1 / 13

Quality Assurance in Specialized Institutions The case of Yerevan State Conservatoire -

Association Européenne des Conservatoires, Académies de Musique et Musikhochschulen (AEC). Quality Assurance in Specialized Institutions The case of Yerevan State Conservatoire -. Mist Thorkelsdottir Head of the Music Department, Iceland Academy of Arts, Reykjavik and

ankti
Télécharger la présentation

Quality Assurance in Specialized Institutions The case of Yerevan State Conservatoire -

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Association Européenne des Conservatoires, Académies de Musique et Musikhochschulen (AEC) Quality Assurance in Specialized InstitutionsThe case of Yerevan State Conservatoire - Mist Thorkelsdottir Head of the Music Department, Iceland Academy of Arts, Reykjavik and Chair of AEC Quality Enhancement Committee

  2. Structure of the Presentation • Introducing the context: • AEC approach to Quality assurance and Accreditation • AEC activities and services in the field • Cooperation with ANQA for the accreditation of Yerevan State Conservatoire

  3. AEC Quality Assurance and Accreditation activities - Projects • EU/USA project ‘Music Study, Mobility and Accountability’ with National Association of Schools of Music (NASM) in the US, 2002-2004 • SOCRATES project ‘Accreditation in European Professional Music Training’, 2006-2007 • ERASMUS Network for Music ‘Polifonia’, 2007-2010 • Institutional Review / Programme Review

  4. AEC Position (2007) Quality assurance and accreditation must : • function as mechanisms that can assist autonomous higher education institutions in the enhancement of their quality and not as bureaucratic processes based on inflexible criteria and procedures. • take into account in their criteria and procedures the specific nature and characteristics of professional music training.

  5. AEC Framework Document: Assurance and Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Higher Music Education (AEC 2010) • Key document • Consists of: • Characteristics (of HME and of QA in Music) • Reference points (link to the Sectoral QF) • Areas of enquiry and criteria/questions to be addressed • Review procedures • Register of experts

  6. AEC Criteria /Areas of enquiry 2 sets of criteria/questions: • For institutional review • For programme review 7 areas of enquiry • Mission and vision /programme goals and context. • Educational processes. • Student profiles (admission to, progress through and completion of the programme) • Teaching staff. • Facilities, resources and support. • Organisation and decision‐making processes and internal quality assurance systems. • Public interaction.

  7. How to prepare for a Quality Enhancement Process? Key document: Handbook How to prepare for an AEC Institutional and Programme Review? (AEC, 2010) • Application for a review • Preparation of materials • Preparation of review itinerary • Composition of the review Team • Information on the review visit • Writing the report • Timeframe

  8. AEC SERVICE: 2 QA PROCESSES • The Quality Enhancement Process for Institutions and Programmes: (no accreditation decision) • Formal collaboration with national quality assurance & accreditation agencies (accreditation decision taken by the agency) => Aim: to add a European-level subject-specific dimension to the national quality assurance and accreditation procedures

  9. Benefits of the music specific approach The music-specific approach: • AEC criteria complementary to the national standards , more attuned to the Conservatoires’ specific field of study and research. • Supportive atmosphere created by the critical but friendly panels. The conception of accreditation: • Extended (focused on enhancement) as opposed to minimal

  10. The procedures involved when the AEC cooperates formally with an agency in accreditation: • Precondition: compliance by the National Standards and the AEC with the European Standards and Guidelines • Phase I: comparative analysis of the procedures and criteria for the assessment applied by the two organisations Result: ad-hoc set of standards integrating the European-level discipline-specific AEC standards with the national OAQ general standards • Phase II: composition of diverse groups of experts for each of the exercises • Phase III: Implementation: 4 jointly coordinated site-visits, resulting in 4 external evaluation reports

  11. Benefits of the joint procedure • Quality of experts panels • Added value for the institutions • Visibility • A learning outcomes oriented approach: (AEC Sectoral Qualifications Framework for Higher Music Education, the European Qualifications Framework for Higher Education) fostering the Bologna process • Respect of national legal framework

  12. The case of Yerevan State Conservatoire • ANQA • Two AEC experts

  13. Conclusion • Very positive experience

More Related