More Autonomy for Developing Degree Programs
System Accreditation Successful [08.12.20]
Picture: University of Hohenheim
Are course contents, qualification goals, and teaching formats still up to date? Do modules build on each other in a meaningful way? Are examinations appropriately designed? Are there possibly too many? Does the curriculum allow students to spend time abroad without any problems? And: At the end of their studies, can students really do what they were promised at the beginning?
Questions like these are something that universities have to ask themselves again and again with regard to each of their degree programs and, if necessary, readjust them in order to remain competitive. The hot topic of whether and how digital teaching formats should be integrated into the regular curricula after Covid-19 will also play an important role in the further development of the degree programs in the coming years.
"Thanks to the successful system accreditation, we can now advance all these topics effectively and autonomously, in continuous dialog with all relevant stakeholders. The students' perspective, graduate surveys, and a range of empirical data that we collect or compile for each degree program will also play an important role in this process," stated Prof. Dr. Korinna Huber, Vice President of Academic Affairs.
Background: Many universities would like a more active role
As important as the topic of quality management is with regard to degree programs, it has repeatedly caused frustration at universities in the past.
This is because how exactly it has to be carried out is precisely prescribed by university policy. Until a few years ago, all degree programs had to undergo a so-called "program accreditation" by an external agency, which can subsequently impose conditions. The universities themselves play a relatively passive role in this process.
There is a better way of doing this, many people believe, including those at the University of Hohenheim:
"One problem with traditional program accreditation is that the external evaluators can only ever deal with certain topics on a selective basis. However, we are convinced that in many cases real progress can only be achieved if one stays on the ball and knows the local context very well," said Prof. Dr. Huber.
Another shortcoming from the Vice President's point of view: "Degree programs are always considered individually when it comes to program accreditation. This means that the requirements are also individual and not coordinated. A strategic development of the study location as a whole does not take place in this way".
Praise for team spirit at Hohenheim
For almost 10 years now, system accreditation has been available as an alternative to program accreditation.
Universities are allowed to take the quality assurance for their degree programs into their own hands. However, they must first prove in a particularly stringent examination that their internal quality management system meets the requirements of the Accreditation Council Foundation, the joint institution of the Länder for quality assurance in teaching and learning.
The University of Hohenheim embarked on this demanding path three years ago. After intensive preparation with the participation of lecturers from all faculties, administrative staff, and students, at the end of October they were able to announce the desired success:
"The Accreditation Council office has described our QM system as particularly clearly structured and comprehensible," reported Dr. Folkert Degenring from the Teaching Development Office. "We were also especially pleased to receive verbal feedback from the external evaluators: after separate discussions with students, lecturers, administrative staff, and the university management, they had the impression that all the players at Hohenheim were actually pulling together very well and that the QM system had been accepted at all levels. This is by no means a matter of course in this form."
Main features of the new QM system
In concrete terms, the Hohenheim QM system consists of a small and a large monitoring cycle.
As part of the small monitoring cycle, discussions take place in the faculties every year. The dialog format is intended to provide a regular opportunity to discuss current developments and any problems in the individual degree programs and to set measures for improvements. Students also contribute their perspective.
The starting point for the discussions is a wide-ranging information package consisting of quantitative and qualitative data. An important part of this are the "degree program data sheets." They contain, among other things, developments in the number of students and applicants, the average Abitur grade of the applicants, dropout rates, and an overview of grade averages and success rates in the compulsory modules. They also contain results of current graduate and student surveys, which are evaluated for specific degree programs.
The large monitoring cycle takes place every 8 years: It begins with the "degree program dialog," which runs in a similar way to the annual small monitoring cycle. Then the procedure is extended to include the external perspective in the "On-Campus Dialog" and the strategic perspective of the university management in the final "President's Office Dialog".
The "On-Campus Dialog" involves professors and a student from another university, as well as a practitioner from a professional field relevant to the respective degree program. In contrast to previous accreditation procedures, the focus here is on dialog at eye level. The external experts thus primarily take on the role of critical friends who contribute an outside perspective to the discussion. However, they also have a mandate to check for compliance with the technical and content criteria laid down in the state's study accreditation ordinance.
In the "President's Office Dialog," the final phase of the internal accreditation process, the faculties set on target agreements with the President's Office, which are based on the results paper of the "On-Campus Dialog" and the strategic goals of the university. The quality seal for the respective degree program is then awarded, together with the seal of the Accreditation Council. The degree program is thus accredited for a period of 8 years.
QM procedure is to be further developed in ongoing operations
It is particularly pleasing that the Hohenheim players do not see the internal accreditation procedures as a necessary evil, but rather as an opportunity for continuous and sustainable quality development of the degree courses on offer, said Dr. Géraldine von Uckermann, Head of the Department of Quality Management | Teaching Strategy.
The department itself also strives for continuous quality development:
"In recent years, a great deal of energy and perseverance has been invested to bring the 'System Accreditation' project to a positive conclusion within a short period of time. The fact that this was successful, and even resulted in an accreditation without conditions, is a great success! Nevertheless, even the Hohenheim procedure is not immune to the fact that it must be adapted to changing conditions and further developed," said Dr. von Uckermann.
For example, the QM system was established on the basis of individual model degree programs. In fact, in the future, several neighboring degree programs will run through the process as a cluster. Adjustments to the special requirements of this cluster process and to the specific framework conditions of individual degree programs are to be made during ongoing operations.
"The process flows of the accreditation procedures are also to be concretized and significantly optimized at the same time. Our aim is to have lean, efficient, and largely intuitive processes," said Dr. von Uckermann. "We try to provide the best possible advice and support to those involved throughout the entire process".
Text: Leonhardmair / Translation: Neudorfer
