Internal assessment: An Instrument for Quality Management in Language Institutions

1. INTERNAL ASSESSMENT:
AN INSTRUMENT FOR
QUALITY MANAGEMENT
IN LANGUAGE
INSTITUTIONS
Galya Mateva, OPTIMA, Bulgaria
Laura Muresan, QUEST Romania

2. LLL-Project:
Improving Standards of Quality in
Adult Language Learning
(Grundtvig Learning Partnership) 2

3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
EXPERIENCE AND INSPIRATION DRAWN FROM :
 EAQUALS and the European language policy
 The National Associations for Quality Language
Services in Bulgaria, Romania, Greece and Croatia
 The English and German Department of the University
of Zaragoza
 Research in the Area
 Synergies with previous European projects, e.g. the
ECML projects on “Quality Management” &
“QualiTraining”, the Grundtvig project “IPALE”
 Colleagues & network partners
3

4. PROJECT BACKGROUND
THE NEEDS OF THE FOLLOWING
BENEFICIARIES HAVE BEEN EXPLORED
AND TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION:
 ADULTS IN LANGUAGE EDUCATION IN THE
PRIVATE SECTOR
 UNIVERSITY LANGUAGE DEPARTMENTS
 BOTH WELL-ESTABLISHED & RECENTLY
FOUNDED ASSOCIATIONS OF QUALITY
LANGUAGE SCHOOLS
4

5. AIMS OF THE PROJECT
 To create a well-balanced Quality Improvement
Scheme for internal assessment in the FOUR basic
areas of MANAGEMENT, ACADEMIC SUPPORT
TO TEACHING, TEACHING PROCESSES and
LEARNING PROCESSES
 To pilot the effectiveness of the Scheme as a
management instrument in all partner institutions
 To integrate internal and external assessment
where applicable for the purpose of ensuring on-
going quality assurance combined with professional
consultancy
5

6. AIMS OF THE WORKSHOP
 To present the project product: The Quality
Improvement Scheme (v.4)
 To discuss aspects of the Scheme as an active
management instrument, including examples from
piloting
 To consider the relevance of the Scheme in the
context of EAQUALS and individual schools
 To enrich the Scheme with new ideas and
perspectives
6

7. THE STRUCTURE OF THE QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT SCHEME
QUALITY
AREA
POSSIBLE
QUESTIONS/
STATEMENTS
FOR
(SELF)
ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT
SCALE
EVIDENCE
7

8. Management
Academic
Coordination of
Teaching
Teaching Learning
ISQALE
Quality Improvement Scheme
‘Quality Areas’
8

9. MANAGEMENT
Human Resources Management
Management of Information and
Communication Processes
Management of Services and the
Environment
9

10. MANAGEMENT
QUALITY AREA POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
М.15. Implementing
innovative practices and
services, identifying unique
selling points
Is there a system for implementing
innovative practices and services in
your institution?
Do the innovative practices/services
bring added value to your work?
Are your unique selling points easily
identifiable?
10

11. ACADEMIC SUPPORT TO TEACHING
QUALITY AREA POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
A.6. Effective
observation systems
and
peer-cooperation
framework
Is there an observation system in place?
What types of observation are being used?
Are all teachers observed at least once every
academic year?
Is observation documented and followed by
feedback?
Is there evidence of action taken on the basis of
observation outcomes?
Is there a framework for facilitating/encouraging
peer-cooperation?
If yes, what forms does collaborative work take?
11

12. TEACHING PROCESSES
QUALITY AREA POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
T.7. Awareness of learner
profiles and learning styles
Are teachers aware of the learning
styles and preferences of their
students?
Do they investigate them?
Do teachers demonstrate
individual approach to learners in
keeping with their learning styles?
12

13. LEARNING
QUALITY AREA POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
L.5 Learners` self-
analysis of learning
Do learners self-assess their
language/communicative performance
regularly?
Can they correct their own mistakes?
Are they in the habit of correcting each other?
Do they use the CEFR can-do statements for
self-analysis?
Do they keep an up-to-date portfolio?
Do they keep a dossier with their written work?
Do they find it useful?
13

14. EXAMPLES & ACTIVITIES
INVITATING FEEDBACK (1)
 Management
14

15. PILOTING PHASES & EXAMPLES
15

16. PILOTING – EXAMPLES FROM
SPAIN: THE EIIC TEACHERS’
NETWORK
Feedback on possible amendments/changes &
improvements to draft the final version of the
questionnaire
O The Greek team
O The Croatian Team
O Teachers from the Master in English Studies
O Teachers from the 1st year in the Degree of English Studies
O Teachers from a UZ degree other than English Studies
O Teachers from a high school (public school)
O Teachers from a high school (private school)
O Teachers from a bilingual school
O Teachers from a vocational school
O Teachers from the Official School of Languages

17. PILOTING WITH LEARNERS
Target population (a stratified sample)
O 10 PhD students in English
O 10 postgraduate students at a master level (UZ Master in English
Studies)
O 10 undergraduate students of the 1st year in the UZ Degree of English
Studies
O 10 undergraduate students in a UZ degree other than English Studies
- ESP
O 10 students from the Official School of Languages
O 10 young learners in higher education(public school)
O 10 young learners in higher education(private school)
O 10 young learners in higher education (private bilingual school)
O 10 adult learners from a vocational school

18. 9 Lifelong learning skills are promoted in my language
class.
10The teacher interacts well with the class.
11 The teacher shows me techniques to improve my language
learning.
12 I know how my learning will be assessed / evaluated.
2 11 46 1
5 55
2 12 46
10 49 1
8 I find the class interesting and motivating.
2 15 43
Methodology & pedagogical approach
Results of the piloting: example
from piloting with learners in Spain
Don’t
agree
Partly
agree
Fully agree
Don’t know
Quit

19. 35 I learn the language by communicating with others (e.g. peers
/ students and teacher).
36 In learning the language, I have opportunities to think and
give my opinion about topics, ideas, etc.
37 In learning the language, I need to search for, understand
and transmit information.
Professional skills
38 In learning the language I plan and organize my work on a
regular basis to successfully acquire competence in the
language.
2 18 39 1
4 55 1
1 22 34 2 1
7 28 23 1 1
Don’t
agree
Partly
agree
Fully agree
Don’t know
Quit
Results – sample (cont.)

20. Feedback re the section on Teaching
 Teachers found it thought-provoking, challenging and a
useful tool in self-assessing their teaching and the
school’s academic coordination.
 Novice teachers found it intriguing and they needed
help from senior teachers/academic
coordinators/mentors to elaborate on certain key areas.
For example, blended learning - Core Inventory.
 It focuses on the teachers’ abilities, the quality aspects
of teaching, the academic coordinator’s role & a
learner-centered approach on teaching. As a self-
assessment tool it helps teachers reflect on their
teaching.
Results of the piloting: example
from piloting with teachers in
Greece

21.  “A scoring system would be appropriate, which would
distinguish between core or primary features/
aspects to meet minimal standards and periphery
or secondary features/ aspects needed in order to
assess level of mastery.”
 (A.T., Manager – example from Romania)
DO YOU FIND THE SCHEME USEFUL? COULD IT BE
A USEFUL SELF-ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT IN
YOUR ORGANIZATION? PLEASE EXPLAIN!
Results of the piloting: example from
piloting with managers /academic
directors in Bulgaria, Croatia,
Romania

22. EXAMPLES & ACTIVITIES
INVITATING FEEDBACK (2)
Academic Coordination of Teaching
Process of Teaching
The Process of Learning
22

23. THE INTERNAL ASSESSMENT
PROCEDURE: A MANAGEMENT TOOL
Multiple perspective:
 Manager assessment
 Teacher self-assessment /assessment
 Teacher peer-assessment
 Learner self-assessment/assessment
 Learner evaluation of teaching and learning
opportunities
Overall picture of Internal assessment
Matching Internal with External assessment
Professional advice and growth
23

24. Thank you!
24