Historical landmarks : the start

The use of Profiles and Meta
Profiles in degree programmes
Brussels, 21 November 2012
Julia González, University of Deusto
Outline of the presentation
Historical landmarks : the start
Further widening and deepening
Present work
Future developments
Outline of the presentation
Historical landmarks: the start
Further widening and deepening
Present innovations
Future developments
Historical landmarks: the start
In the year 2000 a group of over one
hundred European academics felt
the need to address a challenge
and decided to work together to
create an approch to degree
development: design and delivery
Historical landmarks: the start
In the year 2000 a group of over one
hundred European academics felt
the need to address a challenge
and decided to work together to
create an approch to degree
development: design and delivery
Historical landmarks: the start
In the year 2000 a group of over one
hundred European academics felt
the need to address a challenge
and decided to work together to
create an approch to degree
development: design and delivery
a group of over one hundred European academics
• They ….belong to a region, soon to be joint by other
groups ready to work with the same spirit
• came from excellent universities from every country of
the European Union
• were selected by their universities and departments
• were hands-on people, with passion for HE, prepared
to give time, share knowlegde and difficulties, with
commitment to the task
… and decided to work together
• always collaborative action, joint learning and joint
ownership
• always based on common vission, capacity for peer
leastening
• always based on debate,
debate respect and valuing of
diversity while searching for commonalities
• always based on developing consensus beyond
borders, of getting to the essential
Historical landmarks: the start
In the year 2000 a group of over one
hundred European academics felt
the need to address a challenge
and decided to work together to
create an approch to Degree
development: design and delivery
Definir
A coherent system of
building degrees was
jointly developed
… to create and aproch to degree development:
design and delivery
• through intense listening and understanding, the
different pieces came togher
• they associated to create, to think anew , to buildbuild
propositive thinking and action
• developing common language, understood and shared
by those involved in outcomes / processes in HE
• aware that design and delivery were two critical sides
of the same coin
Historical landmarks: the start
In the year 2000 a group of over one
hundred European academics felt
the need to address a challenge
and decided to work together to
create an approch to Degree
development: design and delivery
… felt the need to address a challenge:
THE CHALLENGE OF RECOGNITION
If students were to move, experience and create identity
If professionals were to move freely to work
If diversity was critical for Europe: common and diverse
Comparable and transparent degrees
Need to agree in points of reference-reference common
understanding
… felt the need to address a challenge:
THE CHALLENGE OF RELEVANCE
Consultation with society a permanent feature
Employability a constant concern
Social responsibility and commitment
Answer to social needs
Inclusion of different socio-economic groups
… felt the need to address a challenge:
THE CHALLENGE OF QUALITY
Seen as an opportunity for quality
The debate on quality
The meanings of quality: excellence, fit for purpose..
shared meanings
Programme quality
Transparency and consistency
Outline of the presentation
Historical landmarks : the start
Further widening and deepening
Present work
Future developments
Further widening and deepening
As joint work continued different regions
contributed to the Tuning approach: Australia
strengthen the initial development in
evaluation, USA reflected on evidence based
impact, Latin America, Russia, Africa worked
on profiles towards further simplification and
structuring….credits and future thinking.
Outline of the presentation
Historical landmarks : the start
Further widening and deepening
Present work
Future developments
Three clusters
• profile
• programme
• learners process
Profiling
• designing horizonts
• listening to emerging
realities
• engaging in future
thinking
IA
C
SO
L
EE
N
S
D
R
M EF
ET ER
A E
PR N
O CE
FI P
LE O
IN
TS
A Meta – profile is a group´s
representation of the structure and
combination of competences which gives
identity to a thematic area
The meta-profiles are referential elements
and they are always mental constructions,
destined to reflect and analyse possible
classifications behind the reference points
Transversales
(Ser)
Geology LA
2 – 13 – 10
Competencias
Específicas
Competencias
Genéricas
17
9
26
V03
V05
V06-V07
V16
V17
V09–V13–V11–V18
V02
V04-V01-V08-V12-V10
V14
Básicas
(Saber)
V15
Aplicadas
(Hacer)
COMPETENCIAS GENÉRICAS
Factor 1: Proceso de Aprendizaje [SABER]
1. Capacidad de abstracción, análisis y síntesis
2. Capacidad de aprender y actualizarse
3. Capacidad crítica y autocrítica
4. Habilidades para buscar, procesar y analizar información
5. Capacidad de comunicación oral y escrita
Factor 2: Valores Sociales [SABER SER]
6. Compromiso con su medio socio-cultural
7. Valoración y respeto por la diversidad y multiculturalidad
8. Responsabilidad social y compromiso ciudadano
9. Compromiso con la preservación del medio ambiente
10. Compromiso ético
Factor 3: Contexto tecnológico e internacional [SABER HACER]
11. Capacidad de comunicación en un segundo idioma
12. Habilidad para trabajar en contextos internacionales
13. Habilidades en el uso de las tecnologías de la información
Factor 4: Habilidades interpersonales [SABER SER Y SABER HACER]
14. Capacidad para tomar decisiones
15. Habilidades interpersonales
16. Capacidad de motivar y conducir hacia metas comunes
17. Capacidad de trabajo en equipo
18. Capacidad para organizar y planificar el tiempo
19. Capacidad para actuar en nuevas situaciones
DE 27 SE REDUJO A 19
Matriz de
competencias
genéricas vs
competencias
específicas
CG/CE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
FACTOR 1:
FACTOR 2:
FACTOR 3:
FACTOR 4:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
X X X X X
X
X X X
X
X X X X X X X X X X
X X
X X
X X X X
X X X X X X X X X X X X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
X
X
X X
14 15 16
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PROCESO APRENDIZAJE
VALORES SOCIALES
CONTEXTO TECNOLÓGICO E INTERNACIONAL
HABILIDADES INTERPERSONALES
X
X
X
X
X
Mapa de metaperfil con una
coincidencia
mayor al 50%
Contexto tecnológico
e internacional
11G 12G
Proceso de
aprendizaje
13G
1G 2G 3G
4G 5G
1E
3E 5E 9E
10E 11E
2E
6E
8E
16E
14E
7E 13E
6G 7G
8G 9G 10G
15E
4E
12E
14G 15G
16G 17G 18G
19G
Habilidades
interpersonales
Valores
sociales
FU
TU
R
E
TR
EN
D
S
TY S
I
S H
R
T
E
G
IV
N EN
U TR
S
TS
IN
R
M EF
ET ER
A E
PR N
O CE
FI P
LE O
FU
TU
R
E
TR
EN
D
S
REAL PROFILE
IA
C
SO
L
EE
N
S
D
TY S
I
S H
R
T
E
G
IV
N EN
U TR
S
Cognitive Competences
Professional
Competences
Interpersonal
Competences
Civic
Competences
Methodological
Competences
Practical Competences
Cognitive Competences
Professional
Competences
Interpersonal
Competences
Civic
Competences
Methodological
Competences
Practical Competences
Cognitive Competences
Professional
Competences
Interpersonal
Competences
Civic
Competences
Methodological
Competences
Practical Competences
Cognitive Competences
Professional
Competences
Interpersonal
Competences
Civic
Competences
Methodological
Competences
Practical Competences
Cognitive Competences
Professional
Competences
Interpersonal
Competences
Civic
Competences
Methodological
Competences
Practical Competences
Cognitive Competences
Professional
Competences
Interpersonal
Competences
Civic
Competences
Methodological
Competences
Practical Competences
Programme Design
Level
Length and weight
Theory/practice
Planned Experiences
Teaching and learning
Assessment
Programme evaluation
Programme quality
The learners paths
• Learner centered
• Where is s/he?- the starting point
• Style of learning- Learning process
• Assessment
•
•
•
•
Horizont
Motivation
Strengths
Difficulties
… Deepening
THE CHALLENGE OF RECOGNITION
in relation to profiles
Reference points enriched and discussed in regions
Further understanding between regions - also
metaprofiles
Understanding of differences and commonalities
… Deepening
THE CHALLENGE OF RECOGNITION
in relation to programme
Significant work done in the credit in Latin America
and Russia
Programme design comparative elements
in relation to learners paths
Deepening in tools
… Deepening
THE CHALLENGE OF RELEVANCE
Further systems of consultation
Analysis of future trends in society
Social impact analysis
Analysis of models of relation to enterprise
Social groups engagement
… Deepening
THE CHALLENGE OF QUALITY
Quality as excepcional, perfection,… transformation
Quality in profiles : new profiles for new societies
Quality in the programmeprogramme the translation into the
curriculum and consistency in the delivery
Quality in an learner-centered system: capacity for
transformation and empowerment
Outline of the presentation
Historical landmarks : the start
Further widening and deepening
Present work
Future developments
Future developments
• Widening a number of countries who want to
participate
• The return to EU with an enriched instrument
• Marie Curie: impact evaluation and young researchers
• The Tuning Journal for Higher Education
• Future Trends
• The Tuning family of teachers and learners and
teachers as learners
Thank you for being with us
and for sharing your interest and
commitment to Higher Education