Collaborative quality enhancement in engineering education: an overview of operational models at a programme level

Jens Bennedsen, Siegfried Rouvrais (), Janne Röslof, Juha Kontio, Fredrik Georgsson and Charly Mccartan
Additional contact information
Jens Bennedsen: Aarhus School of Engineering - Aarhus University [Aarhus]
Siegfried Rouvrais: PASS - Process for Adaptative Software Systems - IMT Atlantique - IMT Atlantique - IMT - Institut Mines-Télécom [Paris] - IRISA-D4 - LANGAGE ET GÉNIE LOGICIEL - IRISA - Institut de Recherche en Informatique et Systèmes Aléatoires - UR - Université de Rennes - INSA Rennes - Institut National des Sciences Appliquées - Rennes - INSA - Institut National des Sciences Appliquées - UBS - Université de Bretagne Sud - ENS Rennes - École normale supérieure - Rennes - Inria - Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique - CentraleSupélec - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - IMT Atlantique - IMT Atlantique - IMT - Institut Mines-Télécom [Paris], IMT Atlantique - INFO - Département Informatique - IMT Atlantique - IMT Atlantique - IMT - Institut Mines-Télécom [Paris]
Janne Röslof: University of Turku
Juha Kontio: University of Turku
Fredrik Georgsson: Umeå University = Umeå Universitet
Charly Mccartan: QUB - Queen's University [Belfast]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: This article discusses the tension between quality assurance and quality enhancement in engineering education at a programme level. It acknowledges that accreditation has evolved for many years, but does not agilely support innovation or implement changes in educational programmes. Existing quality assurance systems, institutional collaboration networks, as well as new innovative quality enhancement models and processes are described, contrasted and synthesised. Quality enhancement is analysed based on its function as a source of inspiration and dissemination of good practice. The article reflects on a novel and more collaborative approach to quality enhancement, built on the foundations of specific pedagogical standards and rubrics (e.g. CDIO). One solution leading to real continuous quality enhancement could be flexible and agile evaluation processes. These are founded on measurement and rating frameworks and complemented with quality assurance for engineering education. Incremental enhancement is based on relevant needs identified collaboratively between programmes.

Keywords: EFQM; Iso; Spice; Speic; Quality assurance; Quality; Quality evaluation; Quality of experience; Cti; Abet; Enaee; Eurace; Enqa; Assessement; Active learning; Pedagogy; Pedagogie; Enseignement; Enseignement supérieur; Ingenieur; Engineering education; Educational programmes; Models; Processes; Cdio; quality enhancement; cross-sparring; accreditation; curriculum development (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018-02
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01759082v1
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Published in European Journal of Engineering Education, 2018, ⟨10.1080/03043797.2018.1443058⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://hal.science/hal-01759082v1/document (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01759082

DOI: 10.1080/03043797.2018.1443058

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().