Academic Director Lasse Gerrits on the quality assurance approach at UMD

Quality assurance is more than just preparing for an external review. It is about linking internal evaluations and external assessments into a single continuous system. Prof. Lasse Gerrits demonstrates how the UMD programme has implemented this in practice: from a critical interim evaluation in 2021, to a conscientiously executed improvement plan, to an upcoming accreditation. In doing so, the programme demonstrates how internal and external factors reinforce each other through ownership.

The panel for the interim evaluation of the Urban Management and Development (UMD) programme in 2021 was quite critical, which led to a comprehensive improvement plan for the programme. 

Can you tell us how you approached such a large operation? 

Lasse: 'I had only just started as Director of Education when a programme evaluation was already scheduled. Still, it came at the right time. I had made a few observations about the programme that I wanted to address, and there were also external developments, such as the possible loss of subsidies, that made it necessary to review the programme's profile. We deliberately asked the committee not only to check whether everything was in order for the next accreditation, but above all to think along with us about the further development of the programme, as a "critical friend": Help us identify what we can improve. 

They were certainly critical, but their points were justified. Following the evaluation, the faculty asked us to draw up an improvement plan. We took the panel's feedback to heart and drew up an improvement plan so that we could regain control of quality through a systematic approach.'

What was your approach to getting everyone involved on board?

'A lot had to be changed at once, which isn't always fun, and not everyone is able or willing to go along with it. Sometimes something has grown historically, but you can no longer shape it that way. That means saying goodbye to old routines and habits. It helps to explain why change is necessary, but for some colleagues, such changes will remain difficult.

Due to a shift in the NVAO's evaluation schedule, there will be eight years between accreditations for UMD, rather than six. This means that by the time the next accreditation comes around, you will already have been working on implementing the improvement plan for some time.'

How do you ensure that internal and external evaluations really contribute to the development of the programme?

'I view it as a coherent system, a logical cycle of interim evaluation, drawing up an improvement plan, implementation, followed by an external assessment, and further development. This ensures that quality improvement is continuously brought to the fore. We now work with a long-term plan that looks two years ahead, including for operational matters. The successful restructuring of operational matters gave us more peace of mind and space to think about what the new curriculum should look like.'

So, essentially, the focus shifted from "meeting requirements" to "further developing quality"?

'Over the past three years, we have conscientiously implemented the improvement plan and monitored its effects. We know exactly what actions we have taken for each standard in the assessment framework and what the current status is. In the upcoming accreditation, attention will naturally be paid to reflecting on everything we have adjusted, improved and developed in response to the interim evaluation. However, our approach with an improvement plan also creates room for a development-oriented approach to the assessment. After all, education is constantly evolving.'

You are now monitoring much more than before: pass rates, grade distributions, fraud cases with AI, and more. 

How do you ensure that you don't drown in data but pick up the right signals for improvement?

'We do this by not just looking back and assessing what happened yesterday, because then the past becomes your benchmark. We don't just want to talk to those who have decided to study with us, but also to those who have decided not to study with us. External signals are very important in this regard. Our colleagues have large networks, which means they are in close contact with colleagues from all over the world and are aware of initiatives that are emerging elsewhere. Monitoring forms the basis for the discussion. Every month, we hold a meeting for the entire staff, where we discuss various topics.'

One of the topics in the Interim Education Evaluation was the balance between accessibility, studyability and academic level. After that, you tightened the admission requirements, reduced the number of credits and overhauled the curriculum. That's a lot to take on at once. 

How do you monitor that? What signals do you use to assess whether you are on the right track?

'We use various indicators to keep our finger on the pulse. An important signal about the studyability of the programme comes from the students themselves. Previously, there were many complaints about the programme, not because they found it too difficult, but because the workload was high and disproportionately distributed across the programme. Now we see that the number of complaints has plummeted to almost zero. For us, that is an important indicator.'

You have regularly asked students for feedback. 

How do you ensure that student feedback is not only collected, but also actually leads to change?

'Student feedback is very important to us. In addition to course evaluations and discussions with Student Representatives, we also receive informal feedback. This happens very naturally and spontaneously. The lines of communication are short and the distance between lecturers and students is small. For us, it is natural to stay in dialogue and listen to what students think.

In addition, our alumni network is invaluable, providing us with valuable insights. We regularly ask them to look back on their education: what influenced them, what worked well for them and what did not. Because some time has passed, they have a different perspective. I recently spoke to an alumna who told me that she really hated the statistics courses during her studies, but in hindsight she is extremely grateful that she learned them so well. She now benefits greatly from them."

There were other factors involved in the need to revamp the programme. The discontinuation of the Orange Knowledge Programme led to a decline in student numbers. 

How do you use such an external "crisis"?

'It is, of course, unfortunate that the subsidy was withdrawn, but it did not come as a complete surprise. Moreover, it coincided with the questions we were already asking ourselves: how do we keep our programme financially stable and future-proof? We have already responded to this in recent years by introducing more structure into the programme, working more efficiently where possible and making choices. 

As an institute, we must also regularly ask ourselves: Are we doing the right things? Educational needs are shifting worldwide. Students from countries such as India or Africa, who used to come to us, can now find good master's programmes in their own region. They no longer need to come to the Netherlands specifically for this. We are therefore focusing on other target groups and entering into different relationships with knowledge institutes elsewhere in the world.'

What are your three most important tips for successfully implementing major quality improvements?

'There is no single piece of advice that I can give you that will guarantee success. It is a collaborative effort, it is very labour-intensive, it involves a lot of discussion, accepting that it is a step forward and sometimes a step back. 

Quality assurance is never "finished", Lasse emphasises in conclusion. 'It's about creating a culture in which improvement is so self-evident that an interim evaluation is no longer a wake-up call, but simply a moment in an ongoing conversation.'