Quality Monitoring Plan

How the Plan guides to results?

ECA has created “Updated Quality Policy Plan of Teaching and Learning” and Study Department reports on the progress and performance details within its frame. The Senate approves teachers and staff members who are responsible for its implementation in systematic and regular way after commonly decided projects in different educational plans are accepted.

It is important to agree on action plans annually because then unexpected circumstances or opportunities can be integrated flexibly. One example.

During the COVID-19 pandemic there were jointly determined priorities at the Academy and network levels (for excellent networking in emergency situation we were praised by Mrs. Sigrid Schraml, Secretary General of European Commission networking organization “European Center for Workers’ Questions” (EZA). Before that updated action plans were embedded in rather static position and previously determined strategic goals proved to be an asset. Up until now, the combination of annual updates within the stable, strategic goals is not embedded in procedures or customs of the Academy and study programs. In the following period, we would like to make the timeline management and prioritizing of actions and the monitoring of effects more systematically.

We monitor our policy implementation from the qualitative and quantitative aspects. Qualitative and quantitative monitoring are essential components of both the monitoring of the policy implementation and the actual policy assessment. All teachers and students receive information through Senate and Study Department. At the end of each semester data about quality is distilled showing the characteristics of study programs; additionally at the end of each study year a number of analyses are carried out by independent sociologist from Latvian University and presented to the Senate. Analysis is discussed together with the Study Department and program directors.

New ideas for development are agreed upon.

The study program survey assessment takes place in the LOGOS framework. The framework is strongly monitored. This leads to Regulations which must be implemented both on teaching staff and study program levels. We evaluate the teacher’s Self-Evaluation Reports at the end of each study year in order to understand on what level teachers understand the “Shared Ownership” concept. The Report reveals qualitative educational characteristics. Also we also gather qualitative and quantitative data from students. It offers strong added value.

At the end of every study year the study program director draws up a Self-Assessment in brief of the study program, but every fourth year he/she draws it in consultation with students, teaching staff, staff members and external parties. Last year the Study Department also experimented with discussion on study programs with international experts from Finland and DrHC Representatives’ experts. We had an international panel in which we handled educational quality assurance within the ECA conduct. At the study program level, too, the external perspective can be introduced within the current LOGOS cycle.

How this can be organized and monitored in the next period, will be discussed at the Senate.

The topic reflects the effect of policy actions because sometimes close monitoring is necessary, sometimes it can be different. An example of this is the introduction of the “Landmark Route”. Another case is the development of the students’ conferences after internships. Conferences turn into Labs of innovations in applied research. Some aspects of the Labs are still unclear and they will be discussed at the Senate. We use this method always when some academic progress is needed. Monitoring of the policy quality works systematically and it guides further policy actions.

On a broader level such topics as internationalization and interdisciplinarity or innovations in teaching the Study Department gathers ambitions from teachers, students, employers etc., and organizes reports on those topics in the Senate. The Study Department also reports on minimal achievements and determines indicators needed to monitor growth within policy actions deserved. The Study Department, study program directors, Senate have to be clearly informed about innovative interdisciplinary etc. ideas establishment.

In such way systematic approach to innovation and quality recommendations come into actions. From the content of innovations we see that this approach is a challenge. The main thing in introduction of innovations and interdisciplinarity is motivation of teachers and students. If teachers and students understood the goal of joy to strengthen active and innovative learning, the quality policy is not that complicated anymore.

For the next period evaluation of quality will be a priority.