Skip to main content

The Power of Self-evaluation Based Cross-Sparring in Developing the Quality of Engineering Programmes

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Engineering Education for a Smart Society (GEDC 2016, WEEF 2016)

Abstract

This paper discusses how the quality of engineering education can be improved in practice by using a process of sharing and critique. Starting with a self-evaluation followed by a cross-sparring with critical friends, this new approach has proven successful in initiating change. With a focus on quality enhancement as much as quality assurance, the engagement in and attractiveness of the engineering education are key considerations of the development activities that are inspired by the process. In the process programmes are paired with appropriate partners and, using the self-evaluation as a foundation, the cross-sparring enables each partner the best opportunities to learn from each other. The approach has been developed in an ERASMUS + project involving eight European universities and has been called QAEMP (Quality Assurance and Enhancement Market Place).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. European Commission: Report on progress in quality assurance in higher education. Report to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions (2014). http://ecahe.eu/w/images/e/ee/EU_Report_on_Progress_in_Quality_Assurance_in_Higher_Education_%282014%29.pdf. Accessed 27 Mar 2017

  2. Clark, R., Bennedsen, J., Rouvrais, S., Kontio, J., Heikkinen, K., Georgsson, F., Mathiasdottir, A., Soemundsdottir, I., Karhu, M., Schrey-Niemenmaa, K., Hermon, P.: Developing a robust self evaluation framework for active learning: the first stage of an ERASMUS + Project (QAEMarketPlace4HEI). In: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual SEFI Conference, Orléans, France (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Crawley, E.F., Malmquist, J., Brodeur, D.R., Östlund, S.: Rethinking Engineering Education - The CDIO Approach. Springer, New York (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. http://enaee.eu/eur-ace-system/eur-ace-framework-standards/guidelines-on-programme-self-assessment-review-by-hei-and-accreditation-requirements-of-agency/. Accessed 27 Mar 2017

  5. McCartan, C., Hermon, J., Georgsson, F., Björklund, H., Pettersson, J.: A preliminary case study for collaborative quality enhancement. In: Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku, Finland (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Rouvrais, S., Audunsson, H., Saemundsdottir, I., Landrac, G., Lassudrie, L.: Pairwise collaborative quality enhancement: experience of two engineering programmes ın Iceland and France. In: Proceedings of the12th International CDIO Conference, Turku, Finland (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Clark, R., Thomson, G., Kontio, E., Roslöf, J., Steinby, P.: Experiences on collaborative quality enhancement using cross-sparring between two universities. In: Proceedings of the 12th International CDIO Conference, Turku, Finland (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bennedsen, J., Schrey-Niemenmaa, K.: Using self-evaluations for collaborative quality enhancement. In: Proceedings of the12th International CDIO Conference, Turku, Finland (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Clark, R., Bennedsen, J., Schrey-Niemenmaa, K., Rouvrais, S.: Quality Enhancement in Engineering Education – A Workshop to Explore A Collaborative Framework for Continuous Improvement, WEEF 2015 Conference, Florence, Italy, September 2015

    Google Scholar 

  10. Bennedsen, J., Clark, R., Rouvrais, S., Schrey-Niemenmaa, K.: Using accreditation criteria for collaborative quality enhancement. In: Proceedings of WEEF 2015 Conference, Florence, Italy, September 2015

    Google Scholar 

  11. ERASMUS + QAEMP (Quality Assurance and Enhancement Market Place) 2014–2016. www.cross-sparring.eu

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been funded with support from the European Commission in the context of the 2014–2016 Erasmus + QAEMP (Key Action2, cooperation, innovation and the exchange of good practices). This paper reflects only the views of the authors. The Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the QAEMP project can be found at www.cross-sparring.eu.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katriina Schrey-Niemenmaa .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix A - The 28 Criteria in the Self-evaluation [11]

Appendix A - The 28 Criteria in the Self-evaluation [11]

Full descriptions and rubrics can be found in the Self-Evaluation Manual (www.cross-sparring.eu).

  1. (1)

    A holistic view of learning

  2. (2)

    Appropriate learning outcomes (developed from required competences)

  3. (3)

    An integrated curriculum

  4. (4)

    A sound subject foundation

  5. (5)

    Active learning approaches

  6. (6)

    Appropriate workspaces and equipment

  7. (7)

    Personal and interpersonal skills development

  8. (8)

    Faculty development (knowledge and teaching)

  9. (9)

    Learner assessment (type, level and amount)

  10. (10)

    Programme evaluation to promote continuous improvement

  11. (11)

    Links to employability are made throughout

  12. (12)

    Collaborative learning

  13. (13)

    Additional support for learning

  14. (14)

    Technology to engage students in learning

  15. (15)

    Feedback is timely, appropriate and formative

  16. (16)

    Research is used in teaching

  17. (17)

    Student participation in programme review and development

  18. (18)

    Wider stakeholder input to programme development

  19. (19)

    Student retention and progression is monitored

  20. (20)

    Work placements are promoted

  21. (21)

    Problem solving opportunities (links to the research process)

  22. (22)

    Design projects are integrated throughout the programme

  23. (23)

    Equality, diversity and equal opportunity considerations are part of the programme team thinking

  24. (24)

    Professional attributes and topical considerations are part of the programme

  25. (25)

    Evidence of educational scholarship by faculty

  26. (26)

    Effective communication with students

  27. (27)

    Different learning styles are taken account of

  28. (28)

    Teaching resources

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Schrey-Niemenmaa, K. et al. (2018). The Power of Self-evaluation Based Cross-Sparring in Developing the Quality of Engineering Programmes. In: Auer, M., Kim, KS. (eds) Engineering Education for a Smart Society. GEDC WEEF 2016 2016. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 627. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60937-9_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60937-9_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60936-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60937-9

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics