In accordance with the new Quality Code for Higher Education (2019), Ghent University places great store by the input of external parties on its study programmes' education policy and quality assurance. Each study programme is expected to take a number of actions, that allows them to embed a wide-ranging external perspective in a structured manner. 

What Are Minimal Requirements? 

The entire set of actions undertaken by a study programme in the context of the external perspective should meet the following three criteria:

1. Each study programme seeks out a broad range of external stakeholders (minimally including the professional field, alumni, and international peers) to review its content-related components – including (at the very least) its programme competencies (learning outcomes), curriculum, assessment and exit level.  
2. On an annual basis, the Study Programme Committee is to discuss the results of programme-specific surveys of the professional field, or of other structurally involved stakeholders, and of institutionally organised alumni surveys, as they become available in the Education Monitor via UGI. These surveys form a starting point for self-reflection and analysis. 
3. The programme is to conduct a programme review. This entails that at least 3 international, independent, academic peers with a broad view on the programme, are asked to review programme content quality, either individually or in a panel. Such a programme review is to take place once every 6 years (or in the context of a major curriculum revision). The focus of the programme review is to check whether or not programme competencies (learning outcomes), curriculum, assessment, and exit level are up to standard. 

Peers are preferably international authorities in the field. The Education Department (DOWA) developed a template with target questions. The use of the template is optional. 

Independent peers are experts who are transparent on any existing collaboration ties with the study programme that is under review. They sign a declaration of impartiality and independence stating that they will conduct the programme review in an independent and objective manner. A template is provided by the Education Department (DOWA). 

 

The Professional Field and Alumni Perspective vs. the Perspective of International Peers

The Quality Code for Higher Education identifies two stakeholder groups as mandatory sounding boards for reviewing study programmes' content-related components:

• the professional field, alumni, employers' organisations;
• international peers/experts.

It goes without saying that these stakeholders groups all carry a different expertise and different perspectives:  

Regional vs. International

• professional field partners and (most) alumni often represent locally/regionally embedded organisations and companies, and thus offer local/regional perspectives;
• international peers, with a variety of possible affiliations, offer an international perspective.

Perspective of the Professional Field vs. Academic Perspective

• professional field representatives/partners can introduce a job market point of view into the study programme. Among other things, they can provide information on the employability and professional aptitude of graduates. 
• international peers can review a study programme's content from an academic perspective. 

Feedback vs. Programme Review

• study programmes are expected to gather feedback from the professional field and alumni in a structural manner;
• study programmes are also expected to seek out international peers for a thorough content-based programme review. Such international experts are well-placed to determine whether or not a programme's content meets international standards, and whether or not the programme is sufficiently evidence-based. 

Study programmes are asked to gather external input, reflect on this input, and then determine whether or not they will act upon it. 

Gathering and reflecting on the input of (all the above types of) external parties is mandatory. However, well-substantiated arguments can be made why that input does not (immediately) result in changes to the study programme.  

Possible Actions to Take in the Context of the External Perspective: An Overview

There is a variety of possibilities for embedding the external perspective in study programmes' (quality improvement) policy. The idea is for study programme committees to selects a number of actions that, taken together, meet the criteria mentioned above. 

Engaging the Professional Field or Alumni

• establish a professional committee / advisory board;
• invite external members into existing bodies of consultation;
• use existing network events with the professional field to add a separate feedback moment;
• organise specific alumni events or events with professional field, and add a discussion with a quality assurance component;
• organise alumni surveys or professional field surveys (@);
• organise surveys for other external parties involved in education (@);
• organise focus group sessions with recent graduates / alumni (@);
• involve the professional field in the Master’s dissertation process, or invite representatives of the professional field as members of Master's dissertation juries;

Actions Towards Realising an International Programme Review

• use international frameworks as a guideline for programme reform, or as a touchstone for an existing programme (@)
• have a selection of Master’s dissertations reviewed by international peers, or include an external peer in the jury of each dissertation (@)
• survey incoming/outgoing students (@)
• connect a programme review to activities in the context of teaching staff mobility 
• connect a programme review to an international conference
• organise a meeting with international partner programmes to conduct a programme review (@)
• organise a working visit at an international partner programme to conduct a programme review
• pursue an international accreditation

The External Perspective and its Link with Ghent University's Strategic Education Objectives ‘Stakeholder Involvement’ and ‘Internationalisation’

Programmes have a lot to gain by creating synergies between the external perspective for quality assurance purposes and existing processes related to the Strategic Education Objectives mentioned above.  

Links with a Broader Stakeholder Policy

Stakeholder involvement (cf. the Education Monitor) implies that study programmes run processes and undertake actions by means of which internal and external stakeholders are systematically includes in education (policy) decisions. 

These processes and actions aimed at including externals (professional field, alumni, …) can have different end goals, for example:

• exchanging information;
• setting up a joint (research) project;
• installing or supervising learning processes (e.g. in the context of work placements, Community Service Learning)
• formulating advice for the study programme committee;
• assessing the programme’s intented learning outcomes; 
• …

Many programmes already have ongoing processes that involve externals in their education practice and/or policy-making. In the context of quality assurance, these channels prove to be an excellent means to review essential content-related components (e.g. the curriculum) as well. 

If there is a need for a new or updated plan on stakeholder involvement in the study programme, this exercise should be approached in a systematic manner. The following steps might give some direction: 

1. determine the needs and roles of external stakeholders vis-à-vis the programme; 
2. determine the needs of the programme; 
3. analyse and select relevant stakeholders; 
4. make a well-considered choice of methodology (or a combination of methodologies) that will allow for a structured dialogue with external stakeholders; 
5. assess the policy plan, and revise where necessary. 

Links with Internationalisation

To come to an international external perspective, programmes can set up new actions, or they can rely on (existing) initiatives in the context of internationalisation. Initiatives related to staff mobility as well as student mobility offer various possibilities. 

Appropriate international peers or partner programmes can also be identified within existing/known networks. Among the possibilities are:

• networks at the level of the programme, the faculty, or the institution;
• networks of similar international programmes;
• international research networks

The DOWA Internationalisation Relations Office offers faculties various means that can be used for the programme review: 

Means	What can they be used for?
Organisational support (OS) in the framework of Erasmus+ Budget for mobility outside of the Erasmus zone (the former "OIM")	For preparatory visits, welcoming activities, etc.
Staff mobility for teaching or for training in the framework of Erasmus+ Budget for mobility outside of the Erasmus zone (the former "Birak-funds")	Primarily for the support of lecturers who have a short-term teaching assignment at a partner institution. Via similar channels, financial support for ATP staff is also available for visits to partner institutions or participation in organised staff weeks.
Calls for cooperation in the framework of ENLIGHT	For teaching- and research-related collaboration initiatives between two or more ENLIGHT universities
Calls for cooperation in the framework of the 3i University Network	For teaching- and research-related collaboration initiatives with the universities of Lille and Kent
The Regional Platforms of Ghent University offer opportunities for support	For specific types of collaboration between Ghent University and a partner institution in one of the countries/regions involved

 

The regulations governing budget expenditure also allow for these funds to be used for improving the quality of collaboration with the institutions involved, provided that the Faculty Committee Internationalisation, and, if relevant, the International Relations Office have approved this. 

 

Embedding the External Perspective: Specific Examples 

In the event that a Programme Committee has selected and initiated various actions to embed the external perspective, what can the sum total of these actions eventually look like? What is “sufficient” to meet the three criteria? Three fictional examples: