Peer-Assisted Evaluation Scheme) project

IAMU
PEER-ASSISTED
SELF-EVALUATION SCHEME
Launceston, 2014
IAMU PAES
• The main objectives are to enable IAMU
member institutions:
– to improve the quality of academic curriculum,
leading to Certificates of Competency and BSc,
– to improve the learning experience while
maintaining the target learning outcomes,
– to analyse and improve the organizational
aspects of the MET system at the IAMU member
institutions.
IAMU PAES - PROJECT ACTIVITIES
• Project activities:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
PAES Project Plan – completed
Documentation search – completed
Analyse of current practice – completed
Main areas of assessment – identified
Peer-assisted Self Evaluation Form – completed
Pre-initial Scheme test – completed
Site visit 1 – completed
Site visit 2 – completed
Final report – to be completed
PAES
• A tool designed to systematically and
objectively improve the educational process:
– At higher maritime educational institutions,
– Carried out by the colleagues from fellow
institutions,
– Respecting the recognized academic standards,
– Taking into account STCW requirements,
– Respecting available human and other resources,
– When an institution considers it appropriate, and
– In the extent institution considers appropriate.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
• The scheme is expected to:
– be implemented voluntary,
– respect different concepts of quality and
standards of work implemented at different
institutions,
– be based on holistic approach,
– respect cultural differences,
– keep preparative workload to minimum,
– minimize costs of evaluation, and
– provide different modes of implementation.
STANDARDS
• The standards applicable to MET institutions
are:
–
–
–
–
–
Academic standards
National educational legislation
Standards of competence
National maritime legislation
Service standards
WORKFLOW
• Phases:
– self-evaluation,
– verification, and
– validation.
SELF-EVALUATION (PAES Form)
• Consists of:
– Statements describing academic or STCW
standards assumed for each activity,
– Marks of degree of compliance
• (ranging from 0 to 10) for each activity and statement.
SELF-EVALUATION (PAES Form)
• Covers:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Organization and management
Students
Program
Education process
Academic staff and support personnel
Professional training and internships
Facilities and resources
Program objectives and stakeholders
involvement
– Continuing education
SELF-EVALUATION (PAES Form)
SELF-EVALUATION
• To be completed:
– By at least three host institution representatives,
preferably with management experience
– Impartially and independently, one from the
others
– Few weeks before the peers visit
– Referring to the present state of affairs
• Results have to be standardized.
VERIFICATION
• Pre-site visit
– Data collection
– Data analyses
• Site visits
– Subject areas follow PAES Form structure
– Includes short tour of the facilities
– Includes interviews with students and both
academic staff members and supporting staff
members
– Focuses on statements with marks below average
and those with marks differing significantly
VERIFICATION
• Site visit outcomes:
– Report on findings
– Draft Action Plan, (if needed)
• Draft Action Plan should contain, for each
subject area:
– short description of findings, and
– recommended measure(s) to be considered,
• The host institution management is expected to:
– Consider the Draft Action Plan
– Prepare the Implementation Plan(s), including:
• Action items, resources needed, timetable, responsible
persons, etc.
VALIDATION
• Validation includes:
–
–
–
–
–
–
Putting into practice the Implementation Plan
Reporting to the appointed peer(s)
Considerations of developed measures
Preparation of amendments of the Plan
Implementation of additional measures
Verification of the final outcomes
GUIDELINES FOR EXPERTS
• External Peer Panel
– Nomination, background, training
• Preparation for the visit
– Composition, responsibilities, consideration of
specifics (national, cultural, customs and behaviours,
etc.),
– Preparation for the visit (planning)
• On-site activities
– Overall performance (code of conduct, culture,
religion, etc.)
• Post-visit activities
– Reports (fairness, confidentiality)
CONCLUSIONS
• Issues to be considered:
– Certain additional workload will be created
• to management, selected evaluators, heads of
departments and other staff members
– Additional costs will be created
– A minor interruptions of routine activities or
their delays will be caused
• site visit lasts at least two, preferably three working days
CONCLUSIONS
• Benefits:
– Peers bring a lot of international experience.
– Certain educational activities (carried out in a
particular way) may be reconsidered.
– Discussions with peers could provoke a change in
attitude.
– Peers could help to resolve internal professional
disagreements.
– Discussions about possible future developments
and strategic goals could be initiated.
THANK YOU!