Difference between revisions of "Open ECBCheck"
From Learning and training wiki
Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
− | '''4. Peer-Review:''' The peer-review is conducted by two different | + | '''4. Peer-Review:''' The peer-review is conducted by two different organisations, selected by the Administrative Office. The Administrative Office takes into account that there are not conflicting interests. |
− | Each | + | Each reviewer has to evaluate the self-assessment provided by the organization, on the basis of three criteria: |
* Clarity of the information: Is the provided information clearly understandable? | * Clarity of the information: Is the provided information clearly understandable? | ||
− | * Comprehensiveness of the information: | + | * Comprehensiveness of the information: Has all the necessary information been provided to support the self-assessment rating? |
* Validity of the information: Is the rating reasonable in consideration of the proof provided? | * Validity of the information: Is the rating reasonable in consideration of the proof provided? | ||
− | '''5. Peer-Review Report:''' The peer-reviewers issue a report, which | + | '''5. Peer-Review Report:''' The peer-reviewers issue a report, which covers three main areas: |
* Summary of the self-assessment, which includes all the areas where the reviewer disagreed with the auto-evaluation made by the institution. | * Summary of the self-assessment, which includes all the areas where the reviewer disagreed with the auto-evaluation made by the institution. | ||
− | * Recommendation, whether the institute should or should not be awarded | + | * Recommendation, whether the institute should or should not be awarded the certificate. |
− | * Learning report which highlights the reason of the recommendation and contains suggestions for | + | * Learning report which highlights the reason of the recommendation and contains suggestions for improvement. |
The peer-review is submitted to the Administrative Office. | The peer-review is submitted to the Administrative Office. | ||
− | '''6. Awarding Body Decision:''' The awarding body will evaluate the anonymous peer-review report and | + | '''6. Awarding Body Decision:''' The awarding body will evaluate the anonymous peer-review report and decide whether the Open ECBCheck label will be granted. |
− | If the decision is negative, the Awarding Body informs the institute about reason for this decision and provides the learning reports for possible | + | If the decision is negative, the Awarding Body informs the institute about the reason for this decision and provides the learning reports for possible improvement. It is possible to re-apply for the label after one year from the first application. |
Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
− | '''8. Reporting on Results:''' The | + | '''8. Reporting on Results:''' The orgnisation receiving the certification commits to reporting on the achievements and improvements implemented in accordance with the learning report. |
Revision as of 14:35, 24 January 2011
Open ECBCheck | |
Open ECBCheck is a low cost accreditation and quality improvement scheme for E-learning Programmes and institutions in international Capacity Building. It supports capacity building organizations to measure how successful their e-learning programmes are and allows for continuous improvement through self-assessment, peer collaboration and benchmarking. The Open ECBCheck provides a quality label valid for three years, after this period programs and institutions can re-apply in order to re-obtain the label. Certified institutions and programs also commit to reporting improvements made after having received the certification. Open ECBCheck has been developed through a participative process initiated by InWent. This interagency collaboration involves about 25 international capacity building agencies (among which 8 are UN agencies). [1]
CriteriaThe Open ECBCheck is based on a self-assessment exercise followed by a peer-review performed by external agencies (see Process for more information). Both the self-assessment and the peer-review are guided by a set of criteria. The label has two different sets of criteria for the evaluation of a programme or an institution.
Set of Criteria for a Program / Course CertificationThe program/course quality criteria are divided into seven main areas:
Set of Criteria for an Institutional CertificationThe institution quality criteria are organised into four main areas:
MethodsThe Open ECBCheck label makes use of 5 central methods for quality evaluation and validation:
|
Applying for The Open ECB-Check |
ProcessThe Open ECBCheck process is structured into seven distinct steps in which a course or a programme is analysed and evaluated. Applying programmes or institutions benefit from a clear guidance to structure their self-assessment and a comprehensive learning report, result of the peer-review process, which outlines their improvement potential.[2] The steps involved in the Open ECBCheck process are: 0. Inquiry: An organisation interested in obtaining the certification either for the whole institution or for a specific program or course contacts the Open ECBCheck Administration Office (info[at]ecb-check.org).
The peer-review is submitted to the Administrative Office.
DocumentationSelf-Assessment Tool for Courses Self-Assessment Tool for Programmes Additional documents and information on the Open ECBCheck are available on: http://www.qualityfoundation.org/openecbcheck/ |
References
- ↑ OPEN ECBCheck | Quality Label for Capacity Building http://www.qualityfoundation.org/openecbcheck/ (20 October 2010)
- ↑ OPEN ECBCheck | Quality Label for Capacity Building http://www.qualityfoundation.org/openecbcheck/ (20 October 2010)