Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 1 Developing the System for Teaching and Learning Quality AMICT Workshop, Pedrozavodsk Markku Pylkkö (co-writers Pasi Karppinen and Petri Pulli) Department of Information Processing Science University of Oulu, Finland

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 2 Quality Management in Teaching and Learning The aim is to boost learning by means of pedagogical and didactical solutions Producing quality teaching is long process (no exact studies available which factors affect and how to improve the results) University of Oulu decided in 1994 to develop teaching and learning in various ways, among them utilizing student feedback

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 3 Increasing learning productivity Best way to increase the productivity of learning is to remove those factors that slow or prevent effective learning Best way to find preventive factors of learning is to ask students Collecting student feedback is essential part of Quality Management System for Teaching and Learning (QMS for TL)

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 4 The Aims towards Total Quality Management In Finland The Finnish Higher Education Evaluation Council (FINHEEC) will audit (i.e. inspect) QMSs for TL in autumn 2007 In University of Oulu Teaching Development Unit has advised departments and faculties to develop QMSs for TL Advising emphasizes the need for developing and utilizing student feedback system

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 5 The background of auditing Bologna process as starting point The follow-up meeting in Berlin in 2003 –wishing till the year 2005 national quality assurance systems to include accrediting, certifying or other verifying system. Finnish Ministry of Education settled work group in 2004 –Result 1: Universities in Finland will develop QMSs for TL, FINHEEC will audit –Result 2: No accrediting or certifying, only auditing the QMSs for TL in various universities, the usefulness of the processes. The follow-up meeting in Bergen in 2005 –European Association for Assurance in Higher Education ENQA suggests European principles and recommendations for verifying teaching and learning in universities –The meeting of Ministries of Education accepted and decided to inaugurate them –Principles and recommendations of ENQA were as starting point in outlining Finnish model for auditing

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 6 The Guidance from Teaching Development Unit Every department in University of Oulu should create literal guidance for departmental details in auditing teaching and learning. These directives are for internal use, but must be presented in auditing process. Creating is assisted by the files from Teaching Development Unit including quality manual of the university, directions and guidelines, annually updated self evaluation report, strategy for developing teaching in university of Oulu and the handbook of auditing QMSs for TL (from FINHEEC).

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 7 Some instructions from the Quality manual in UO University of Oulu introduced the self evaluation system (or process) for quality of teaching during the academic year 1993–94, decided by The Board of the University Updated manual (2006) has considered FINHEEC criteria for evaluating (auditing) the QMS for TL. The factors considered in the evaluation process at the University of Oulu 1.Teaching Developing Groups 2.Student feedback as a course or lecture basis 3.Feedback days organized at least once in academic term 4.Annual self evaluation of QMS for TL

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 8 Outer evaluations, for example national quality unit evaluation every 3 years Inner evaluation of teaching inside/on university level Continuing evaluation of the quality of teaching Inner quality units and rewarding of teaching Three levels of evaluations in the quality control of teaching 1 2 3

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 9 Student feedback gathering and utilizing The methods of gathering and utilizing of student feedback is planned by the Teaching Developing Group of the Department Feedback is gathered from all courses Rating should produce qualitative (literal) feedback information. Numeric (quantitative) information can be used as support info for qualitative rating. Feedback or summary of that will be given to the teacher concerned, students, the Teaching Development Group and the head of department Feedback will be needed also from earlier students (alumns) and interest groups (under construction)

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 10 THE LEARNING OF A STUDENT The QMS for TL must produce relevant feedback information from the learning of students 1 – learning results of a student – student’s way of work and spending of time (feedback about the learning itself) – student’s experience about learning and stress ARRANGEMENTS FOR TEACHING – co-operation between teachers and students – student’s experience about the functionality of teaching arrangements and tutoring for learning TEACHERS’ PERSONALITY AND WORKING EGO – demanding, empathy, teaching style Feedback level 2 3

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 11 PalauteOodi (for feedback) Enables gathering feedback via WebOodi (total information system for 15 universities in Finland) Used in 7 universities in Finland, test runs started in Spring in UO (Electr. & IT-Dept.) Every student participating the course (or examination) will be invited to give feedback Quantitative summary to be viewed by all Qualitative feedback only for party concerned

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 12

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 13

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 14

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 15

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 16

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 17

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 18

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 19

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 20 The logical model for the student feedback system digital feedback form course’s www-site / optima students quality control teaching activity social direction teaching once during the course (after registering for examination) exam. paper feedback form self evaluation feedback for one course recommendations developing acts made because of student feedback course feedback inspection Teacher state of course moderator consults good practices moderating digital teaching material personal feedback Teaching Dev. Group organizes classifier The affecting area of PalauteOodi

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 21 Developing targets in our Department (IPS) The Process for planning the teaching (Process model) –The guidance and codification for course planning (clever Excel-form) –The effectiveness analysis (accumulation of credits/working hours) –Resource planning (Excel-resource matrix) –The plans for the utilization of working hours (clever Excel-form under construction) Practices for distant teaching –Digital teaching material (quality needs) –Optima learning environment (utilization in a more effective level?) –Distant practising environment (need to be developed) Student feedback introduction (under construction) Support for international students (work group on a way)

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 22 December January February March April May June Continuing procedure during academic year Continuing procedure during academic year October December March April Planning of the teaching in the Department of Information Processing Science, coordinating of tasks is assisted by the board, the council and Teaching Development Group of the department Process, tasks and time frame Devel- oping talks Planning of next curri- culum Re- warding talks Creating course plans Resource planning for remote sites Personal resourcing – in-site search Personal administ ration Planning and implem- entation of teaching Process- ing of course feedback

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 23 Thank you! Comments? Questions?

Markku Pylkkö, AMICT Workshop, PedrozavodskDeveloping the System for Teaching andLearning Quality 24 Contact info Markku Pylkkö (Petri Pulli, Pasi Karppinen