Process of iteration and refinement by the Project Team leading to the final 28 criteria
Self Evaluation Criteria Description
• The description elaborates on the statement of the criterion to explain its meaning • It will be developed to define significant terms and provide background information
• The rationale highlights reasons for the adoption of the criterion • Reasons are based on educational research and best practices in engineering and higher education • Examples will be provided in order to support the rationale
• The rubric is a scoring guide that seeks to evaluate levels of performance • The rubric is a six-point maturity rating scale for assessing levels of compliance with the criterion • The description for each level is based on the description and rationale for the criterion • The rubric will highlight the nature of the evidence that indicates compliance at each level
Remember 1. QAEMP self-evaluation is for your program development 2. It is a tool for you 3. You do not need to prove anything with this 4. It is a tool for continuous improvement
Step 1 • We create groups • This is your home group! • Start by writing the group number and name on the forms. Work ! s to#be hop:)Self"E #kept valu % for% the$C ation*Fo ross!S rm parrin ,"! g!
Step 2 Self-Evaluation Handbook Version 1 – April 2015
• In your group: Decide who takes which criterion of the following:
• 14) Technology to engage students in learning • 15) Feedback is timely, appropriate and formative • 27) Different learning styles are taken account of
Step 3 – 2 minutes • Each member of the group studies his/her criterion • AIM: to become an expert of that criterion! • To Do • Try to understand the ideology behind it and make notes • Identify examples from your program that can serve as evidence for that criterion • Estimate the level of your program in the scale • Write some rationale for your judgement
Step 4 – 6 minutes • Expert groups meet (one group for each studied criterion) • To Do • Exchange your thoughts in the group • Agree on the presentation of your criterion to the rest of the expert group • Identify some helpful evidence • You will later teach this criterion to your home group members!
Step 5 - 12 minutes
,"! ion*Form ! Evaluat g! op:)Self" Cross!Sparrin sh rk o ide( W verse(s the$ n(the(re for% pt% criteria(o ng(partner.(( (last(2( Sparri to#be#ke (for(the ur(CrossO e(is(room
• Return to your home group • To Do • Each home group studies the criteria led by the expert • Evaluate your own program/faculty 1) level on the rubrik, 2) give some rationale and 3) how to improve • When asked move to next criterion and teaching continues… • This is repeated until all four criteria are taught and evaluated by the entire home group • You now have knowledge on the criteria AND a evaluation of your own program (
Cross-Sparring • The next step: share your selfevaluations and engage in a cross-sparring exercise • Later: That would be facilitated though a web-based system: the market place.
The Market Place
Step 7 – 15 minutes Meet in your new cross-sparring pairs • For each criterion: • The person with highest evaluation describe what they are doing and what they find to be “best practice” related to that criterion • The other person asks questions to really understand what the Cross-Sparring partner is doing in relation to the criterion. • Together formulate a best practice for that criterion, write it down in the blue column !
Step 8 • In plenum: What was the best practice for • 14) Technology to engage students in learning? • 15) Feedback is timely, appropriate and formative? • 27) Different learning styles are taken account of
Step 9 In plenum (Think-Pair-Share) • What do you think of the approach? • Is it doable? • Is it worth it?
Summary • Reflective self evaluation is a powerful tool • Learning from others and sharing best practice can improve your performance considerably
Summary • Within the Erasmus+ project: “Quality Assurance and Enhancement Marketplace for Higher Education Institutions” we are creating a toolkit for sharing best practise based on cross-sparring • Check out www.cross-sparring.eu for more information and let us know if you want to know more
Acknowledgements • Part of this work has been supported by the Quality Assurance and Enhancement Marketplace for Higher Education Institutes (QAEMarketPlace4HEI) -project under the EU contract Grant Agreement Number 2014-1-IS01-KA203-000172 of the Erasmus+ KA2 Cooperation and Innovation for Good Practices Programme. • Special thanks to Juha Kontio, Jens Bennedsen, Katriina Shrey-Niemenmaa and Robin Clark for sharing slides