1. Quality assurance at HUB
23-11-2011, Brussels
Paul Garré
director quality and education

2. Quality Assurance at HUB
• Internal policy
– Total quality management (education,
supporting organisation and services,
research, services to society)
– Strong stakeholder participation (students,
staff, alumni, relevant external stakeholders)
– Documented quality system (internal audits)

3. Quality Assurance at HUB
• External regulations
– Peer review by independent expert panels
(national quality agency: VLUHR)
– Accreditation (international Dutch-Flemish
Accreditation Council: NVAO)
– NEW: starts up in 2015: institutional reviews
by international expert panels (international
Dutch-Flemish Accreditation Council: NVAO)

4. A mission to accomplish …a long journey
• Plan • Do
Mission Operational
statement plans
Strategic goals Quality Manual
Surveys
Project teams
Data analysis
Changed
Self evaluation
procedures
Internal audit
New structures
Peer review
• Act • Check

5. Quality policy: 10 basics
Team work
Teach as you preach
Facts and figures
Personal commitment
Shared focus
Stakeholder orientation
Exchange of expertise
Open communication
Simplicity
Empowerment

6. Educational policy: 3 premises
•Integrated knowledge, skills
and attitudes
•Authentic contexts
Competence •Professionally relevant
learning outcomes
•Evidence/research based
contents
•Adequate student counseling
•Increasing student autonomy
Learning
•Active knowledge
construction
•Interaction and collaboration
•Flexibility
Powerful •Diversity, interculturality
learning •Mobility
environment •Blended learning
•Studiability
•Transparancy

7. A quality system is just a way to
coordinate some basic building blocks
Commitment
Authority and
responsability
Expertise
Information
Communication
Vision
Adequate
Budget methods and
Time instruments
Capacity Organisational
Structure

8. Education and Quality Department
1. Educational development and innovation
unit
2. Quality assurance unit
3. Statistical Analysis and Measurements unit

9. 1 Educational development unit
• Curriculum development
• Educational training programmes
• Flexible learning paths en competence
assessment
• New trends and innovations

10. Educational Training at HUB
1. Policy model
2. Educational Training: main characteristics
3. Administration

11. Policy model
The main goal of the training model at HUB is to develop the organisation
and to achieve its policy goals (so the main goal is not individual development).
• Individual training is the responsability of the individual employee. If relevant
and related to their job, employees can follow external training.
• In order to achieve strategic and operational goals, HUB provides internal
training, i.e. training of the competences of all employees and teaching staff
or specific groups:
• Educational Training: Training needs in Faculties and Fields of Study are discussed and
listed by deans/directors, central training needs by the Management Committee. The
Education and Quality Department is responsable for realisation. Some examples
• Functional Training: Training needs are discussed and listed by Staff and/or Management
Committee. The HR Department is responsable for realisation. Some examples

12. Educational Training: main characteristics
Central projects
- HUB Education-day:
Organised by Faculties and Fields of Study / Preferably 1 central theme / Networking and knowing each other
- Strategic projects
– ICTO: Individual consultancy or made-to-measure training by the ICTO Department.
– Diversity and Corporate Sustainability: made-to-measure training
• Preferably made-to-measure training tracks with more than one training session
for specific groups or curriculum teams in order to achieve work related implementation
• Realisation in collaboration with the coordinator Diversity or Corporate Sustainability
Training for Faculties and Fields of Study
– Preferably made-to-measure training tracks with more than one training session
for specific groups or curriculum teams in order to achieve work related implementation
– Realisation in collaboration with the coordinators educational development in every Faculty / Field of Study
– Communication and follow-up of implementation by deans and directors
Other Trainings
– Initiatives of a specific group or curriculum team within a Faculty or Field of Study
– No direct link with the strategic or operational goals of the Faculty or Field of Study
Examples: Doing filosophy with children (BALO), Statistic programme Maple (CT Maths & Statistics), ….

13. Administration
Communication
– External Training: Intranet, monthly overview by mail, meetings of the team
– Internal Training: Intranet for central projects, made-to-measure trainings by mail
Approval of participation and registration
– External Training: Digital procedure for approval and registration
• For teaching staff: advice by directors and approval by faculty president/ approval by deans
• For administrative employees: advice by head of department and approval by the director HR Department
• Automatic registration in a databank
– Internal Training:
• For teaching staff: no approval needed (teaching hours can be replaced but cannot be cancelled)
• For administrative employees: approval by the head of department
• Registration: attendance list with signature
– All registrations (also for trainers/instructors) are transferred to an individual training portfolio
• This portfolio is on the agenda in performance interviews / can be used in the context of promotion
One central budget divided in two:
– External: Administration by faculty president/deans for teaching staff / director HR Department for all administrative employees
– Internal: Administration by the Education and Quality Department
Evaluation and follow-up
• Training sessions: Internal evaluation of every training
• External (and most internal) trainings are on the agenda of curriculum teams and departments
• Global policy: Follow-up in the annual Scorecard / the annual Strategy and Effectiveness plan

14. 2 Quality assurance unit
• Quality manual
• Complaints handling
• Internal audits
• External audits and peer reviews
• Accreditation procedures
• Self assessment excercises

15. 3 Statistical analysis and
measurement unit
two main tasks:
Drawing up statistics using the information in
existing databases
Organizing and analyzing surveys
Statistics and survey results are posted
on the intranet

16. Information is used on various levels:
Micro: teacher wants to know how his students
performed
Meso: a degree programme has to write a self
evaluation report, statistical data are vital
Macro: general management gets insight in the top
layer of statistical information (through strategy book
and strategy and effectiveness report)

17. Distinction between:
Routine information:
• Statistics that are drawn up every year (based
on existing internal/external frameworks)
• Surveys organized using a measurement
planning covering multiple years
BUT! Take into account changes in
routines, frameworks, survey methods, the
educational landscape…
Ad hoc: statistics drawn up on request

18. statistics (existing surveys
databases)
Routine • Number of students • Evaluation of Didactic
• Influx of students Practice
• Characteristics of • Alumni
(influx of) students • Study time
• Student performance • Student quality
• Academic level of barometer
degree programmes • Personnel survey
• Internationalization + some smaller surveys
Strategy Book/Strategy
and effectiveness report
ad hoc

19. Short presentation of the different surveys

20. Evaluation Of Didactic Practice
with a standardized questionnaire students evaluate a
combination of a professor and a course (used to be
on paper, now digitally)
Planning (3-year cycle)
Year x: courses BA1, MA 1, MA2
Year x+1: courses BA3
Year x+2: courses BA2

21. Evaluation Of Didactic Practice (cont.)
Goals:
 Provide students with an opportunity to give
feedback on their professors
 Inform professors about their didactic practice
 HR tool: corrective measures for professors with low
scores, element in promotions
 Overview of Didactic Quality of a certain
degree programme

22. Alumni survey
alumni receive an extensive (digital) questionnaire
asking them about
(i) their professional career up until that moment;
(ii) how they look back on their studies at HUB
Every alumnus gets a questionnaire one and half year
after graduation (=march of graduation year +2),

23. Alumni survey (cont.)
Goals:
 Get an overview of where alumni work (or additional
courses), job characteristics and job satisfaction
 Get to know view alumni now have on their degree
programme (competences acquired, impact of
international experience, general satisfaction…)

24. Study time measurements
students are asked to estimate the study time they
needed for their courses, two methods (designed on
association level):
• Estimating after the course has finished
• Keeping a study time diary (every week)
Every degree programme stage has to have at least
one study time measurement in a period of eight
years

25. Study time measurements (cont.)
Goals:
 Legislation states that 1 credit should entail 25-30
hours of study time – measurement is necessary
 Getting an idea of the balance of the study load
within a degree programme (stage) and within the
academic year
 Measures if necessary (if study time is either too low
or too high)

26. Student Quality Barometer
using a standardized questionnaire students give
their opinion on a high number of topics concerning
their studies at HUB
Every four years, all students are asked to fill out the
student quality barometer

27. Student Quality Barometer (cont.)
Goals:
 Get an overview of how student’s score different
aspects of studying at HUB (also important for
external justification)
 Getting an idea of the problem areas, element to
prioritize actions
 Assessing if former problem areas have been dealt
with

28. Other (smaller) surveys include
 Quality of internship
 Quality of course material
 Experience of exchange students
(incoming/outgoing)
 Student’s motivation behind a study choice

29. Statistics + Survey results = Loads of information
Useful for individuals/degree programmes
(they only use what they need)
Less useful for general management wanting to
assess the state of things at HUB (bird’s eye view)
Management tool that summarizes the information
is needed = strategy book

30. Short presentation of the strategy book

31. genesis:
From the Mission statement goals are derived
To assess if these goals are met, indicators for
each goal need to be determined and neccessary
data collected.
Each goal has its own scorecard with indicators

32. Number of students
Market position
Practice orientedness
Scientifically founded
Social formation
Didactic excellence
Quality oriented (improve, consolidate, justify)
Services and facilities
Student and study guidance
Students’ performance
Study time
Employment
On the job training

33. What problems is STAM confronted with?

34. Pitfalls:
central data provider for more than 20 degree
programmes
Visibility?
Local commitment?
Ad Hoc questions: don’t let them get in the way of
routine information

35. Pitfalls (cont.):
Surveys: response = continuous source of frustration
Actions that can/need to be taken:
• Group survey sessions in pc rooms
• For some digital questionnaires: ask student
number (use only to target non-respondents,
guarantee anonimity)
• make (previous) survey results available
• Communicate!
• Plan!

36. Pitfalls (cont.):
Strategy book = still too extensive to really get a
bird’s eye view
 Plan to develop an all-encompassing management
tool (max. 20 à 25 indicators)

37. Thanks for your attention!
Any questions?