Our Thesis Tensions are inevitable between QA and QE – in particular within international partnerships Healthy relationships enable necessary systems to function effectively Without nurturing strong relationships, systems will eventually malfunction A QE led approach enables effective QA QE is central to building effective transnational partnerships

Reflection on our own experience of collaborating in transnational partnerships We needed to understand (theorise) the nature of organisational collaboration In order to promote educational development we needed to consider the wider relationship in order to understand their own role in the partnership, we felt all all involved participants needed to be aware of the big picture The process of collaboration exposed a need to improve collaboration within and across our own institution, with departments and staff and facilitative groupings (the centre) Necessity to embed capacity building and sustainable structures – difficulties in grafting these on to pre-existing structures - potential advantage where no structures pre- existed.

Making sense of Partnerships Family relationship? (Kanter: – courtship, engagement, housekeeping, bridging and old marrieds’ ) Master/Apprentice? Mentor/mentee? Partnership of equals? Neo-colonialism? Market oriented?

Building Collaborative Advantage (Huxham, C and Vangen, S (2005) 'Managing to Collaborate: the theory and practice of collaborative advantage', Routledge.) Distinguished 3 sorts of aims: Collaboration Aim Publicly stated, agreed by both (all) sides Organisation Aim Frequently not publicly stated; what the partner wants to get out of the partnership rather than a common aim Individual Aim What the individuals involved in a variety of ways want to get out of the partnership

Collaborative Aims Different spheres of collaboration: Collaboration Eg, develop a joint degree scheme to be offered in the home country of one of the partners, based on that of the other partner? Organisation foothold in the market, revenue, enhanced status in another part of the world, degree awarding powers, entry into HE, social/regional status, innovations in TLA, enhancement of practice? Individual ? New, different experiences? possible career enhancement? Individual collaboration? How these are managed will help to shape the success or otherwise of the partnership. (Collaborative Advantage V Collaborative Inertia)

Dependencies/critical factors for collaborative advantage Nurturing collaborative relationships (direct and personal) Exploring values, personal, social, academic (not commercial) Attention to the dynamics of collaboration Trust Empowerment Value iterations Longevity Commitment and belief Trust building activities Choice and control

QA led - procedures QA, necessary – BUT - if dominant, potential threat to the health of the relationship, if: mechanistic Judgemental Bureaucratic Over-emphasis on quantitative measurability Power inequality Hard and fast results Potential for ‘collaborative inertia’

Support and guidance Teaching and learning approaches Syllabus Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Independent learning/ study time Assessment strategy Learning resources Quality assurance: Monitoring Compliance accountability Quality assurance: Monitoring Compliance accountability Periodic Quality Review New Scheme/Module Approvals Annual Teaching Review Support and guidance Teaching and learning approaches Syllabus Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Independent learning/ study time Assessment strategy Learning resources Quality enhancement: Evaluation development innovation Quality enhancement: Evaluation development innovation Professional development Own evaluation and reflection Peer Review and ObservationScholarship Curriculum design, evaluation and development: Alignment Progression Coherence Curriculum design, evaluation and development: Alignment Progression Coherence Constructing and using feedback from students

QE led - processes Potential opportunity to build collegial relationships Mutually supportive More effective development – constructivist ethos Flexibility and adaptable Responsive to change and to context Softer and slower Potential for ‘collaborative advantage’

Quality enhancement: Evaluation development innovation Quality enhancement: Evaluation development innovation Quality assurance: Monitoring Compliance accountability Quality assurance: Monitoring Compliance accountability Professional development Own evaluation and reflection Peer Review and Observation Periodic Quality Review Scholarship Curriculum design, evaluation and development: Alignment Progression Coherence Curriculum design, evaluation and development: Alignment Progression Coherence New Scheme/Module Approvals Constructing and using feedback from students Annual Teaching Review Support and guidance Teaching and learning approaches Syllabus Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Independent learning/ study time Assessment strategy Learning resources Quality assurance: Monitoring Compliance accountability Quality assurance: Monitoring Compliance accountability Periodic Quality Review New Scheme/Module Approvals Annual Teaching Review Support and guidance Teaching and learning approaches Syllabus Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Independent learning/ study time Assessment strategy Learning resources

Educational development Has a central role to play in leading the QE agenda, but also: In building collegial relationships In making connections between different agents in both partner institutions In creating cohesion between QA and QE QA - Quality Administration?, QE – Quality Education?

Educational Development for collaborative advantage Work with colleagues to strengthen individual aims Work with the organisation to facilitate the melding of individual aims with organisational aims Work with both partners to incorporate successfully the individual and organisational aims into the Collaboration aims.