CREATING AND SUSTAINING A QUALITY CULTURE AT YORK UNIVERSITY INQAAHE March 31-April 2, 2009 Abu-Dhabi

2 YORK UNIVERSITY Toronto, Ontario, Canada Over 50,000 students 46,000 undergraduate students 5,000 graduate students 3 rd largest university in Canada (second largest English-language) 2 nd largest university in Ontario Two campuses (one bilingual)

3 The Quality Assurance Context External appraisal of new and existing graduate programs (OCGS) External audit of undergraduate program approvals and reviews (UPRAC)

4 Graduate Program Appraisal Process Ontario Council on Graduate Studies (OCGS) Appraisal of all proposed new Master’s or Doctoral programs since 1965 Periodic appraisal of all existing Master’s and Doctoral programs since 1983 Seven year cycle

5 Undergraduate Program Approval and Review Audit Process Undergraduate Program Review Audit Committee (UPRAC) of the Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents since 1997 Province-wide Guidelines for undergraduate program approvals and reviews UPRAC audit of institutional policies and implementation practices Seven year cycle Compliance of policies with the UPRAC Guidelines Compliance of actual approvals and reviews with university policies and UPRAC Guidelines

6 York University Undergraduate Program Review Process Ownership of the quality agenda UPRAC requirements plus York quality issues (e.g. general education) Eight Year cycle Key aspects Briefing Student Questionnaire Self-Appraisal Consultants Responses Senate Committee Meeting

7 UPR Briefing Associate Vice-President Academic meets with Chair, Undergraduate Program Director, staff, etc. Cognate Reviews – all units meet together Briefing on York QA requirements, QA principles and policies in other jurisdictions Specific requirements for learning objectives and University Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations (UUDLES) Institutional data provided

8 UPR Student Questionnaire Standard questions (e.g. curricular content, teaching and learning styles and processes, student experiences, demographic data, etc.) Program-specific questions designed and added by the program Development and analysis by York Institute for Social Research On-line questionnaire – over 50% response rate

9 UPR Self-Appraisal Not descriptive or defensive, but analytical, reflective, improvement-focussed Program retreat – full and part-time faculty, staff, librarians, teaching assistants, students Address: Program vision and mission Expected learning outcomes v actual learning outcomes Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and tensions Solutions for identified problems Agenda of concerns – questions for consultants

10 UPR Consultants Two external consultants (arms-length) One internal consultant Respond to agendas of concerns (of program, dean, and AVPA generic UPRAC) Site visit – meet with all stakeholders (including students) Joint report

11 UPR Responses to Consultants’ Report Program response to consultants’ recommendations Dean’s response to consultants’ report and program response

12 UPR Senate Committee Meeting Bring closure to the UPR Senate Committee meets with Chair and Dean Review UPR documentation Determine outcomes

13 Centre for the Support of Teaching (CST) Mandate to improve the quality of teaching and learning Help instructors and programs with learning objectives and expected learning outcomes, and University Undergraduate Degree Level Expectations (UUDLES) Workshops, advice, templates, teaching skills programs, etc.

14 Retention Council Created 2007 to improve the educational experience of students Managerial-level staff, College Masters, librarians, Academic advisers, students Six committees Advising Year-to-year transition Faculty Participation Student Engagement Data and Resources Peer Mentoring

15 Peer Mentoring Pilot study in Faculty of Fine Arts First year students matched with successful upper-year student mentors Students with peer mentor had higher mean GPA and higher levels of student engagement (NSSE questions)

16 Year-to-Year Transition Navig8 Interactive website Consolidated student information On-line tools Links Etc.

17 Advising York size and structure results in complicated advising pathways Goal to clarify and improve student advising Ensure consistently accurate information More effective referral process Student’s first stop should be their last stop, or second-last stop

18 Research at York (RAY) Enhance research culture Respond to common perception of opposition between teaching and research Integration of teaching and research Involve undergraduate students in faculty research projects University subsidizes RAY stipends

19 Concluding Observations Student focus Continuous improvement Multiple, reinforcing activities (not single action) Multiple responsibility – everyone’s responsibility Beyond compliance to ownership of the quality agenda