TEMPUS UM_JEP Development of Quality Assurance System in Higher Education - QUASYS Workshop II, Dubrovnik, October 11-12, 2003 INTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE MODEL AT THE UNIVERSITY OF OSIJEK presented by Prof. Ksenija Čulo Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Croatia

Current Situation  Obsolete Curriculum  High drop-out rate  Low motivation level of students

Key Elements: to assure standards of achievement to assure quality of teaching to assure quality of management

Internal QA System - Principles Confidencebuilding Commitment to Commitment to quality improvement quality improvement Focus on student needs Coherent and transparent system structure system structure Efficiency, effectiveness, effectiveness,sustainability Promotion of quality culture quality culture

Evaluation Priorities  TEACHING AND LEARNING PROCESS COURSES AND PROGRAMMES STRUCTURE AND CONTENT AIMS AND OBJECTIVES UP-TO-DATENESS LEARNING MATERIALS GAINED SKILLS AND COMPETENCIES  STAFF STAFF DEVELOPMENT STAFF INITIATIVES  INFRASTRUCTURE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT ACCESS TO EQUIPMENT LIBRARIES  STUDENT COUNSELLING, SUPPORT SERVICES PRIORITIES

INTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESS U U n n i i v v e e r r s s i i t t y y Q Q A A B B o o a a r r d d F F a a c c u u l l t t y y Q Q A A C C o o m m m m i i t t t t e e e e s s F F a a c c u u l l t t y y Q Q A A C C o o o o r r d d i i n n a a t t o o r r s s F F a a c c u u l l t t y y S S t t a a f f f f S S t t u u d d e e n n t t s s

The picture represents the SYNERGY of these three QA activities. Complete effect can be achieved only when all three elements are applied IN COORDINATION. QA is a CYCLIC PROCESS. At the University in Osijek, the QA process is in the phase of: The picture represents the SYNERGY of these three QA activities. Complete effect can be achieved only when all three elements are applied IN COORDINATION. QA is a CYCLIC PROCESS. At the University in Osijek, the QA process is in the phase of: DEFINING OF QUALITY STANDARDS Measuring Quality Improving Quality Defining Quality

We have conducted two polls among students 1 st POLL - ASSESSMENT OF CATEGORIES INCLUDED IN THE EDUCATION PROCESS Questions were about: 1.ABILITY OF THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION to reach the desired studying quality (equipment, technology, space) 2.QUALITY OF THE CURRICULA CONTENTS 3.QUALITY OF TUITION (learning/teaching) 4.ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE of the educational process – temporal and content sequence of subjects 5.EFFICIENCY OF THE COMMUNICATION-INFORMATION SYSTEM (management of the faculty – course teacher – student records office – students’ organization – student) in the support of the teaching/learning process 6.CORPORATE CULTURE of the educational system (on the level of the study group / the faculty and the university) ACQUIRED RESULTS MUST BE THE BASIS FOR THE DESIGNING OF A SUCCESSFUL MODEL OF QUALITY ASSURANCE AT THE UNIVERSITY.

FOR EVERY CATEGORY OF QUALITY THERE WERE TWO CRITERIA:  In your opinion, is the specified characteristic IMPORTANT for the assurance of quality of studying? Evaluation marks are 1 - 5: 1 - NOT IMPORTANT; 3 - IMPORTANT; 5 - VERY IMPORTANT (1 - NOT IMPORTANT; 3 - IMPORTANT; 5 - VERY IMPORTANT)  In your opinion, what level of quality of this characteristic IS NOW ACHIEVED in your study group/at the faculty? Evaluation marks are 1 - 5: (1 - VERY LOW; 3 - GOOD; 5 - EXCELLENT) There was also the possibility to answer with: I am not sure / I don’t know

The poll contained 31 value characteristics. IMPORTANT CURRENT SITUATION ANALYSIS RESULTS ++ BEST POSSIBILITY -+ SUPERFLUOUS AT THE FACULTY/THE STUDY GROUP +- WORST POSSIBILITY -- GOOD POSSIBILITY We are now polling the teaching staff, and then the poll will be conducted among non-teaching personnel as well.

2 ND POLL - QUALITY OF LECTURES AND LECTURERS ( EVALUATION MARKS WERE 1 - 5; 1 - POOR; 3 - GOOD; 5 - VERY GOOD ) Questions were about: I. CODE OF SUBJECT, CODE OF LECTURER Name of subject, name of lecturer Name of subject, name of lecturer Evaluation of the subject (if you have passed the exam in that subject): Evaluation of the subject (if you have passed the exam in that subject): In which attempt have you passed the exam: In which attempt have you passed the exam: Your general average mark in the exams you have passed so far: Your general average mark in the exams you have passed so far: Your presence at the lectures given by the lecturer: (1/3, 2/3, 3/3) Your presence at the lectures given by the lecturer: (1/3, 2/3, 3/3) II. LECTURES ARE INTERESTING Lectures are understandable Lectures are understandable Contents of the program is up-to-date Contents of the program is up-to-date Lectures are in keeping with the curriculum Lectures are in keeping with the curriculum The lecturer includes examples from the practice The lecturer includes examples from the practice The lecturer encourages students to think The lecturer encourages students to think The lecturer answers the students’ questions The lecturer answers the students’ questions Study literature is coordinated with the lectures Study literature is coordinated with the lectures Study literature is accessible Study literature is accessible One can prepare for the examination using the prescribed literature One can prepare for the examination using the prescribed literature The lecturer gives a fair and just evaluation of one’s knowledge The lecturer gives a fair and just evaluation of one’s knowledge The lecturer evaluates one’s knowledge on the basis of criteria known in advance The lecturer evaluates one’s knowledge on the basis of criteria known in advance Complete evaluation of the subject Complete evaluation of the subject Complete evaluation of the lecturer Complete evaluation of the lecturer III. SUGGESTIONS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE PROGRAM Suggestions for the improvement of the lecturer Suggestions for the improvement of the lecturer

Suggestions for the improvement of the lecturer key words are: KNOWLEDGE AND COMPETENCE, FAIRNESS AND HONESTY, FAIRNESS AND HONESTY, HUMANE APPROACH

The most desirable characteristics of lectures and lecturers: INTERESTING TEACHING MATERIAL FEASIBILITY IN PRACTICE MOTIVATION WEALTH OF PROGRAM CONTENTS ADAPTABILITY TO THE STUDENT ACCURACY ALLOWED PERSONALITY AND CREATIVENESS TRUST IN HONESTY TECHNICAL SUPPORT A similar questionnaire has been made for assistants in relation to their seminars and exercises.

CONCLUSION! ! In the establishing of a system of quality at the Osijek University, there is still a lot of work to be done (quality assurance framework). Maybe the establishing of a University Quality Agency could accelerate this procedure. ! Special attention should be paid to: establishing of an adequate corporate culture and establishing of a suitable communication- information system

Reference 1.Študentska anketa, Univerza v Mariboru, Maribor, Slovenia Ashcroft, Kate and Palacio, David: Researching into Assessment and Evaluation in Colleges and Universities; Kogan Page, London, Ellis, Roger: Quality Assurance for University Teaching; SRHE and Open University Press, Buckingham, 1995