General Remarks and Comments About Applications of Ideas Described in European Standards and Guidelines in Internal Quality Assurance

System. Mariusz Mazurkiewicz, Wrocaw University of Technology

Standard 2: Approval, monitoring and periodic review of programmes and awards (SEUA)
In the second standard one of the most important think is learning outcomes and evaluation methods of support of achievement learning outcomes by students. Presented questionnaire is more or less focused on students and graduates opinion about learning processes. In the case of student and graduates opinion is very important to observe coincidence between her/his opinion and her/his achievements in the aspect of intended learning outcomes and individual achievements (even in the aspect of grades). In my opinion there is necessity to avoid or minimize influence of personal results of given student on her/his opinion. To minimize this factor is at least necessary to know her/his results (grades). Above remark is valid in the case of anonymity of survey. In my opinion anonymity in this process is one of the fundamental requirements. Also there is a need to involve in questionnaire more detailed information about lecturers and courses. For example ability of teacher to explain difficult aspects of subject, language efficiency (e.g. teacher voice is loud enough, is teacher voice clear enough), tempo of lecture or classes, general attitude of lecturers to students and so on. There are no comments and remarks for questionnaire for employers.

Standard 3. Assessment of students (YSU)

Assessment of students plays important role in the learning process. According to Bergen declaration assessment has to show achievement of learning outcomes. In the presented questionnaire there is no information about type of learning outcomes, which way or method of assessment questioned should evaluate in survey. There exists difference between for instance knowledge, competences (skills) or social skills, another approach in assessment of these aspects is necessary. The example of question from questionnaire: Student assessment methods accurately measure student learning outcomes Which type of learning outcomes? No information. What kind of learning outcomes should have methods to measure its achievement accurately? And general question: Is the survey (among students) approach proper enough to use in evaluation of accuracy assessment system to achievement learning outcomes? In the questionnaire there is also a lot of information about learning processes in the classroom. Learning process could be divided into work in classroom and students own work (at home, library, internships and so on), but in questionnaire range of information is limited to the classes (my impression). There is also need to extend area of question to for instance homework and so on. Example of this approach from questionnaire: Regular assessment of students accurately captures what they are learning in the classroom Last comment questionnaire in this case is based on the assumption that assessed students make evaluation of assessment system in the field of achievements of learning outcomes. I think they cannot evaluate the system as

a whole, but need from them their opinion about realisation of the system, evaluation of application of given tools is more required than evaluation of the system.

Standard 5. Learning resources and student support (YSMU)

Survey among teachers in the area of assurance adequate level of resources to support learning process is only one tool which, if used in preliminary phase of evaluation resources gives general picture of technical preparation of Higher Education Institution to support learning processes. First of all, HE institution needs to assure adequate and appropriate level of resources to accompany the process of learning outcomes achievements in the area of knowledge and competences. Permanent evaluation or monitoring is a task for administrative staff of faculty in the context of technical support and is the general task for some evaluation body, which consists of representatives of faculty/university, at least once a year. In my opinion questionnaire for students doesnt fit to standard 5 till question 8 at least. According to the content of questions this questionnaire is appropriate to evaluation of standard 6 and 7 more than to standard 5. Prospective information which could be received from questions 16-19 is to general to hold conditions mentioned in the standard 5.

Standard 6. Institutions should ensure that they collect, analyse and use relevant information for the effective management of their programmes of study and other activities. (VbSEUA)
Questionnaire for employees is a tool to prepare preliminary evaluation of current situation in the higher education institution in the field of development IT resources in all aspects of university activity. This survey is not able to monitoring procedures of IT university system development, results are appropriate to show eventual progress or changes in the system once per relatively long period. There is no information about students or their involvement in the IT systems assessment process.

Standard 7. Institutions should regularly publish up to date, impartial and objective information, both quantitative and qualitative, about the programmes and awards they are offering. (YSAFA)
Evaluation by parents as a process, which occurs once a year (or for each admission) is enough to permanent evaluation of content, utility level and quality of information about HE institution and its awards in the aspect of research and education. Presented questionnaire reflects ordinal scale in the aspect of evaluation of progress and development (number of candidates, parents satisfaction level and so on) and as a tool is enough to monitoring conditions related to standard 7. Involvement of employers in the process of evaluation information policy of university in presented questionnaire is only useful in the phase of preliminary evaluation of information policy. There is a lack of data about information policy which is made by university in day by day work. Students opinion pool could be concerned as a tool to make continous monitoring of quality in the field of information policy. In students questionnaire there is part related to satisfaction level among questioned students. This level of satisfaction seems to be available to use as a indicator appropriate to monitoring process of evaluation information policy of HE institution. The model prepared by YSAFA staff is a dynamic model of quality assurance system for university information policy. Presented questionnaires are the significant part of the system and also there exists enough capacity in the aspect of results to use it in the way described by the model. To complete the picture of the model of quality assurance in the field of information policy there is a need to deliver information about the others component and procedures used in the process.

Done at Wrocaw, 12.03.2012