Quality Management for Courses

The University of Basel ensures and develops the quality of its courses through a system of three closed feedback loops, as follows:

• Feedback loop one: Responsibility for course quality is first and foremost overseen by lecturers, who design and hold lessons, and regularly reflect on them through discussions with students.
• Feedback loop two: The faculty or department has a responsibility to ensure the implementation of quality management for courses in its organizational unit, and in the event of critical course evaluations in particular, to seek discussions with lecturers, to agree on measures and to check their implementation and success.
• Feedback loop three: The President’s Office is responsible for the university-wide implementation of quality management for courses, in compliance with uniform framework conditions and (inter)national standards, and in exchange with the faculties.

To ensure a systematic dialogue on course quality between the above-mentioned primary stakeholders, and in order to embrace and review measures, the feedback loops include firmly established processes and avenues for discussion (feedback, discussion among staff members, annual teaching evaluations). An evidential basis for the reflections and measures is ensured by clearly defined bases for discussion; specifically by (a) the evaluation of student course assessments for faculties or departments aggregated per course or (b) per year, and by (c) uniformly structured annual reports on the faculties’ quality and quality management of courses.

Questionnaires, which are tailored to faculty, subject and course type-specific quality criteria, serve as an instrument for recording student assessments on course quality (basis: Rindermann’s multifactorial model of course quality). These are administered by the decentralized evasys administrators in the faculties and departments. Every course is evaluated at least every third time it is held. The evaluation takes place in one of the last classes of the course, depending on the circumstances, through students filling out a virtual or paper-based questionnaire. As a result of the time made available in the contact hour, the response rate and quality of results is kept high and signal that student feedback is important to the faculty staff. In the subsequent contact hour, lecturers report back on the key findings and actions, if any, to the students, and if necessary use the opportunity for questions or comments. Teachers can request a voluntary course evaluation at any time (contact: the responsible decentralized evaluation coordinator) or if necessary use other tools, such as focus group discussions or peer observation.

In the case of critical course evaluations, a discussion with the Dean of Studies in the faculty or with the chairperson of the teaching committee in the department is mandatory. The results are also discussed in aggregated form by the relevant committee responsible for teaching at the faculty and departmental level (teaching committee (UK), curriculum committee (CK) curriculum and examination commission (CPK), examination commission (PK)), and by the Deans of Studies in the annual discussion on teaching with the Vice President for Education. If necessary, measures are then agreed. Additionally, the annual meeting reports on the implementation of quality management for courses in the faculties and discusses measures for the further development of the quality management system and/or the quality of teaching. 

The quality management for courses was established from 2010 to 2017 at the University of Basel in a university-wide project, designed according to the principles of systemic organizational development. The Vice President for Education's specialist office for evaluation and the General Secretariat's current EvaSys Surveys Services, supported by a sounding board from all faculties and groups, developed a concept and university-wide project standards (framework document) that comply with (inter)national standards and ensure uniform framework conditions at the University of Basel. Additionally, the processes and instruments for each faculty and/or department were developed using participative methods in compliance with university-wide standards.

A cycle consisted of the following steps: (a) project presentation and stocktaking, (b) implementation of separate workshops with students, teaching staff and teaching committees, with the involvement of the administration to record the subject-specific quality expectations and optimal process design, (c) development of the required questionnaires, (d) introduction of the evaluation and survey software EvaSys, designation and training of the decentralized evaluation coordination, (e) implementation of a pilot program, (f) evaluation of the experience gained, and optimization and implementation of the processes and instruments, where applicable. These are recorded for each faculty or department in an information sheet, with a timetable, specific modalities and contact details for the attention of lecturers.

Contact

Publications