Date : September 29, 2011 Presenter : Min Won SEO, Director-General Center for University Accreditation, KCUE

Transcription

1 Date : September 29, 2011 Presenter : Min Won SEO, Director-General Center for University Accreditation, KCUE 1

2 Table of Contents I. Introduction of KCUE II. Promotion of Quality Assurance in Higher Education by KCUE III. Basic Policy and Main Contents of New Institutional Accreditation System IV. International Collaboration by KCUE 2 2

3 I Introduction of KCUE 3 3

4 I. Introduction of KCUE Foundation Background Social upheaval in 1980s led to recognition of need for private organization to promote university cooperation KCUE established in 1982 for government-university mediation, promotion of inter-university collaboration Founding legislation: Korean Council for University Education Act (Act No. 3727) Current membership: 201 four-year universities nationwide as of

5 I. Introduction of KCUE Purposes of Establishment Contribute to development of university education & increase cooperation by providing means of autonomous consultation & mediation on issues common to 4-year universities Support development of university education by increasing university autonomy, strengthening accountability, and making recommendations to gov. on quality improvements and ensuring reflection in policy 5

6 I. Introduction of KCUE Brief History Apr 1982 Oct 1982 Apr 1984 Feb 1988 Apr 1992 Dec 1997 Inaugural general assembly Legal recognition as incorporated body Enactment of Korean Council for University Education Act Establishment of Center for Higher Education Research International seminar commemorating 10 th Anniversary Commissioned operation of Korean University Council for Social Service Apr 2002 International seminar commemorating 20th anniversary Feb 2008 HQ relocation from Yeouido to Mapo-gu, Sangam-dong Sept 2009 Establishment of Admissions Counseling Center Sept 2009 Establishment of Accreditation Management Team Sept 2010 HQ relocation from Mapo-gu, Sangam-dong to Seocho-gu Jan 2011 Establishment of Higher Education Transparency Center 6 6

7 I. Introduction of KCUE 7 Organization 7

8 8 General Assembly General Universities Education Universities Industrial Universities Correspondence Universities National Public Private National National Private National Board of Trustees Chairperson Vice-Chairpersons Trustees Auditors Total Secretariat Secretary- General Office/Center Directors Team Leaders Researchers Staff Administrators Dispatch Total Total 8

9 I. Introduction of KCUE Strategic Objectives Admissions University Accreditation Promote public education and construct grounds for advanced admission process Accreditation stimulating university competitiveness Higher Education Research Research policy issues and support training learning program Higher Education Training International Cooperation Provide high quality programs for Professors and Faculty Support HE internationalization and student globalization Consultation/ Mediation Management centered on member universities & strengthen public relations 9 9

10 II Promotion of Quality Assurance in Higher Education 10 10

11 II. Promotion of Quality Assurance in Higher Education University Evaluation: First Generation ( ) Comprehensive University Evaluation Comprehensive university evaluation was focusing on superintending guidance and advice for the purpose of improving university education <Performance of 1 st and 2 nd Round Comprehensive University Evaluation> 1 st Round Comprehensive University Evaluation (1982~1985) Year No. of University No. of Graduate Schools 2st Round Comprehensive University Evaluation (1988~1992) Year No. of University Integrated evaluation of undergraduate studies Total Total

12 II. Promotion of Quality Assurance in Higher Education University Evaluation : Second Generation ( ) Comprehensive University Accreditation System Contribute to improvement of quality across university education including operation of university budget, improvement of university administration system and improvement of education conditions through comprehensive education evaluation 1 st Round Comprehensive University Accreditation System (1994~2000) Year <Performance of 1 st, 2 nd Round Comprehensive University Accreditation> University +Graduate School University Graduate School 2 nd Round Comprehensive University Accreditation System (2001~2006) Year University +Graduate School University Graduate School Total Total

13 II. Promotion of Quality Assurance in Higher Education Program Accreditation System ( ) Evaluation of 2-3 programs every year Evaluate up to 40 programs by 2008 to improve education and study conditions and education quality in relevant programs Year Area of Study Year Area of Study Year Area of Study Year Area of Study Year Area of Study Year Area of Study 1992 Physics 1998 Nurse 2002 Social Welfare 2005 Korean language 2006 Music 2007 Trading and literature Electronics Pharmacy Civil engineering Agriculture English language Mathematics and literature 1993 Chemistry 1999 Law Mathematics Dance Business Chemistry administration Mechanical 2003 Economics Veterinary science Food nutrition Engineering 1994 Biological Engineering Construction Engineering Libraryand information Pharmacy Computer engineering 2008 Economics Chemical Engineering 1995 Management, Trading, Accounting Department 1996 Medicine, Dentistry, Oriental Medicine 2000 Electric, electronic, information communication Material engineering 2001 Design science Physics 2004 Biology and life science Mechanical Engineering Liberal arts Newspaper and broadcasting ads, promotions Japanese language and literature Chinese language and literature Sports Information communication Electric, electronic engineering Nurse Physics Oriental medicine 13 13

14 II. Promotion of Quality Assurance in Higher Education University Evaluation from Industrial Viewpoint (2008- Present) Explore solutions for quality disagreement between manpower from university education and those required in industry Provide information required for improvement of university curriculum Deduce and provide results of evaluation which encourage win-win trend of university and industry <Pursuing Performance of University Evaluation from Industrial Aspects> Area of Industry Target No. of evaluated university No. of companies Area of Industry Target No. of evaluated university No. of companies Car Mechanical engineering Design Architecture 3 5 Construction Construction engineering 6 3 Petrochemistry 4 3 Engineering Civil engineering 3 3 Precision chemistry Cosmetic Pharmac eutical Chemical Engineering Chemical Engineering Chemistry 8 8 Bank 6 3 Insurance Business administration 4 4 Game Game industry - 3 Securities 6 3 Total 5 majors 32 universities 24 companies Total 3 majors 36 universities 35 companies 14 14

15 II. Promotion of Quality Assurance in Higher Education Support Programs for University Self-review Introduce for autonomous quality management and reinforcement of responsibility since 2009 Universities have comprehensively examined, analyzed and evaluated overall school operations including education, research, organization and facility over 1 time in 2 years according to Higher Education Act, and announced the results. Avoid uniform evaluation and pursue evaluations in diverse types according to feature of universities by allowing universities to independently determine the items of evaluation (including items of information announcement), evaluation standards, processes and methods 15 15

16 III Basic Policy and Main Contents of the New University Accreditation System 16

17 III. Basic Policy and Main Contents of New University Accreditation System 1. Background for the New University Accreditation System and Relevant Institutional Regulation With creation of Article 11 (2) (Evaluation) of Higher Education Act, self -evaluation and announcement of information are specified obligatory in universities Introduce recognition system of government for university accreditation institute KCUE prepares for 3 rd university Accreditation system from 2011 based on relevant institutional regulations Article 11 (2) of Higher Education Act (Evaluation) (Oct. 2007) Regulation on Evaluation and Accreditation of Higher Education Institute (No of Presidential Decree) (Dec. 2008) 2. Purposes of the University Accreditation System Assure quality of university education through 3 rd party external evaluation Respond the need for accountability of university according to expansion of university autonomy Satisfy the right of people to know for quality of university education Increase in international recognition of Korean higher education 17

18 III. Basic Policy and Main Contents of New University Accreditation System 3. Basic Policy of Accreditation [1] Accreditation focusing on Qualitative Evaluation Evaluation to determine the quality of institute and evaluation faithful to purpose and original meaning of accreditation (2] Reduction in burden of University Evaluation University oriented evaluation: evaluation on requirements that matches the essence of evaluation accreditation Paper-less evaluation: minimize preparation of self-review report for evaluation and accreditation Authentic evaluation: evaluation focusing on actual data such as existing data of university, homepage data, annual report and self-assessment report 18

19 III. Basic Policy and Main Contents of New University Accreditation System 3. Basic Policy of Accreditation [3] Pursuit of Consulting Evaluation Characterization consulting for utilizing strengths of university Consulting for creating foundation to improve university education quality for supplementation of improvements [4] Evaluation Reflecting Feature of University Replace or add the general evaluation criteria for judging whether evaluation areas or items satisfy the foundation of determination according to characterization plan, university development and feature of university. Provided, however, if the university desires to replace or add the general evaluation criteria, prior consultation with university evaluation association is required, attached with reasonable foundation and evidencing documents that can support this. 19

20 III. Basic Policy and Main Contents of New University Accreditation System 4. Structure of Accreditation Contents 6 evaluation categories, 17 evaluation areas, 54 evaluation criteria 20

21 III. Basic Policy and Main Contents of New University Accreditation System 5. Accreditation Period per Accreditation J Type Accreditati on Type Accredita tion Unaccredited Accreditation Deferred Unaccredited Reexamin ation Accredita tion Unaccredited Reexamin ation Accredita tion Unaccredited Accreditation Referred Unaccredited Reexamin ation u d g m e n t 1 year passed Accreditation Period J u d g m e n t u d g m 2 years passed e J n u t d g m 2 years passed e n t u d g 1 year passed m e n t Accreditation Period 1 J Accreditation Period J year passed J u d g m e n t Decide 21

22 III. Basic Policy and Main Contents of New University Accreditation System 6. Accreditation Process Prior Stage (8 months earlier) Select evaluation criteria, submit additional information Criteria Selection Committee Selfassess ment Stage 1 (6 months earlier) Submit application for accreditation University Stage 2 (4 week earlier) Complete and submit self-assessment report per university University Stage 3 (1 week earlier) Off-site Documentary Review Institutional Evaluation Committee Evalu ation Activit ies Stage 4 (reference point) Site Visit Institutional Evaluation Committee Stage 5(within 5 weeks) Adjust deviation and prepare evaluation report Institutional Evaluation Committee Evaluation Review Committee Stage 6(within 8 weeks) Collect opinions of university, determine and report evaluation repot Institutional Evaluation Committee Stage 7 (within 9 weeks) Judge accreditation, announce results/submit accreditation report University Accreditation Committee Judg ment Stage 8 Accreditation result accepted or not Result unaccepted Raise objection Objection examination University Committee of Appeal Activit y after Accre ditatio n Result accepted Judge results of hearing and accreditation and announce results University Accreditation Committee Relevant university 인증 Unaccredited if necessary Stage 9 Monitoring Consulting Center for University Accreditation Submit report for maintaining Re-Accreditation accreditation standards Stage 10 Accreditation deferred: within 1 year Submit the report for main University from 1 judgment items of change (relevant Re-evaluation: 2 years from judgment universities) 22 of Unaccredited

23 Comparison between 2nd Generation and New Generation Category Former Generation New Generation Evaluation Content 5 Step: Category(6)/Area(22)/ Criteria(54)/Indicator(170) + 5 step measure 3Step: Category(6)/Area(17)/ Criteria(54) Self-review Report Heavy responsibility of self-review report: about 700 pages Minimize self-review report: 2/3 of Criteria(55) are evaluated by the information disclosure, homepage, bulletin, etc. Evaluators Peer professors recommended by university Professionals by evaluation area Training of Evaluators Administrative delivery focused : documentary evaluation workshop, onsite visit workshop Strengthen improvement of professionalism: utilizing detailed evaluation manual 23 23

24 Comparison between 2nd Generation and New Generation Category Former 2주기 대학종합평가 Generation 기관평가인증제 New Generation 방안 Site Visit Period 3days Evaluation Activities: 2~3 days Cost All cost supported by the Government 2 days : 23,130,000 won 3 days : 29,820,000 won Result & Utilization Relative comparison by total score Top/excellent/average/improvement required grading Insufficient utilization Accredited/Not Accredited : focused on initial objective of evaluation Select Best practice utilization of result Main Characteristics Convenience of self-review report and evaluation activities Large quantity of evaluation contents lead to heavy investment of time, efforts and cost in writing self-review report Weak basis of evaluation weighting Size and characteristics of university are not reflected University focused evaluation Paper-less evaluation oriented Authentic evaluation oriented Consulting evaluation oriented 24 24

25 IV International Collaboration by KCUE 25 25

26 IV. International Collaboration Mutual Recognition of of Higher Education Quality Assurance between Countries Construct self- evaluation system University autonomy era Rapid increase in higher education population among countries Obtain internal and external university competitiveness Reinforce external 3 rd accreditation and evaluation Easiness/Responsibili ty Crisis of academic affair operation Vulnerable finance structure Decrease in higher education population Change in Viewpoint of University Education Insufficient mind of education management 26

27 IV. International Collaboration Promotion Plan of Center for University Accreditation Sign MOU with Overseas QA agencies Korea-China-Japan QA Council ( 10) ASEM Int l Seminar Form Network for Int l Compatibility in Evaluation Produce Evaluation Materials in English Publish Common University Evaluation Glossary Strengthen affiliation with Int l Communities Expand to Cross Boarder Evaluation in Higher Education 27 27

28 IV. International Collaboration Constructing Higher Education Institution Accreditation Network Share recognition on quality assurance of higher education and internationalization among different countries Perform joint project for the matter of interests that evaluation institutes of each country have, hold seminars and expand personal exchange Construct the foundation for preparing the interchange and cooperation system among higher education institutes in different countries 28 28

29 IV. International Collaboration Promotion of International Collaboration in University Evaluation Korea-China-Japan Quality Assurance Council Agreement Strengthens the collaboration between the quality assurance institutions from Japan, China and Korea Facilitate mutual understanding on quality assurance between Asian countries Promote inter-university exchange with quality assurance by deepening discussion on common issues 29 29

30 IV. International Collaboration Recent MOUs with Overseas Evaluation Organizations Date Evaluation Organization Country Feb Feb Mar ANIEI (Asociacion Nacional de Instituciones de Educacion en Tecnologias de Informacion A.C.) CONEAU (Consejo Nacional Evaluacion, Acreditacion y Certificacion de la Calidad de la Educacion Universitaria) WASC (Western Association of Schools & Colleges, Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges & Universities) Mexico Peru U.S.A Jul.1 09 ACE (American Council on Education) U.S.A Aug Oct Dec NIAD-UE (National Institute for Academic Degrees-University Evaluation) HEEC (Higher Education Evaluation Center of the Ministry of Education) NIAD-UE, HEEC Japan China Japan, China 30 30

31 IV. International Collaboration Reinforce promotion on university accreditation outside the country - Production of promotion materials - Promotion of Korean university accreditation evaluation outside the country Publish and distribute annual report of university accreditation in English 31

32 32