaluation procedure

2.1.1. Collection of specific quantitative and qualitative data

2.1.2. Opinion formation

2.1.3. Indicative actions

2.2. Analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data

2.3. Participation by members of the teaching staff

2.4. Student participation

2.5. Participation of administrative and other staff

3. Drafting of the Report

4. Contact HQA

Quality assurance in higher education — an implementation guide Internal Evaluation procedure version 1.0 July 2007

Α.δι.π.

Preface

Quality Assurance in Higher Education is linked with the dynamic of Higher Education Institution evolution. This is achieved through systematic procedures for internal evaluation (self-evaluation) at all levels of the academic community.

The role of HQA is to assist the Institutions throughout the introduction of this newinstitutionfor the highlighting of their achievements and their reinforcementwhenever necessary, by the State.

The Quality Assurance procedures reinforce the autonomy of Higher Education Institutions, and the role of academic collective bodies in making decisions regarding the management of their work through transparent and objective procedures of social accountability.

The following instructions are applicable — partially or totaly — for all phases of the Internal Evaluation procedure and it is expected that they will be used:

(a) by the Academic Units (Schools or Faculties) for the preparation of their Annual Internal Reports

(b) bythe QAU for the drafting the respectiveInternal Reports of the Institutions, but more importantly,

1. The Internal EvaluationProcedure and Timetable

The Internal Evaluation is a collective task and requires the participation of all members of the Academic Community in all stages and phases of its implementation.

The Internal Evaluation is not merely the first step to the external evaluation. Its purpose is not to satisfy the requirements of the relevant legal framework, but to become the key tool with which the individual Academic Units and Institutions will establish procedures of continuous improvement of their complex work.

For the conduct of the Internal Evaluation in every Academic Unitand Institution,the following special bodies are set up:

(a) theInternal Evaluation Group (IEG), responsible for the Internal Evaluation of the Academic Unit,

(b) theQuality Assurance Unit (QAU), responsible for the Internal Evaluation of the Institution.

At the Academic Unit level (Faculty or School):

-The Internal Evaluation will be carried out with the responsibility of the IEG of the Academic Unit shall involve the drafting of Annual Internal Reports regarding the functioning of the academic unit throughouttwo consecutive semesters. The Annual Internal Reports are to be submitted to the QAU of the Academic Unit of the Institution, under the Academic Unit’s responsibility, before the end of the academic year.

-The Internal Evaluationprocedure shall be completed periodically with the drafting ofthe Internal Evaluation Report, which is presented to the QAU of the Institution and through the QAU, the HQA is notified for the initiation of the External Evaluation Procedure of the Academic Unit. The Internal Evaluation Report is submittedto the QAU two months after the submission of the Annual Internal Report of that year.

Accordingly, at Institution level:

-The Internal Evaluation shall be carried out with the responsibility of the QAU of the Institution.

-There is a precondition for the biannual drafting of Internal Reports by the QAU regarding the operation oftheInstitution, which are based on the Annual Internal Reports of the Academic Units.

-The Institution’s Internal Evaluation procedure ends with the preparation of periodic Internal Evaluation Reports regarding the operation of the Institution, which are drafted by the relevant QAU, taking into account the Annual Internal Reports of the Academic Units of the Institution. The Internal Evaluation Reports of the Institutionsare communicated to the HQAin order to activate the External Evaluation procedure of the Institution.

The Internal Evaluation procedure shall be repeated at the latest every fourth year after the beginning of the previous evaluation (see the attached diagram).

1.1. Quality Assurance Unit (QAU)

1.1.1. Establishment and term

The QAU is constituted at the Higher Education Institutions by decision of the relevant supreme collective body, which shall define its composition, organization and operation in accordance with Article2 of LawΝ.3374/2005.

1.1.2. Responsibilities

The QAU is responsible for the evaluation of the Institution as a whole, and acts as anInternal Evaluation Group (IEG)for the Institution ((L. 3374/2005, Article5 § 4).

The responsibilities of the QAU are determined by L.3374/2005 and include:

Quality assurance in higher education — an implementation guide Internal Evaluation procedure version 1.0 July 2007

Αδιπ

Quality assurance in higher education — an implementation guide Internal Evaluation procedure version 1.0 July 2007

Αδιπ

THE COMPLETE OPERATIONAL CYCLE OF ACADEMIC UNIT EVALUATION[1]
YEAR / ACADEMIC UNITS (SCHOOL/FACULTY) / IEG / QAU / HEI ADMINISTRATION / HQA / PUBLICITY
1
2
3
4 / / /

/ /

(a) the biannual drafting of an Internal Report on the operation of the Institution, which shall take into account the respective Annual Internal Reports of the Institution’s Schools and Faculties (L.3374/2005, Article2 § 5).

(b) The drafting, every four years, of the Internal Evaluation Report regarding the operation of the Institution.

The QAU initiates the External Evaluation proceduresof the Academic Units of the Institution, by forwarding the Internal Evaluation Reports to the HQA (L.3374/2005, Article5 § 2).

Apart from the above, the QAU has the overall responsibility for the coordination and support of the quality assurance and evaluation procedures both at the level of the Institution and at the level of the Academic Units

1.2. Internal EvaluationGroup (IEG)

1.2.1. Establishment and term

The IEG is set up at theAcademic Units (Faculties or Schools) by decision of the General Assembly from DEP/EP members from the ranks of Professors or Associate Professors with internationally recognized scientific work and, preferably, with experience in quality assurance procedures. A student representative,designated by the competent body representing them, shall also participate in the IEG (L.3374/2005, Article5 § 2).

The term of the IEG shall be that of one period of Internal and External Evaluation and shall end with the completion of the External Evaluation procedure.

1.2.2. Competences

The role of the IEG is to handle, coordinate and implement: it shall design, plan and coordinate the evaluation procedure, and shall be responsible for drafting the Internal Evaluation Report.

The IEG is responsible for conducting the internal evaluation procedure in the relevant Academic Unit: It monitors the completion of the questionnaires (see data collection forms and teacher/course questionnaires for the students, informs the bodies and Members of the Academic Unit regarding the responses and results of the dialogue with teachers and students and collects all necessary relevant information.

On the basis of the above elements, the IEG prepares the Internal Evaluation Report (L.3374/2005, Article5 § 2).

The IEG is assisted in its role by all members of the Academic Unit: it aims at participation from everyone and takes their views into consideration.

The ways by which the transparency of the internal evaluation is achievedare determined and communicated up-front bythe IEG (i.e.howall views are listened to and taken into consideration, ways and means of communication of all interested parties, keeping of communication records decision-making procedures, encouragement of initiatives, addressing disagreements, etc.).

The importance of good and timely programming, of standardization of procedures and of the periodic update of all participants is underlined.

2. Means and procedures

2.1. Means for implementing the Internal EvaluationProcedure

The implementation of the procedureby the Academic Units presupposes:

2.1.1. The collection of certain quantitative and qualitative data

The information required is specified in the Analysis of Quality Assurance Criteria and Indicators (see relevantdocument, Edition 2.0, July 2007). It should be underscored that it is important and necessary that the criteria and indicators of the HQAare justifiably supplemented, adjusted or amended by the Academic Units as to better conform to their specific profile. It should be taken into account that any amendments or additions introduced by initiative of the Schoolsor Faculties should apply for at least two consecutive Evaluation periods.

The collection of detailed quantitative and qualitative data may be significantly facilitated if all staff members of the Academic Unit are invited to periodically fill out, each for their particular work,the standardized Data Collection Forms proposed by QUAA(see relevant forms, Edition 1.0, July 2007). The proposed Forms are only indicative and may be modified at the discretion of the Academic Units or may be replaced by any other method deemed more appropriate from the IEGfor the collection and recording of the required data.

It is underlined, however, that the Data Collection Forms form part of the documentation of the Internal Reports and are NOT to be used for on the evaluation of their drafters.

2.1.2. Opinion formation

The collection of specific Data Collection Forms for at least two consecutive semesters provides a detailed and analytical view of the work conducted by the Academic Unit and facilitates the formation of an overall view and, finally, the drafting of both the Annual Internal Report and the Internal Evaluation Report of the Academic Unit undergoing evaluation.

In the analysis and interpretation of the most crucial-for the Academic Unit- data, all members of the Academic Unit must and should be involved, in order to contribute to the shaping of as extensive a consensus as possible.

2.1.3. Indicative actions

(a) Formulating concrete objectives and early timing.

(b) Arranging the data into categories (i.e. by collection source,by time frame for collection, by participating member [DEP, EP, Administrative Staff, Students, etc] or operational combinations).

(d) Sample recording and initial processing for the detection of any problems (i.e. absence or unreliability of available data, difficulties in collection, etc.).

(e) Periodic, frequent, and repeated informing of all participants regarding the process.

The need to set up commonly accepted rules is underscored,to ensure:

The participation of all members of the Academic Unit
The confidentiality of personal and other relevant data
The recording and imprinting of all opinions and the seriousness in which they are expressed.

2.2. Analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data

The Academic Unit should prioritize the data for analysis according to its objectives and should focus its attention on that criteria directly related to these objectives. In any case, particular attention should be given to:

(a) Understandingand highlighting the factors responsible for positive or negative outcomes;

(b) Identifying the initiatives to be taken for further development or to remedy possible problems, and

Finally, as regards the critical evaluation, it should focus on:

(d) The current situation (as reflected by the data collected);

(e) The gap separating the current situation from the attainment of the pursued objective;

(f)Expressing proposals of reasonable adjustment (i.e. for objectives that have already been achieved) and/or measures to achieve them (i.e. for lagging objectives), and

(g) Improving the efficiency of academic quality assurance mechanisms at Academic Unit level.

2.3. Participation by members of the Academic Staff

All members of the teaching staff of the Academic Unit, including teachers within the scope of Presidential Decree 407 and Scientific and Laboratory Staff must:

Fill in and submit to the IEG the standard Data Collection Format the end of each semester, and the standard Individual Educational Staff Data Collection Format the end of each academic year (see Above 2.1.1);
Participate in the planning and periodic review of quality assurance procedures, and
Contribute to the collection and regular feedback of data, in the analysis and the drawing of conclusions.

Their participation is ensured, for example,with:

timely and comprehensive informing by the IEG, “accepted“rules”, and
the operational standardization of documents, procedures and communication.

2.4. Student participation

In accordance with Law Ν.3374/2005, student representatives participate both in the IEG and in the QAU(Article2 § 4 and Article5 § 2, respectively).

Students participate in Internal Evaluation procedures mainly via specific questionnaires, which give them the opportunity to express their own views (see the Draft Student Questionnaire proposed by theHQA).

Student participation is ensured, for example, with timely and comprehensive informingby the QAU, timely and precise time planning and with the operational standardization of documents, procedures and communications.

Provision should bemade forthe update ofthe students by the Chairperson of the Academic Unit, in cooperation with the QAU.

2.5. Participation of Administrative and other staff

The Administrative and other staff participate in the Internal Evaluation procedures andare responsible for the disposal and/or recording of:

a lot of the data necessarily collected, in particular during the phase of data collection, and
Comments regarding the operation of the Academic Unit (i.e.use of infrastructure, standardization of documents, simplification of procedures, etc.).

3. Drafting of the Report

A reminder that the Internal Evaluation Reportis in regard to the work of the Academic Unit as a whole, and does not constitute an assessment of individual performance.Therefore, the Academic Unit must ensure:

The confidentiality of communications and the protection of personal data, and
The expression and taking into account of allviews.

The Internal Evaluation Report and the Annual Internal Reports must include in their conclusions:

Appropriate -according to the Academic Unit –ways for making any necessary improvements, and
Realistic targets of development for the next period, on the basis of the rates of achieving objectives in the current period.

It follows from the foregoing that, independently from the External Evaluation, the Internal Evaluation Report, as well as the corresponding Annual Internal Reports, must be taken into consideration in the decision-making and planning of the Academic Unit.

4. Contact the HQA

Cooperation of the Units undergoing evaluation with the HQAis a prerequisite for improving the Quality Assurance system. The HQA seeks and encourages communication with the Schools. Their comments and contributions are welcome and should help in improving the planning and organization of the whole ProcedureofQuality Assurance.

Website: and

E-mailaddress: ilto:

Address: 44 Sygrou Avenue, 11742 Athens

Quality assurance in higher education — an implementation guide internal assessment procedure version 1.0 juillet 2007

[1]The first internal and external evaluation of the academic unit does not require the completion of the four-year cycle. It can commence after the drafting of the first Annual Internal Report.