Our Thesis

1. Our Thesis • Tensions are inevitable between QA and QE – in particular within international partnerships • Healthy relationships enable necessary systems to function effectively • Without nurturing strong relationships, systems will eventually malfunction • A QE led approach enables effective QA • QE is central to building effective transnational partnerships

2. Reflection on our own experience of collaborating in transnational partnerships • We needed to understand (theorise) the nature of organisational collaboration • In order to promote educational development we needed to consider the wider relationship • in order to understand their own role in the partnership, we felt all all involved participants needed to be aware of the big picture • The process of collaboration exposed a need to improve collaboration within and across our own institution, with departments and staff and facilitative groupings (the centre) • Necessity to embed capacity building and sustainable structures – difficulties in grafting these on to pre-existing structures - potential advantage where no structures pre-existed.

3. Making sense of Partnerships • Family relationship? (Kanter: – courtship, engagement, housekeeping, bridging and old marrieds’ ) • Master/Apprentice? • Mentor/mentee? • Partnership of equals? • Neo-colonialism? • Market oriented?

4. Building Collaborative Advantage (Huxham, C and Vangen, S (2005) 'Managing to Collaborate: the theory and practice of collaborative advantage', Routledge.) Distinguished 3 sorts of aims: • Collaboration Aim Publicly stated, agreed by both (all) sides • Organisation Aim Frequently not publicly stated; what the partner wants to get out of the partnership rather than a common aim • Individual Aim What the individuals involved in a variety of ways want to get out of the partnership

5. Collaborative Aims Different spheres of collaboration: • Collaboration Eg, develop a joint degree scheme to be offered in the home country of one of the partners, based on that of the other partner? • Organisation foothold in the market, revenue, enhanced status in another part of the world, degree awarding powers, entry into HE, social/regional status, innovations in TLA, enhancement of practice? • Individual ? New, different experiences? possible career enhancement? Individual collaboration? How these are managed will help to shape the success or otherwise of the partnership. (Collaborative Advantage V Collaborative Inertia)

6. Dependencies/critical factors for collaborative advantage • Nurturing collaborative relationships (direct and personal) • Exploring values, personal, social, academic (not commercial) • Attention to the dynamics of collaboration • Trust • Empowerment • Value iterations • Longevity • Commitment and belief • Trust building activities • Choice and control

7. QA led - procedures QA, necessary – BUT - if dominant, potential threat to the health of the relationship, if: • mechanistic • Judgemental • Bureaucratic • Over-emphasis on quantitative measurability • Power inequality • Hard and fast results Potential for ‘collaborative inertia’

8. Professional development Peer Review and Observation Scholarship Constructing and using feedback from students Own evaluation and reflection • Quality assurance: • Monitoring • Compliance • accountability • Quality enhancement: • Evaluation • development • innovation New Scheme/Module Approvals Learning resources Learning resources • Curriculum design, evaluation and development: • Alignment • Progression • Coherence Teaching and learning approaches Teaching and learning approaches Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Annual Teaching Review Syllabus Syllabus Support and guidance Support and guidance Periodic Quality Review Assessment strategy Assessment strategy Independent learning/ study time Independent learning/ study time

9. QE led - processes • Potential opportunity to build collegial relationships • Mutually supportive • More effective development – constructivist ethos • Flexibility and adaptable • Responsive to change and to context • Softer and slower Potential for ‘collaborative advantage’

10. Professional development Peer Review and Observation Scholarship Constructing and using feedback from students Own evaluation and reflection • Quality assurance: • Monitoring • Compliance • accountability • Quality assurance: • Monitoring • Compliance • accountability • Quality enhancement: • Evaluation • development • innovation New Scheme/Module Approvals New Scheme/Module Approvals Learning resources Learning resources • Curriculum design, evaluation and development: • Alignment • Progression • Coherence Teaching and learning approaches Teaching and learning approaches Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Aims and Intended Learning outcomes Annual Teaching Review Annual Teaching Review Syllabus Syllabus Support and guidance Support and guidance Periodic Quality Review Periodic Quality Review Assessment strategy Assessment strategy Independent learning/ study time Independent learning/ study time

11. Educational development • Has a central role to play in leading the QE agenda, but also: • In building collegial relationships • In making connections between different agents in both partner institutions • In creating cohesion between QA and QE • QA - Quality Administration?, QE – Quality Education?

12. Educational Development for collaborative advantage • Work with colleagues to strengthen individual aims • Work with the organisation to facilitate the melding of individual aims with organisational aims • Work with both partners to incorporate successfully the individual and organisational aims into the Collaboration aims.