Stage of Implementation of Quality Assurance Systems in Tvet

STAGE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEMS IN TVET

Analysis of questionnaire responses

Method

A triangulation method needs to include also national level authorities, responsible for the implementation of QA, and ARACIP, CNDIPT in particular.

The instruments used in the present survey need further standardization in order to be implemented on a regular basis for the future. This is particularly relevant for the Schools CQs questionnaire, as it contains too many open questions.

Number of Inspectors involved in the present survey is too limited to establish its relevance and validity, but the number of responses provided (96%) and the content of responses demonstrated its fit for purpose.

The following analysis with recommendations is based on 43 questionnaires returned from schools’ inspectors and 137 from schools (63 from rural schools, and 74 from urban schools).

Analysis

Training for QA

Access to training opportunities - Majority of inspectors included into the survey reported they are trained- 84%;

At the school level, however, a strong need for more training on QA processes and mechanisms especially for the regular teaching staff was expressed, both for rural and urban area schools.

Fitness for purpose - The training, although considered relevant to the QA purposes and to their role in the external monitoring process, still needs improvement, as nearly half of the respondents evaluate it as moderate, and 7% cannot decide.

Ways for improvement –

The issues and problems identified during the monitoring process need to be discussed with TVET managers at various levels – there must be a permanent forum for such discussions;

The scale of the monitoring process is still limited and more people needs to be trained for it, especially from the county level; training for QA should be organized specifically for the counties.

Future training needs to emphasize on writing the external monitoring report and identifying and promoting good practice;

Future Inspectors’ training needs to prepare for action research, writing case studies, drafting practical manuals and organizing local seminars.

Urban area schools’ expressed needs for future training and capacity building include knowledge and experience withQA procedures and in drafting school QA manuals needed; training for newly appointed teachers needed and for QA of study programmes’ delivery.

Rural area schools’ expressed needs for training and capacity building includes Training for preparing the school qualifications for accreditation.

Quality of QA documentation:

There are difficulties with the schools in providing Self-evaluation reports and 35% of Inspectors admit that the reports were unclear, another 28% - that they do not meet the requirements.The reasons may be in the fact that members of the QA committees at schools are frequently changed and new members are not prepared for the kind of job.

Proposals for improvement refer to:

more training on QA for QAC members;

establishment of an inter-assistance network for QA issues;

simplifying the documentation and SER structure required;

publishing on the web of reports on good practices;

implementing measures for institutionalization and professionalization of QAC through providing incentives for QAC members- e.g., releasing them from other activities for a period of time; remunerating their efforts;

Effectiveness of external monitoring

Q9: There is an anonymous recognition of the usefulness of external monitoring and its efficiency in identifying gaps and deficiencies in QA. Still, there is a room for improvement when it deals with highlighting best practice examples in QA. 2 respondents are unable to decide about the ability of external monitoring to help in identifying good practices and 1 respondent admits this process cannot provide this at all. There is also more need for exchange of good practices between the monitoring inspector and the school QA unit.

Visits must become mandatory in the monitoring process, alongside with improved capacity of inspectors and QAC members in designing and implementing QA process and procedures.

Ways for improvement proposed by Inspectors:

Majority suggests to enrich the present mandate of all school inspectors with quality monitoring and the associate change of the legal basis and the RODIS regulation. Some answers suggest that external monitoring suggests at present tensions, while the RODIS procedure is more relaxed in terms of requirements for quality.

Answers suggest that schools are under great pressure in terms of accountability procedures and there is a proposal to streamline various requirements by, for instance, harmonizing the quality monitoring process with the monitoring of strategic planning documents.

Others suggest toinvolve in the external monitoring process quality coordinators alongside the inspectors, as they can more effectively communicate good practice examples and advise on quality issues.

Another proposal for a ‘lighter touch’ approach suggests that annual external monitoring should apply to a random sample of up to 30% of schools only.

Dissemination of good practice:

Here the proposals split in two kinds: proposals for internal dissemination, within the school, and proposals for external dissemination, between schools.

Proposals for internal dissemination include:

Giving more power to individual schools to draft their own procedures for QA and to create and adopt their own plans for improvement;

The school self-evaluation report should be based on reports from the school’s methodological units for subject groups;

Staff development for student-centered learning in all programmes on offer by the school;

Organize mentoring for young teachers

Implement regular feedback from employers and graduates and discuss the results in order to implement plans for improvement.

Proposals for external dissemination include:

QACs should communicate between themselves at county and larger levels;

Inter-assistance networks as an improved communication approach;

Better use of ICT for dissemination purposes;

Improved collaboration with the social environment and the local business in particular, with clear focus on improving the quality of student learning and graduate employability;

Attracting extra funding for improved quality of training through involvement in project development and application process;

Inspectors have considerable opportunity to communicate their observations, experience and good practice examples to other colleagues and to schools. They have a significant role to play in the overall improvement of VET quality.

Inter-assistance Networks:

About 30% of inspectors have experience in Inter-assistance networks, but only half of them had had a chance to implement this experience. Probably this is due to the fact that currently Inter-assistance networks are predominantly based on exchange and communication at subject level small methodological communities (ref. to the same question responses from schools).

Proposals for improvement include:

Providing resources for the Networks and their activities;

VET managers’ commitment to support the networking activities;

Creating VET resource centers;

Involving the business into the networking activities;

Strong support- both financial and methodological- for dissemination of information on good practices needed;

Improved relevance of the legal framework for school collaboration with the business

Main obstacles include:

Lack of resources; Limited use of ICT to assist in school work; limited access to information for rural schools; Lack of funds for school visits and trainings;

Lack of support from the local school authorities;

Lack of relevant legal basis;

Lack of collaboration with stakeholders;

Large distances between coordinating body and coordinated schools;

Lack of motivation;

Resistance to change;

Overburdened school units; overburdened staff, who is qualified for the job

Limited staff qualified for the job – this staff is on a high demand and therefore, constantly busy and overworked.

Immediate actions for improvement:

Streamlining various processes and scheduled activities;

Correlating requirements and activities (e.g., reporting systems) of different bodies (ARACIP, etc.);

Establishing Inter-assistance network;

Attracting resources from the Structural Funds.

4/6/2009

Patricia Georgieva, TA, SQA.

Material produced under Phare 2006 financial support

PHARE TVET RO2006/018-147.04.01.02.01.03.011