March 2008Luc François1 Joint Programmes: a challenge with a future

March 2008 Luc François2 Content I. EUA-guidelines for Joint Programmes II.Experiences from ‘the field’: Master in Euroculture III. Manual for Joint Programmes (Flemish case) IV. Questions

March 2008 Luc François3 I. EUA guidelines for Joint Programmes 1. Basis assumptions and starting point ↓ 2. From planning to action ↓ 3. Quality Assurance for JP ↓ 4. Overview of steps to be taken

March 2008 Luc François4 1. Basic assumptions and starting points (1/2) Bear in mind: JP is a highly complex, coordinated activity of partners  Cooperation and coordination are crucial for realisation of a JP Central coordination structure of JP: mostly happens alongside ‘own’ institutional structures  Good coordination on different levels is necessary and should be considered Identify preconditions in order to ensure support of partnerinstitutions  See From Planning to Action

March 2008 Luc François5 1. Basic assumptions and starting points (1/2) Maintain and enrich the cultural heritage and diversity in a coherently structured programme Cooperation on the principles of transparency and honesty Permanent dialogue between all partners involved Sense of ‘common ownership’ of JP Will to work together in international context (institutional mission statement) Broad involvement and participation of all relevant stakeholders (students, staff,…) Quality assurance: shared and integrated responsibility

March 2008 Luc François6 2. From Planning to Action (1/2) Shared understanding Language issues Technical terminology Decision-making and levels of responsibility Decision-making structures: clear strategies and communication policies Levels of responsibility: LevelChallenges and Actions (tasks) NetworkEffective coordination SubjectAppropriate content InstitutionSustainable institutional anchoring

March 2008 Luc François7 2. From Planning to Action (2/2) Quality Assurance: coordination needed among the three levels (network-subject-institution)  Appointment of ‘agent’ at each level (competent, trained and responsible person) to assure coherent overall programme Involvement of students  In QA mechanisms  Transport of information on good (and less good) practices

March 2008 Luc François8 3. Quality Assurance for JP (1/2) Key questions should be posed: 1. Have Learning Outcomes been defined? 2. Is the curriculum coherent, target oriented and sustainable? 3. Has a consistent and suitable implementation of the programme at all partnerinstitutions been ensured? 4. Does (or will) improvement take place in order to ameliorate the programme?

March 2008 Luc François9 3. Quality Assurance for JP (2/2) Because of broad ambition and complexity of JP, three additional elements must be considered: 5. Explicit unique dimension of the JP 6. Different organisational cultures and values need to be balanced 7. Recognition issues need to be solved

March 2008 Luc François10 4. Overview of steps to be taken Setting up a new Joint Programme: 1. Idea 2. Concept (outline) 3. Planning (in detail) 4. Agreement 5. DOING the programme Evaluation of a running Joint Programme 1. Joint Analysis 2. Action plan for improvement 3. External evaluation

March 2008 Luc François11 II. Experiences from the ‘field’: Master in Euroculture ° 1999 Aim: provide students good comprehension of overall aspects in the European integration process Partners in the Network: Groningen (Nl): coordinator Göttingen (G) Krakow (Pl) Olomouc (Cz.R) Strasbourg (F) Udine (I) Uppsala (Se)

March 2008 Luc François12 Master in Euroculture Structure of the Programme 90 ECTS 1st semester: home university Intensive Programme: organising partner 2nd semester: host university 3rd semester: internship-training and Master thesis Language: English Selected as Erasmus Mundus Programme

March 2008 Luc François13 Master in Euroculture: advantages and disadvantages + Partners ‘in crime’: same goal + Interesting structure for students and staff: international experience + Selected as Erasmus Mundus - Ghent University left the network due to different credits - Different legal regulations: difficult to find the golden mean - Different tuition fees - Keeping up communication between all partners

March 2008 Luc François14 III. Manual for Joint Programmes 1. Why a manual? 2. Concept of the manual 3. Partners involved 4. Framework of the manual 5. State of affairs

March 2008 Luc François15 1. Why a manual? (1/2) EU: promotion of structural cooperation between European institutions (and beyond) Focus on different means of cooperation: Questions are raised: Organisation: how to handle? Quality: how to assure? Legal framework: differences per countries Civil effect of diploma’s

March 2008 Luc François16 2. Why a manual? (2/2) Confusion of concepts: joint degree ≠ joint programme ≠ joint degree programme Flanders: No manual available yet (only the EUA guidelines)  Task for the Flemish Bologna Experts!

March 2008 Luc François17 2. Concept Idea: website with hyperlinks Hard copy Translation in English (for interested partners) Manual for interested teachers, staffmembers, …who have to start from scratch Recommendations for the Flemish Ministry of Education regarding changes in Higher Education Act.

March 2008 Luc François18 3. Partners involved Small working group (led by Bologna-experts) but with large support from International Relations Offices Quality Assurance Offices Legal Affairs Offices Student Administration Offices

March 2008 Luc François19 4. Framework of the Manual (1/5) Legal framework: explanation on: ≠ forms of diploma’s and ≠ forms of collaboration Specific legal framework in Flanders on education Specific laws on profession (if applicable) Specific linguistic regulations in Flanders Erasmus Mundus: specific legal elements to be concerned

March 2008 Luc François20 4. Framework of the Manual (2/5) Choice of partners: possible ‘traps’: ≠ number of credits (60 vs 90 vs 120) ≠ organisational structure (profession-oriented vs academic) Quality Assurance Structure of partners Programme: does it fit into the ≠ missions of the institutions involved?

March 2008 Luc François21 4. Framework of the Manual (3/5) Development of a JP: steps to be taken Ideas and expectation of JP Set up of a steering committee and support Set up of joint educational frame of reference Development of the programme: name, goals, programme, organisational structure, admission requirements, financial matters, infrastructure, scholarships, diploma and diplomasupplement, …

March 2008 Luc François22 4. Framework of the Manual (4/5) Quality Assurance Basis = shared vision on QA, transparancy on decision- making level, open communication and engagement One model of QA for alle partners (incl. PDCA-cycle) Consolidation of JP Evaluation and improvement of JP External QA (visitation-accreditation process)

March 2008 Luc François23 5. Framework of the Manual (5/5) Cooperation Agreement Financial and legal implications On the institutional level Preferable: co-signed by the ‘agents’ (responsible persons) of the programme Definitions and glossary Recommendations

March 2008 Luc François24 5. State of Affairs Draft has been read by external experts from VLIR (Flemish Interuniversitary Council) VLIR-UOS (University Development Cooperation) VLHORA (Council of Flemish Unversity Colleges) NVAO (Dutch-Flemish Accrediaton Organisation) Department of Education, Flemish Ministry of Education Adjustment of the Manual based on recommandations of the external experts Translation of the Manual: foreseen in the near future Public Presentation: April 2008

March 2008 Luc François25 Thank you for your attention!