1. Internal Quality Management at KAHO Sint-Lieven 2/10/2016 1 Mieke Vanhoorne Policy Document Quality Assurance KAHO Sint-Lieven Gent,16 November 2010 Tempus SMGR 158853-1-2009-1-BE ESABIH EU standards for accreditation of study programs on BH Universities European Commission Mieke Vanhoorne, Quality Coordinator

2. Quality Assurance 2/10/2016 2 Mieke Vanhoorne Quality level Time Continuous Improvement guarantee

3. Plan: General level –Policy HUB KaHo Sint-Lieven –Strategic plan –Policy objectives(2010-2015) –Policy documents –Policy plans departments and services (on annual basis) –Action plans 2/10/2016 3 Mieke Vanhoorne

4. Plan: Policy statement HUB KAHO Sint-Lieven In our organisation students are key players. We determine their talents and try to educate them into competent and engaged persons. With the focus on practical exercises, and science and research as a basis in our profiles. Dreaming, Thinking, Doing and Perseverance are our motifs. Our education is ‘state of the art’, publicly validated. We focus on personal guidance. Innovation and quality are our ambitions. Choosing for Europe and the whole world throughout our Flemish embedment. Diversity is our power. Starting from our Christian inspiration that inspires a broad and authentic engagement to society We have faith in each other and the future. Mieke Vanhoorne 4 2/10/2016

5. Plan: Policy objectives KAHO Sint-Lieven (2010-2015) 4 Policy objectives Attractive education Personal guidance Pioneer in research and development (R&D) Engagement, innovation, entrepreneurship 3 motifs Stimulating the development of talents Internationalization Cooperation Mieke Vanhoorne 5 2/10/2016

6. Plan: Departments and organisational units Departments –Policy documents –Policy plans Organisational units (study programmes, study groups, expertise-, knowledge-, educational- centres) –Mission –Core processes –Strategic and operational plans –Action plans (Quality framework) Mieke Vanhoorne 6 2/10/2016

7. Do –Education –Research –Social services 2/10/2016 7 Mieke Vanhoorne

8. DO: To offer qualitative higher education 5 study fields: Industrial science and technology Teacher training Health care and nursing Business studies Biotechnology Postgraduate courses KaHo Sint-Lieven - Introducing KaHo Sint-Lieven 8

9. DO: To offer qualitative higher education Educational programmes: 18 professional bachelor programmes (180 ECTS credits) 4 academic bachelor programmes (180 ECTS credits) 7 master courses (60 ECTS credits) 1 bachelor after bachelor course (postgraduate) International master course Food Science, Technology and Nutrition (Erasmus Mundus) KaHo Sint-Lieven - Introducing KaHo Sint-Lieven 9

10. Mieke Vanhoorne Do: Co-responsibility basic facilities: infrastructure Technologiecampus Gent Campus Dirk Martens Aalst Campus Waas Sint-Niklaas 2/10/2016

11. Mieke Vanhoorne Do: Infrastructure 2/10/2016

12. Do: Responsibilities The head of the study programmes are, in cooperation with all persons involved, responsible for the realisation of the quality assurance of the university college in their study programme (educational and quality board) Departments Other organisational units departments General services and services for the departments (Responsibilities and qualifications are determined in the text ‘Organisational structure of KAHO Sint-Lieven) 2/10/2016 12 Mieke Vanhoorne

13. Check: follow-up –Measurements and enquiries with feedback to the people involved. –Self-evaluation –Follow-up of policy- and action plans. –Reports (f.e. annual report, self-evaluation report) –Follow-up external reports (f.e. follow-up of the reports of the Visitation Commissions) 2/10/2016 13 Mieke Vanhoorne

14. Act: data storage Intranet 2/10/2016 14 Mieke Vanhoorne Policy KAHO - HUB Policy objectives Integration Organisation

15. Act: data storage ECTS 2/10/2016 15 Mieke Vanhoorne

16. Act: Continuous improvement Innovation 2/10/2016 16 Mieke Vanhoorne Bron: http://www.horeca.org/smartsite.dws?id=36617http://www.horeca.org/smartsite.dws?id=36617 Thinking Daring Doing Perseverance Dreaming

17. Act: Boards Academical Board (AR) University college negotiation committee (HOC) General committee for prevention and protection at work (OCPBW) General student board ASR) Student forum Educational- and Quality board (OKR) Departmental Board (DR) Departmental negotiation committee (DOC) Departmental student board (DSR) Regional committee for prevention and protection at work (RCPBW) Educational Board(OR) Educational Advisory Board (OAR) Educational Student Board (OSR) Quality improvement teams ( KVT’s) Study groups Mieke Vanhoorne 17 2/10/2016

18. Act The Management Board and the Board of Governors stimulate and supervise the quality assurance. This mainly by supporting, the follow-up and if necessary steering: o the quality frameworks; o the organisation of self-evaluation, visitation and accreditation; o the support of the Quality Improvement Teams and study groups. 2/10/2016 18 Mieke Vanhoorne

19. Quality culture By improving the quality culture in KAHO Sint-Lieven we want to achieve the following: All staff members feel themselves responsible for the quality and the improvement of quality; Everybody is willing to continuously improve the quality; Quality issues are indicated and solved; Creating an open atmosphere and trust between staff members so they dare to recognise weaknesses; Problems are transferred to opportunities; Spontaneous initiatives are being encouraged; Managerial staff tries to coach and guide rather than planning and supervising. 2/10/2016 19 Mieke Vanhoorne

20. Quality coordinator: task description Stimulating, supporting and follow up of the quality policy of the University College. Giving advice to the managing committee concerning the quality policy Chairman of quality improvement committees ; –new accreditation system (NAS), –measuring management Coordinator Quality Manual (Intranet / Policy and organisation), advisor for setting up the quality framework Managing the implementation and use of intranet as an instrument for quality Supporting self-evaluation processes, visitation and accreditation processes. Member of the steering committee for quality at the association Co-chairman of the board for education and quality Coordinator and follow up of the HE database Mieke Vanhoorne 20 2/10/2016

21. Giving support when making self-evaluation reports

22. Start Attuning with the head of the study programme Informing professors Setting up a core group Start collect the required annexes

23. A critical view to the quality framework of the study programme PLAN –Mission –Core processes –Educational vision –Strategic and operational plans –Action plans Participation of everyone involved –Educational Board of the study programme(OR) –Educational Advisory Board (OAR): students, alumni, professional sector, professors –Student Board of the study programme (OSR)

24. Check Enquiries -Enquiry concerning the educational activities (lessons, labs, mentoring placements, working in groups/practical training/projects) -Study time measurements -Enquiries concerning guidance of first year students -Enquiries about placements -Student satisfaction -Staff satisfaction -Enquiry for alumni Formal and informal moments

25. Action Nr.SubjectItemTimingResponsibleIn cooperation with Documents/ Results 1 2 3 4 5

26. Writing the self-evaluation report SIX SUBJECTS (criteria) –Objectives of the courses –Programme –Effort of staff –Means / Facilities –Internal quality management system –Results Accompanying FACETS (indicators) –Criteria for evaluation –Self-evaluation

27. Self-evaluation report: example Criteria 2: Curriculum Indicator 2.1: correspondence between objectives and the content of the programme –Implementation of the objectives in the curriculum; –Level (bachelor’s, master’s) and content of the components of the study programme; –Existence of inter-disciplinary elements; –International dimension of the study programme/ integration of internationalisation in the curriculum (policy, participation rate, cooperation, international contacts, etc); –Degree to which recent advancements in education at home and abroad are integrated in the curriculum; –Procedures for curriculum revision and innovation; –Participation of relevant stakeholders in curriculum development, revision and innovation.

28. Self - evaluation with accreditation scan (HUB): questions Participation of relevant stakeholders in curriculum development, revision and innovation. 2.1.1 Professors are actively and systematically involved in curriculum development and revision. 2.1.2 Students are actively and systematically involved in curriculum development and revision. 2.1.3 People from outside the study programme, among who colleagues, are involved in curriculum development and revision. 2.1.4 Enquiries for alumni concerning the contents of the curriculum.

29. Self-evaluation: questions asked to several persons involved ProfessorsStudentsPeople from outside the study programme Alumni 15 D/2.1.1. Professors are actively and systematically involved in curriculum development and revision 16 D/2.1.2 Students are actively and systematically involved in curriculum development and revision 7 S/2.1.2 Students are actively and systematically involved in curriculum development and revision. 17 D/2.1.3. People from outside the study programme, among who colleagues, are involved in curriculum development and revision 6 E/2.1.3 People from outside the study programme, among who colleagues, are involved in curriculum development and revision. 18 D/2.1.4 Enquiries for alumni concerning the contents of the curriculum. 6 A/2.1.4 Enquiries for alumni concerning the contents of the curriculum.

30. Self-evaluation: processing “Professors are actively and systematically involved in curriculum development and revision” Don’t agree at all Completely agree No opinion

31. Self-evaluation: processing  3.5<x : OK  3<x<3.5: attention  x<3: problem 2.1: Relation between objectives and content of the programme 15 Professors are actively involved in curriculum development and revision. 16 Students are actively and systematically involved in curriculum development and revision. 17 People from outside the study programme, among who colleagues, are involved in curriculum development and revision. 18 Enquiries for alumni concerning the contents of the curriculum. ProfessorStudent Guest professor AlumniExternal

32. Self-evaluation: analysis Strengths Weaknesses + plan of action

33. Writing the self-evaluation report Core team Feedback –Educational Board –Educational Advisory Board –Management (head of the department, coordinator of the field of study) –Quality coordinator –Reading committee