1. dr. Vesna Dodiković-Jurković & Ivan Filip Jakopović HEA/ADA Conference “ From Quality Assurance to Quality Culture" Sarajevo, 6 December 2011

2. Independent public institution responsible for QA in HE and science in Croatia Started with activities in 2005 Role redefined in 2009, granting further independence Mission: continuously support quality improvement of science and higher education, by applying European and international best practices International membership: INQAAHE (2006), CEENQA (2008) and ENQA (2011) Listed in EQAR

3. Accreditation Council Professional body of the Agency overseeing QA procedures 11 members nominated by various stakeholders - Rectors’ Conference, Council of Polytechnics and Colleges, Croatian Chamber of Economy, Croatian Students' Council, National Council for Science, National Council for Higher Education No public officials 1 Adjunct NGO member (no voting rights)

4. Reaccreditation in HE FREQUENCY: 5 – year cycles, approx. 120 institutions SCOPE: All Croatian HEIs Minimum conditions prescribed by the government (1:30 teacher- student ratio etc.)+ quality grade Financed by state OUTCOME: YES/NO decision for institution and its study programmes + recommendations or Letter of expectation (decision postponed, HEI activities continue, enrolment ban possible)

5. Reaccreditation 7 standards: 1)Institutional management and quality assurance 2)Study programmes 3)Students 4)Teachers 5)Scientific and professional activity 6)International cooperation and mobility 7)Resources: administration, space, equipment and finances Grades on a scale of 1-5

6. Expert panel Composition: 2 foreign professors 2 Croatian professors 1 Croatian student Optional: 1 representative of the industry instead of one professor where possible Public call for experts published every year (print and web) Cooperation with European QA agencies in expert echange The call is ongoing!

7. Expert panel Criteria Competence in the discipline Good knowledge of English Good oral and written communication Teamwork Non-conflict of interest Management/evaluation experience Gender balance and continuity (1 member from previous evaluation) whenever possible Student - high grade average, student union bonus

8. Coordinators HEI coordinator: - not prescribed - usually secretary, but has also been a vice-dean, administrator for student issues, etc. - communicates with Agency coordinator, organises the visit on the side of HEI Agency coordinator: Experienced in QA procedures - certified internal auditors and/or trained in external quality assurance weekly internal seminars - for example QA Graduate Programme (INQAAHE website)

9. Self-Evaluation Divided into two parts: Tables with data/commentaries and descriptions HEIs may present additional elements which may be relevant for the analysis of their activities Agency organises workshop for all institutions to be reaccredited in September/October Additional info: FAQ, forum on quality assurance, phone, email (then put into FAQ)

10. Training Experts are sent necessary information prior to their arrival 1-day training prior to site visit, divided into 2 parts 1) Croatian system of higher education, methodology, criteria, previous reports 2) Discussion about specific institutions 2 trainings when 2 institutions are visited

11. Site visit In Croatian and English / translation provided by ASHE Involves all internal HEI stakeholders and is the only venue for direct communication with expert panel (otherwise has to pass through the Agency) Working lunch organised on site wherever possible to save time (cafeteria or catering), HEI representatives excluded (used for reflection, discussion and further preparation) Gifts forbidden

12. Report Writing Reports have 12-25 pages Drafts already written while at institution (IMPORTANT!) Written by the head of the panel (aided by coordinator) then sent to other experts for revision Based on evidence – information from self-evaluation and site visit

13. Decision-making Institutions reply to reports Reports, replies and quantitative data discussed among Accreditation Council Conflict of interest regulated by Code of ethics Opinion of the Accreditation Council -> Accreditation decision of the Agency -> Formal decision of the Ministry Follow up decided by AC (usually 2 years)

14. 2010/2011 summary 20 institutions (economy) planned, 17 visited (2 postponed for December 2011, 1 merged) 9 accreditation decisions: 4 positive 5 letters of expectation - 3 enrolment bans 2 study programmes denied reaccreditation

15. Lessons learned/Improvement Based on collected questionnaires from HEIs and experts (after site visit) + opinions of the coordinators and AC members Even more emphasis on training (ppt, online courses) Distribution of report writing on other team members More emphasis on research and outreach External stakeholders?

16. AUDIT ASHE Accreditation Council-Audit annual plan Standards: ESG part I. (1.1.-1.7.) Criteria: 1 - Absent 2 - Emerging 3 - Developing 4 – Advanced

17. AUDIT

18. The audit consists of four phases: I.Planning II.Execution of Audit that includes visit to HEIs III.Reporting IV.Follow-up phase OUTCOME: Certificate or Reaudit or Reaccreditation

19. The audit team consists of: 2 representatives of HEIs (1 domestic, 1 foreign) 1 representative of a scientific institute or the business sector 1 student representative 1 representative of ASHE ASHE coordinator – support

20. Criteria for experts selection (audit): good knowledge of higher education, science and quality assurance good knowledge of quality assurance systems participation in seminars for audit experts organised by ASHE (on-line seminars for foreign experts) successful completion of seminar for audit experts/certificate; database of audit experts participation in additional trainings for audit experts experience in audit

21. Education Audit (procedure, standards, criteria, outcome) –Basic training (Seminar+workshop→certificate →inclusion in database) –Additional training –On-line seminars for foreign experts Realibilty of the process → capacity of experts

22. Preparations for the site visit Panel Reads the documents Explores the web Reflects on all issues Shares initial impressions/list of findings (on the meetings) Asks for additional documents (evidences) Puts a programme together (who to see, where to go) Plans for the interview sessions (questions) 2 panel meetings – 1st one month prior to site visit, 2nd one day before

23. VISIT According to the programm, in time All stakeholders interviewed, evidence collected, concensus reached REPORT –within 1 month after the site-visit –written by the chair of the expert panel –all members should take notes during the site-visit and cooperate in producing of the report –Report style (public document) –Recommendation to improvement of HEI’s QA system, assesment (consensus) –Adoption of the report – ASHE AC

24. Follow-up phase HEI’s official response + developed a detailed plan of improvement actions HEI’s Report of Follow-up phase → Audit team Final report –Final assesment of efficiency of HEI’s QA system –Recommendation for the improvement in the next period –Certificate or reaudit –Published

25. HEIs enhancement Enhancement of in-house quality culture Transparency of the QA system Strategic development HEI’s positioning at national and international levels Awareness of differences between ISO and ESG Mobility of teaching staff and students Improvement of the monitoring process for study programs Participation of students and external stakeholders in the QA system Capacity building of teaching staff

26. ashe The future is not some place we are going to, but one we are creating. The paths are not to be found, but made, and the activity of making them, changes both the maker and the destination. - prof. John Schaar