1.
Quality in focus
EBBA OSSIANNNILSSON, PHD, LUND UNIVERSITY, SE
TRAKAI 23 NOVEMBER 2013

2.
Ebba Ossiannilsson, PhD Lunds Universitet

3.
Ossiannilsson (2012) Benchmarking (e)-learning in
higher education, Doctoral dissertation, Oulu
University, Finland

4.
Agenda

5.
Driving forces for quality
Branding /instant reputation
Digitalization
Technical innovations
Inernatíonalisation
Collaborate to compete
Social innovations
Strategical partnerships
“Learn on the go”
Ossiannilsson 2013

6.
What´s in it for me?
Quality is in the eye of the beloved

7.
Retrospective or prospektive?
• From control to
enhancement
• Self-evaluation
• Peer review
• Benchmarking
• Certification
• Accreditation
• Quality assurance
CC BY-NC Some rights reserved by Shira Golding

8.
Quality culture – dialectic approach
Quality control
Processmodels
Guidelines
Communication Rules
Standards
Trust
Co-operatiop
Inclusivness
Innovation/Creativity
Competeces
Attitudes
Values
Self -evaluation
CC BY Some rights reserved by SeattleClouds.com

9.
Background
• The Swedish National Agency of Higher
Education, ELQ
• EADTU, E-xcellence+
• ESMU, Benchmarking eLearning exercise 2009
• The First dual-mode distance learning
benchmarking club

10.
Learning objects
80s 93
94
Gaming technologies
Open Educational Resources
98
99
00
01
04
Massive Open Online Courses
05
E-books and smart devices
Virtual worlds
Social and participatory media
Learning Design
95
Mobile devices
Learning Management Systems
The Internet and the Web
Multimedia resources
E-Learning timeline
07
08
http://scienceoftheinvisible.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/a-ramble-through-his
online.html

11.
Benchmarking
Benchmarking is an internal organisational process that
aims to improve the organisation´s performance by learning
about possible improvements of its primary and/or support
processes by looking at these processes in other, betterperforming organisations (van Vught et al. 2008a: 16).
The concept was first used by Camp at Xerox (1989 1993).

12.
Benchmarking
“The locus of benchmarking lies between the
current and desirable states of affairs and
contributes to the transformation process that
realizes these improvements.”
Moriarty & Smallman (2009)
En route to a theory on
benchmarking

13.
Why benchmarking?
The system of benchmarking includes:
• The institution taking the responsibility for QA
• Self-evaluation as a bases for self-improvement
• Using peer reviewers as reference and input for
improvement
*In a collaborative process of dialogue we create an
environment of learning from each other
*In a process of comparing the university’s’
performance with best practices in the field of elearning we identify weaknesses and strengths
• Setting a roadmap for improvement

14.
Benchmarking benefits and values
• Self assess institutions
• Better understand the
process
• Measure and compare
• Discover new ideas
• Obtain data to support
decision making
• Targets for
improvements
• Strengthen
identity, strategy, imple
mentation
• Enhance reputation
• Respond to national
indicators
• New standard for the
sector
Van Vught, F. (2008)
A practical guide. Benchmarking in European Higher Education

15.
16
RQ 2 New benefits identified, old ones
confirmed
• Attitudes
• Involvement
• Collaboration
• Management
• Committment
• Critical
reflections
• Cultural issues
• Internal
dialogue
• Teambuilding
• Internal
processes
• Trust
• Transparency

16.
The benchmarking process
©Ossiannilsson 2012
What to
benchmark
Take action
Analyse
benchmarking
information
Benchmarking
team
Benchmarking
partners
Ossiannilsson 2011. Reprinted with permission from SCIRP

17.
©Ossiannilsson 2012

18.
Ossiannilsson E & Landgren L (2011). Essential areas that benchmarking elearning ought to cover. Reprinted with permission from Wiley-Blackwell.
©Ossiannilsson 2011

19.
On changing quality perspectives
Networking
Sustainability
Boundless education
Lifelong learning
Holistic and conceptual approach
and embedded and beyond
A move from my students, my
course, my resorurse… towards
our´s…
Globalisation
Demography
Technical and digital
development
Student involvement and
student completion
Quality
Frame of references
(Ossiannilsson 2012)

20.
Rhizome
© Ossiannilsson 2012
Serendipity

21.
General objective
Creating a QA in e-learning system, because:
• The use of e-learning increases
• E-learning is an essential element for Lifelong learning
• Internationalisation of education is supported by e-learning
• E-learning has become mainstream provision
Integral part of education – Integral part of QA
E-xcellence instrument launched in 2007:
Complementary to the existing internal and external national
quality assurance systems.

22.
E-xcellence: QA in e-learning instrument
• Curriculum design, Course design, Course
delivery, Services (student and staff support),
Management (institutional strategies)
• E-xcellence focuses on elements in course
provision that contribute to Lifelong Learning
schemes, like:
ease of access to courses and services
new forms of interaction (students and staff)
flexibility and personalisation
• E-xcellence is a benchmarking instrument

23.
The basic tool is the quick
scan, which can be applied
in three ways
The quick scan as a quick orientation (basic option)
The quick scan with a review at a distance (extended option)
The quick scan with an on-site assessment (most comprehensive option)

24.
E-xcellence Associates Label
Not a label of proven excellence,
but a label to reward continuous
educational improvement.
Selfassessment
Roadmap of
improvement
Review
Essential is integration
of benchmarks
The label is provided based on
an
Label
external review at a distance
or on-site.
Virtual Benchmarking
Community

25.
2005
E-xcellence
Roadmap
2006
E-xcellence
Project
2007
2008
2009 -> 2011 2012
Excellence
instrument
E-xcellence +
Project
TF Quality
Assurance
label
E-xcellence
Associates label
EExcellence
xcellence
NEXT
NEXT
Goal: From project to mainstream implementation of the
E-xcellence instrument European wide at the local level.

26.
Objectives NEXT
2011-2012
The main objectives of E-xcellence NEXT are:
(1). further European introduction
Extend local seminars European wide to 20 seminars
(2). updating and extending the E-xcellence manual
Inc. Social networking and OER
(3). broadening the partnership on European and
Global level. UNESCO Global TF QA in e-learning

27.
Local seminars within
E-xcellence NEXT
1.
Kaunus University of Technology (KTU), Lithuania
Master’s degree (MSc.) in Information Technologies of Distance Education
2.
Akademia Górniczo-Hutnicza (AGH), Poland
Centre of e‐Learning and Faculty of Management
3.
Open University of Cyprus (OUC), Cyprus
Bachelor on Hellenic Studies
Master on Educational Studies
4.
Riga Technical University (RTU), Latvia
Professional Master Program "Innovations and Entrepreneurship"
5.
Universidade Aberta (UAb), Portugal
Master on Administration and Educational Management (MAGE);
Master on E-learning Pedagogy (MPEL).
6.
Hellenic Open university (HOU), Greece,
Master in Business Administration (MBA)
7.
Moscow State University of Economics, Statistics and Informatics (MESI),
Master programs: Applied Informatics; Management
Bachelor programs: Applied Informatics; Linguistics; Management; Economics

28.
QA-agencies reached
with E-xcellence NEXT
• ENQA as Associate partner in the project NEXT
• Portuguese Agency for Assessment and Accreditation of Higher
Education – (A3ES),
• La Agencia Nacional de Evaluación de la Calidad y
Acreditación (ANECA, Spain),
• Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad (VLIR),
• Vlaamse Hogescholenraad (VLOHRA),
• Dutch-Flemish accreditation body (NVAO),
• Lithuanian Centre for Quality Assessment in Higher Education,
Higher Education Quality Evaluation Centre (HEQEC – AIKNC),
• Polish Quality Assurance Agency for Technical Universities
(KAUT),
• Higher Education Planning, Evaluation, Accreditation and
Coordination Council (YÖDAK, TR)
• Hellenic Quality Assurance Agency (HQAA).

29.
Has the use of the instrument had any impact in your
organisation so far?
• Discussion on some important issues was initiated, involving
stakeholders not involved before
• We have identified issues for further e-learning development
• The participation in the project has already led to adjustments of the
QA system of the university
• It has opened a dialogue between different stakeholders
• We are working on improvement on e-learning performance along the
road map
• Definitely, QA in e-learning became more important
• Since the project teachers see how to improve their courses
• Too early for an official impact, but it enhances fruitful discussions
• E-xcellence framework is very useful in the process of designing
an internal QA system on e-learning

30.
What role could QA agencies play in
relation to QA in e-learning?
• They should regard e-learning as an indispensable
element of modern education
• Create an independent assessment of e-learning/on-line
programmes
• They should prepare recommendations in QA and elearning
• Provide a more detailed implementation plan
• They should both play a constructive and an accreditive
role in the development of a methodology to assess
quality in
e-learning
• Organise workshops on QA benchmarks

31.
What aspects did you like the most
about the E-xcellence seminar?
• Open discussion, sharing views and experiences
• The process of completing the Quick Scan
• Opportunity to exchange experiences between local team
and experts from other countries
• Sharing experience, revealing strengths and weaknesses
• Improvement plan
• E-xcellence tool is extremely useful for improving quality
• Commitment of participants: managers, teachers,
students, incl. representative of National accreditation
agency
• Discussions that are relevant for future development
• It was an opportunity to revise our master degree

32.
Convergence in education by e-learning
Changing Communication patterns between students and tutors
• Demand for increased communications
• Expectations of 24x7 support
• Asynchronous communication expands participation
• Discussion routinely integrated within course design
• Student forums and chat rooms extend informal communication
Web Resources replace text material
• Information and learning resources not limited by book
ownership or library access
Networked curricula with the support of ICT and e-learning
• International exchange of students via on-line platforms
OER
We expect that the QA community will meet increasing use of
OERs in the future Content – but also tools, licences, practices…

33.
QA-agencies and e-learning
From the ENQA Sigtuna Seminar on QA in e-learning (Oct. 2009)
• establish a solid quality assurance system in Europe
• eLearning should not be evaluated separately,
• There is a need for a common definition and understanding on all
aspects of eLearning.
• There is a need for a “common language” that would help higher
education institutions and quality assurance agencies strive for the
same goal.
• It is important to meet and discuss quality assurance at the
European level and between different stakeholders in the
educational sector
• to provide adequate training for academic professionals, higher
education providers and quality evaluation experts.

34.
Caring is sharing, sharing is caring
Footprints
W:www.oulu.fi; www.lu.se/ced
E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@oulu.fi
E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@ced.lu.se
FB:Ebba Ossiannilsson
T:@EbbaOssian
Phone: +4670995448
S:http://www.slideshare.net/Ebba
Ossiann
Ossiannilsson 2013