ASSESSMENT REPORT Extensive programme assessment

Transcription

ASSESSMENT REPORT
Extensive programme assessment
Bachelor
International Business & Management
Studies
Full time
Hogeschool Inholland
Diemen - Haarlem - Rotterdam
Lange Voorhout 14
2514 ED The Hague
T) ++ 31 70 30 66 800
F) ++31 70 30 66 870
I www.hobeon.nl
E [email protected]
ASSESSMENT REPORT
Extensive programme assessment
Bachelor
International Business & Management
Studies
Full time
Diemen - Haarlem - Rotterdam
Croho registration: 34936
Hobéon Certificering BV
Date
23 January 2013
Audit panel
Drs. W.G. van Raaijen, chair
Mr. G. de Herde
S. Buiyvis, MA
J. Marty
Secretary-co-ordinator:
H.R. van der Made
CONTENTS
1.
GENERAL AND QUANTITATIVE DATA
1
2.
SUMMARY JUDGEMENT
3
3.
INTRODUCTION
9
4.
4.1.
4.2.
4.3.
4.4.
4.5.
4.6.
JUDGEMENT PER STANDARD
Intended learning outcomes
Curriculum
Staff
Services and facilities
Quality Assurance
Assessment and learning outcomes achieved
11
11
14
29
36
41
46
5.
OVERALL CONCLUSION
51
6.
RECOMMENDATIONS
53
ANNEXES
ANNEX I
ANNEX II
ANNEX III
ANNEX IV
ANNEX V
ANNEX VI
ANNEX VII
Overview of judgements
The course’s learning objectives and outcomes
Overview of the Bachelor’s programme
Overview of staff at the three branches
Programme of site-visit
Documents examined
Composition of the audit panel
55
57
59
61
65
67
71
73
1.
GENERAL AND QUANTITATIVE DATA
General data
Institution
Name
Status
Government funded
Outcomes of Institutional
Quality Assessment
Not yet available
Programme
Name of programme in Central
Register of Higher Professional
Education (CROHO)
ISAT-code CROHO
Orientation and level
Number of credits
Variant(s)
Possible new name
Specialisations
Possible new specialisations
Location(s)
Special Quality Feature
Date site-visit
International Business and Management Studies
34936
HBO Bachelor
240
Fulltime
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Amsterdam/Diemen, Rotterdam en Haarlem
N.A.
1st and 2nd of October 2012
©Hobéon Certificering | Assessment Report Extensive Assessment of the Bachelor International Business & Management Studies
UoAS Inholland, v2.01
Quantative data
Table 1: Percentage of drop-outs in first year
Cohort
Fulltime
Diemen
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
31%
34%
51%
28%
56%
33%
Haarlem
24%
35%
29%
69%
6%
27%
Rotterdam
41%
33%
46%
29%
28%
55%
Table 2: Percentage of drop-outs bachelor
Cohort
Fulltime
Diemen
2005
2006
2007
19%
13%
19%
Haarlem
26%
23%
25%
Rotterdam
19%
38%
13%
Cohort
Fulltime
Diemen
2004
2005
2006
53%
65%
60%
Haarlem
42%
53%
62%
Rotterdam
59%
44%
44%
Table 3: Output
Table 4: Teaching staff qualifications
Qualification
Percentage
MA
73,1%
PhD
15,3%
Table 5: Teacher – student ratio
Teacher – student ratio
Ratio
1:27
Table 6: Contact hours
Year of study
Average hrs. p/w
1
20
2
14
3
10
4
10
2.
SUMMARY JUDGEMENT
Like all other IBMS programmes in the Netherlands Inholland’s IBMS course has adopted the
nationally validated set of final qualifications to function as its intended learning outcomes.
The panel considers these adequate in the sense that they reflect the required range of
competencies as well as the level at which they must be acquired. Both internationalisation and
business research methods have been firmly incorporated.
A stronger focus on some qualifications to highlight Inholland’s own vision on the IBMS
programme in the eyes of the panel members would definitely add value.
The programme receives regular input from a Professional Advisory Committee, that should in
the eyes of the panel be strengthened further to cover the entire scope of IBMS at a truly
higher management and international business level. Also, a more structured approach towards
the input from alumni should be seriously considered as this could be a valuable and endless
source for programme improvement and topicality, as well as the foundation of a strong
professional network that continually interacts with staff, students and management.
A more refined and distinctive set of final qualifications to distinguish the Inholland programme
from other IBMS courses in the Netherlands, as well as a more enhanced professional reference
body, would definitely have rendered an ‘excellent’ for Standard 1. As it stands, the panel
awards it a ‘good’.
Curriculum
Since December 2011 the centralized programme has a proper Curriculum Committee in place.
The panel has established that this Committee is the ‘owner’ of the programme and delivers
sensible input, especially with regard to its redesign. The competency based programme offers
a nice variety of courses that focus on the acquisition of the IBMS knowledge base on the one
hand and get students to apply their knowledge in simulated or real professional practice on
the other hand. Projects and scaffolding courses offer a coherent programme, both horizontally
and vertically, i.e. with an increasing degree of complexity being offered and a higher level of
self-reliance being required from the student while the course continues.
The panel has seen good examples of (i) challenging and realistic project assignments, (ii)
placement accounts and (iii) relevant graduation reports that deal with professional issues.
Studying the course descriptions and Hand books the panel has come to the conclusion that by
attaining the learning goals of all course modules students are well-prepared to acquire all of
the intended learning outcomes of the course. A variety of didactic formats are being applied
and all of these tie in nicely with the competency-based approach of the course.
The panel was impressed by the sturdy Study Counselling trajectory being offered. Not just as
an add-on, but firmly intertwined with student’s reflection on his command of the final
qualifications. This process of self-reflection throughout the course culminates in the
presentation and defence of students’ overall portfolios as part of the graduation process and
clearly helps the student to further develop his learning skills. The panel commends the staff on
this feature, which, as yet, it has not seen in operation to such an extent elsewhere and which
appears to be highly appreciated by the students.
Books and literature in use, according to the panel, clearly reflect HBO level. However, the use
of supporting literature should be encouraged more, e.g. through (project)assignments that
challenge students to undertake literature research.
Both the research component and the international component have been incorporated into the
programme. Further enhancements of the research track are underway and the panel strongly
recommends the programme management to make an international placement a mandatory
part of the programme for all students, i.e. Dutch students in particular.
Students appear to work hard, some of them even 40 to 50 hours per week, which is above
average. Still, there were no issues about study (un)feasibility.
Therefore the panel’s overall judgement on the Curriculum reads ‘good’.
Staff
The panel members were impressed by the vision and strategy presented by the course
management and support their views that envisage the development of a strong and attractive
international environment in Diemen/Amsterdam. The panel recommends the management to
go forward with informing their teaching staff in order to obtain full commitment, which now,
unfortunately, is not the case. This, in the eyes of the panel leads to unnecessary commotion
and insecurity.
Policy
As a result of the recent nature of policy decisions at the time of the audit a clear discrepancy
could understandably be noticed between the solidness of the policy documents on the one
hand, and the lack of effectiveness with the implementation on the other.
In the light of a successful transition process to a single International College on one location,
the panel urges the management to pay more attention to issues like work pressure, reenergizing staff, management continuation and focus, as well as communication and culture.
As it turns out now, with still ample room for improvement on the preceding parameters, the
panel rates standard 8 as ‘unsatisfactory’.
Quality
The students to whom the panel spoke were content about the professional know-how and
attitude of their lecturers.
In tune with this, the panel established that the staff as a whole are basically qualified for the
realisation of the curriculum in terms of content, educational expertise and organisation. All of
the staff qualifications from their resumes neatly cover all curriculum component in all
locations.
The element of actual professional knowledge of the international business world needs
attention, as well as the further strengthening of staff to acquire academic abilities, particularly
in the light of the increasing focus within higher professional education on the component of
practice oriented research and the guidance thereof.
Also, in some cases improved staff performance is needed when it comes to class preparations
and the timely delivery of test results.
Size
On the basis of lecturer-to-student ratios alone and the student appreciation of staff availability
as such, the panel considers the number of IBMS staff sufficient to enable the proper execution
of the programme.
Nevertheless, the teams experience high work pressure, which is partly due to the decline in
the number of students, as a consequence of which there is less volume for fixed educational
tasks. Change of programme management in various locations has also hindered the smooth
execution of some of the educational processes and the high work pressure experienced by
staff is also down to the revision of the assessment system (see Standard 16) and the
tightening up of the WHW requirements.
Also, the uncertainty about the future of Inholland UoAS and the possible consequences of the
reorganization in view of the developments concerning the Inholland International College have
had a significant impact on the IBMS team.
These HRM issues require enhanced management attention and possibly some measures in the
field of temporary additional workforce, which has already been incidentally granted as some of
the lecturers confirmed.
On the one hand, the panel noted some failures in the execution of HR policies, causing issues
that need swift attention, but on the other hand observed a well-equipped and appreciated staff
of an effective size, who work hard and are committed to their students. Considering that
aspects of staff quality and staff size outweigh the aspect of effectiveness of staff policy, the
panel’s judgement on the Course Staff as a whole reads ‘satisfactory’.
By and large, the panel concludes that the facilities, which comprise building, classrooms,
project rooms, language laboratories, audio-visual provisions, comply with the general
standards that may be expected of a University of Applied Sciences and are suitable for the
execution of an IBMS programme. Even the small library contains English literature that caters
for IBMS students. However, the panel did not detect any English periodicals on Business
Management. It considers these an absolute necessity for an international business course.
The course provides all the course details in a timely manner and in an accessible form. Both
panel discussions and results of questionnaires show that the students are content about the
quality of the tutoring and the provision of information.
Therefore, the panel judgement on ‘Services and Facilities’ reads ‘good’.
Quality Assurance
Inholland and thus IBMS has a proper evaluation system in place that acquires information
from all relevant stakeholders on the quality and topicality of the programme and all other
areas of Quality Assurance. The panel noticed that staff members and students are invited to
give feedback on a regular basis. The recent improvement plan, particularly related to the
WHW, is an example of the effectiveness of the programme’s QA system.
Evaluation data are properly analysed and lead to actions for improvement. However, in order
to achieve the set target rating ‘good’ on all parameters (> 3.5) some work will still have to be
done. One item in particular seems to need attention: satisfaction rates of disabled students in
Diemen and Rotterdam appear to be rather poor. The panel recommends some further
investigation into the reasons behind these weak results.
Considering the course has a solid QA system in place, that covers all stakeholders involved as
well as all relevant areas of evaluation, at the same time delivering data that demonstrably
lead to improvements, the panel rates the school’s overall Quality Assurance as ‘good’.
In general the school has a solid system of tests and exams in place in assessing the
achievement of curriculum outcomes. It renders valid and reliable tests and examinations.
Testing criteria/requirements are clear to the students. The teaching staff is conscious of and
applies safeguards to manage the risk of so-called free-riding practices in project assessments.
Also, the work field is involved in the assessment of students’ professional skills.
The programme offers a nice range of test formats that tie in very well with the didactic
approach of the programme. The panel has seen both interim exams on knowledge as well as
integral competency assessments, which all comply with the required format and level. One can
see that a lot has been done over the past years to enhance the quality of assessments, for
which the staff should be commended.
With regard to the final thesis the panel suggests to reduce the number of assessment forms
and to re-introduce ample room for substantiation of assessors' judgements. The newly
introduced set of forms breaks down the criteria nicely, but at the same time invites assessors
to fill them out rather mechanically. This does not deliver any transparency as to how the
judgement was formed, as was the case with the previous assessment forms. It demonstrates
that sometimes not all improvements are for the better.
Moreover the panel detected differences in the interpretation of assessment criteria between
examiners. This should be dealt with right away. Either by issuing strict guidelines from the
Examination Board and/or by organizing so called obligatory calibration sessions with all
examiners. The panel suggests Phd staff members to play a role in these intervision meetings.
The Examination Board has been recomposed recently and should still be brought into their
required position as a sparring partner of the management, showing that they are in the lead
and have full control over the examination process and the final outcomes of the course in
particular.
Last, but not least, the panel was content with the quality of the final papers. Out of 22
inspected dissertations only one was questioned. It shows that the recent effort put in the
redesign and reinforcement of the graduation trajectory has really paid off. In weighing up the
criteria of this Standard, the panel rates the Achieved learning outcomes and the Assessment
system as ‘satisfactory’.
Overall conclusion: satisfactory
At IBMS-Inholland the panel has seen (i) a nationally validated range of qualifications directing
appropriate standards for the entire programme; (ii) a well-designed and challenging
curriculum that offers ample opportunities for individual students to develop knowledge,
understanding and skills in the field of International Business Management; (iii) a well-equipped
staff that is very committed to their students; (iv) a well-furnished teaching and learning
environment that offers sufficient facilities and provides students with appropriate information;
and (v) a proper assessment system that still needs some refinements and further direction
from the Examination Board, particularly with regards to the graduation phase of study, but at
the same time renders realistic results.
Taking into account all of the findings as they are, the auditors have concluded that the
Bachelor of Business Administration IBMS of Inholland UoAS shows a quality that ranges from
fair to good both from a Dutch and an international perspective. Particularly when it comes to
the execution of staff policy, appropriate adjustments are required. And although the final
grades reflect the levels achieved, students’ final assessment still needs a few improvements,
especially in the field of transparency of the examiners’ judgements, but on the whole the
achieved level of the course is definitely up-to-the-mark.
Thus, all of the findings with regard to Inholland’s IBMS programme indisputably lead to the
panel’s overall judgment ‘satisfactory’.
Hence, the panel recommends the NVAO to award re-accreditation to the Bachelor of Business
Administration IBMS of Inholland University of Applied Science.
23 January 2013
Drs. W.G. van Raaijen,
Chair
H.R. van der Made,
Co-ordinator/Secretary
3.
INTRODUCTION
The IBMS programme of Inholland University of Applied Sciences is offered in three locations:
Diemen/Amsterdam, Haarlem and Rotterdam.
Diemen has the largest intake of IBMS students, Rotterdam the smallest. Due to the Inholland
turmoil in 2011 intake numbers dropped dramatically, as becomes clear from the table below:
Intake numbers
2008
174
2009
194
2010
228
2011
132
2012
168
At the time of the audit the distribution of students across the three locations is as follows:
Location
Haarlem
Diemen
Rotterdam
Total
2012/2013
114
322
187
623
Developments
Historically, the three programmes developed independently of one another as variants of
existing Dutch programmes. This was also the case for similar international programmes
developed in UASs throughout the Netherlands. In 1999 all these programmes were brought
under the newly formed International Business & Management Studies programme, led by the
IBMS National Platform with representatives from all IBMS programmes in the Netherlands.
Up to 2005 the three locations still had their own curriculum. From 2005 onwards the three
locations have collaborated on the basis of a partly joint curriculum: the Foundation Year was
identical for all locations, the second year was largely identical and the third and fourth year
were still executed individually.
At the time of the current audit the programmes on all locations had been aligned and in the
years prior to the audit the emphasis was particularly placed on the synchronization of the
graduation year and the correct application of graduation requirements.
Various assessment procedures, for example, those of placements, dissertations (graduation
report) and final professional portfolios were harmonized, so that the same documents,
handbooks and assessment forms are now used in all 3 locations.
In the audit, the Director Internationalisation of Inholland outlined the further development of
the English and international courses of the institute. In 2011-2012 Inholland drew up a plan to
develop an International College . Just days before the audit, the Inholland UoAS Board
established the plan, which involves combining IBMS and most of its international programmes
into one International College in Diemen with effect from 2013-2014.
Needless to say, that this development will have clear ramifications for the IBMS curriculum
and its staff. The panel spoke extensively with the management about this strategic
development that was not entirely known yet to all participants in the audit, but at the same
time impacted panel discussions. The exact nature of the consequences will become clear in
2012-2013.
In view of these developments, Inholland is seeking collaboration with the Hogeschool van
Amsterdam in order to align their choice of international courses, preferably resulting in a
complementary education on offer. The panel is in favour of these developments.
Position within Inholland
Since 2010, Inholland has organised its degree programmes within 6 faculties with
programmes spread across the various Inholland locations. IBMS stands alone as a programme
in its own right and only for organisational purposes forms part of the Faculty of Marketing,
Tourism and Leisure.
Results of previous audits
The previous accreditation of the IBMS programme took place in November 2005. In their
report of October 2006, the auditors were positive on all aspects of the existing programme as
well as the newly developed programme being put in place as from September 2006. The panel
made the following remarks, suggestions or recommendations:

Dutch students should be more informed better about English being the pre-requisite
language for the course; also, more guidance in the field of language acquisition was
recommended;

More attention should be devoted to the aspect of how to deal with diverse cultures;

Recent international work field experience is limited to an odd 10% of the sitting lecturers,
an improvement of this percentage is noticeable under newly appointed staff;

The student satisfaction on the quality of the teaching staff does not entirely reflect the
rating of 2.8 (on a 5-point scale) from the NSE, which might have been caused by a low
response rate;

Student appreciation of Study Counselling has improved, but a further concretisation of the
study counselling programme is required;

The response to evaluations is generally low and the outcomes therefore unreliable.
The course should to take measures for improvement to raise student and alumni
feedback;

Also, a more structured approach towards the implementation of improvements is required.
The current audit panel in its investigation has incorporated the issues that emerged from the
previous accreditation audit and, if necessary, refers to the current state-of-affairs in this
report.
In addition, the panel scrutinized the course on its WHW compliance. Following an investigation
of several Inholland degree programmes in 2010-2011, both the Inspectorate for Higher
Education and the NVAO made clear that Inholland’s compliance with the WHW (Higher
Education Law) needed to be improved. The course performed an extensive WHW-check
culminating in a cohesive body of measures which have been incorporated in the most recent
Tuition and Examination Regulations of the course (TER 2010-2011).
In general, the panel established that the course has taken most of the issues to heart and did,
indeed, implement the appropriate improvement measures.
4.
JUDGEMENT PER STANDARD
4.1.
Standard 1: The intended learning outcomes of the programme have been
concretised with regard to content, level and orientation; they meet international
requirements.
Explanation: As for level (bachelor or master) and orientation (professional or academic), the intended
learning outcomes fit into the Dutch qualifications framework. In addition, they tie in with the
international perspective of the requirements currently set by the professional field and the discipline
with regard to the contents of the programme.
Findings
National framework/intended learning outcomes
Like all other IBMS programmes in the Netherlands Inholland’s IBMS course has adopted the
nationally validated set of final qualifications to function as their intended learning outcomes.
In 2010-2011, the national collaboration platform of IBMS courses in the Netherlands reviewed
and updated the National IBMS Profile from 2004 in consultation with representatives of the
professional field, lecturers and students. This resulted in the revised IBMS Competencies
Framework 2011, which describes nine profession-related and seven generic areas of
competence. The entire set of final qualifications of the course have been incorporated in the
Annex II of this report.
Changes to the 2004 profile
The newly designed Framework 2011 puts greater emphasis on process management,
international Human Resource Management (HRM) and business research methods. A number
of areas of competence have been refined, such as ‘Intercultural Competence’, which has
replaced ‘Intercultural Awareness’, and Business Research Methods, which has replaced
Creative Problem Solving.
The national IBMS professional profile is clearly linked to the Dublin Descriptors for professional
Bachelor level alignment, the generic HBO competencies and the BBA domain standard. The
intended learning outcomes are competence-based1.
In the profile for each of the areas, a description is given of the competencies that are to be
acquired and the three consecutive levels at which, throughout the course, they are supposed
to be achieved. Based on the three key-concepts of accountability/responsibility, transfer and
complexity, which denote HBO bachelor level, the programme has described the competency
acquisition level for each curricular phase. These are (i) Suitability for the Profession, at the
end of the Foundation Year, (ii) Ready to go on Placement, at the end of Year 2, (iii) Prepared
for the Profession/Competent as a Starting Professional, at the end of Year 4. These phases are
defined in terms of what the student should be able to do. The panel is of the opinion that the
phase descriptions clearly indicate HBO Bachelor’s orientation and level:
1
A competency is understood as the ability to coherently apply knowledge, insight, skills and attitude in
(intercultural) professional practice.
Level 1: Suitability for
the Profession
Level 2: Ready to go
on Placement
Level 3: Competent
as a starting
professional
Define the problem and formulate the right questions: reason for/context
of the assignment, define the problem or analyse the question, analyse the
desired results and how those results will contribute to solving the problem or
answering the question; analyse the complexity of the assignment or question,
determine what is needed (knowledge, skills, attitude); planning activities;
accountability
Define the problem and formulate the right questions, find answers;
determine individual strengths and weaknesses: reason for/context of the
assignment, define the problem or analyse the question, analyse the desired
results and how those results will contribute to solving the problem or
answering the question; analyse the complexity of the assignment or question,
determine what is needed (knowledge, skills, attitude); planning of activities;
(strategy for obtaining what is needed); accountability; self-reflection regarding
one’s behaviour, determine one’s strengths and weaknesses.
Define the problem and formulate the right questions, find answers;
determine individual strengths and weaknesses: reflect on on-the job
problems experienced in the “real business world”, self-reflection on
one’s own behaviour when solving real-world, provide added value to
problem solutions: reason for/context of the assignment, define the problem
or analyse the question, analyse the desired results and how those results will
contribute to solving the problem or answering the question; analyse the
complexity of the assignment or question, determine what is needed
(knowledge, skills, attitude); planning of activities; (strategy for obtaining what
is needed); analyse & select information; accountability; analyse the “real
world” situation; determine strategy to solve problem based on problem
analysis, objective and results; self-reflection on one’s own behaviour in
problem-solving tasks; self-reflection at all stages of the process; determine
one’s strengths and weaknesses; find and implement creative solutions for
existing real business-world problems
Internationalisation and Research
Also, both internationalisation and business research methods have been firmly incorporated
into the course profile.
The international orientation has been transferred into it in the sense that the international
business competencies denote, by their very nature, an international focus, and also the
general management competencies are clearly framed within an international context, as are
all functional key-areas competencies. In addition, a fair command of English and, optionally, a
basic command of a second (and sometimes even a third) foreign language form an integral
part of graduate’s interpersonal competencies.
As to the importance of the international element as part of the intended learning outcomes of
the IBMS course, the panel is extremely positive.
As stated, one of the adaptations made to the new national profile as opposed to the previous
one, is the explicit focus on business research methods. In this field, among other things,
graduates are expected ‘to apply relevant scientific insights, theories and concepts, to combine
several subjects, to gather information and draw conclusions in a methodical and reflective
manner’. The panel supports the way the intended learning outcomes of the course deal with
research.
Professional validation of course profile
IBMS-Inholland and its External Advisory Board (EAB) were involved in the establishment of the
new professional profile through their participation in the National Platform as were all other 12
IBMS programmes concerned, thus providing an elaborate validation process.
At the time of the audit, the course’s representative body of the professional field had just
recently been brought to life again, as could be gathered from the minutes of three recent
Board meetings. In the audit the panel spoke with four work field representatives, one of whom
is also an EAB member. Most of them operate at CEO level, but as such, the panel established
that they do not yet altogether cover the full range of IBMS domains.
As became clear from the panel discussions and the minutes of meetings, which contained
relevant comments on the course profile, their current input is highly valued by the
management. Still, the panel believes the External Advisory Board could be strengthened to
cover the entire scope of IBMS at a truly higher management (CEO) and at a broader
international business level.
The panel is also in favour of a more structured approach towards the alumni of the course. In
the audit some of the them said to regret the lack of a real alumni network that could
contribute to the topicality and focus of the course. The panel believes that the foundation of
such a professional network should seriously be considered.
The set of intended learning outcomes unequivocally governs the output of the curricula at all
three locations. To the panel it has become clear that developments over the past two years,
both within and outside Inholland, have caused management and teaching staff to reconsider
the execution of three (partly different) IBMS programmes on three separate locations.
A tough process of merging the three curricula into one coherent programme, governed by one
central Examination Board, had just been finalized in the run-up to the audit. Further
centralization in one location, resulting in the establishment of an International College as of
September 2013 will be the next step to integration. The panel believes the management holds
a clear vision on the further integration of the three programmes and expects the
establishment of an International College to contribute to the enhancement of the international
learning environment and, thus, to facilitate the attainment of the eventual outcomes of the
course.
Own identity
Inholland’s internal focus on the organizational aspects of the programme, the safeguarding of
the graduation trajectory and the Examination Board has obviously left very little room for
implementing one’s own features that could have - and in the opinion of the panel – should
have added some identity to the national set of qualifications. All required competencies of the
National Framework are naturally covered, but a stronger focus on some qualifications to
highlight Inholland’s own vision on the IBMS programme in the eyes of the panel members
would definitely add value. To this end, the panel in the audit discussions noted some
possibilities for ‘course identifiers’ (see section on ‘Recommendations).
Considerations and Judgement
The intended learning outcomes of the programme have been very well concretised with regard
to content, level and orientation. They meet international requirements and express a clear
focus on internationalisation and practice oriented research.
A more refined and distinctive set of final qualifications to distinguish the Inholland programme
from other IBMS courses in the Netherlands, together with a slightly more enhanced
Professional Advisory Committee, would definitely have rendered an ‘excellent’ for Standard 1.
As it stands, the panel awards a ‘good’.
4.2.
Curriculum
Standard 2: The orientation of the curriculum assures the development of skills in
the field of scientific research and/or the professional practice.
Explanation: The curriculum has demonstrable links with current developments in the professional field
and with the discipline.
Findings
With regard to the assessment of this Standard, prior to the audit the panel extensively studied
the Course Curriculum and the Term Handbooks that contain the course descriptions and
provide details on contents and topics, coherence with other units of study within the same
term, learning goals, didactic and test formats. Additionally, in the audit the panel members
inspected a diversity of course materials, including practical in-class assignments, project
assignments and research studies.
From the curriculum overview (refer to the Annex III) and the Course Books, the panel
gathered that the course offers a well-balanced practice in professional skills as well as the
acquisition of current knowledge. The design of the programme shows three phases (phase 1:
year 1; phase 2: 1,5 year; phase 3: 1,5 year) and it comprises five pathways: placement,
integrative, conceptual, skills and personal development. The development of skills, both in the
field of professional practice and scientific research is chiefly encouraged in the placement
pathway, the integrative pathway and the skills pathway.
Skills in the field of professional practice
The course explicitly guides student’s development of the appropriate professional attitude to
operate in an international business environment through the module Professional Development
in years 1 and 2, as well as by the Study Career Coaching (SCC) programme throughout the
entire 4 years.
As demonstrated by the project assignments and assessments thereof, which the panel
reviewed in the audit, the students through these projects develop their skills in the field of
communication, collaboration, project management, analysis, planning, doing research and
management. In addition, during the placement, students put the professional competences
they are developing into practice, as became clear from the placement reports that were on
display during the audit.
Connection with the international business world
In Years 1 and 2, a project is key in each term (see Standard 3). At first, students will work for
a fictional commissioning client. However, the further they progress in the curriculum, the more
assignments will originate from the international business environment. Students with whom
the panel members spoke in the audit confirmed that professional practice lies at the heart of
the programme. ‘In the projects we have to deliver real life business reports that will also be
required of us later as professionals,’ says one of them. The panel reviewed good examples of
these in the form of marketing plans, financial plans, trend analyses and demand analyses.
A good example of students being confronted with the business world is the Dragons’ Den
project, which is scheduled in the second semester of Year 1. Although the assignment itself
does not come from a commissioning client, students have to draw up a business plan for an
original product devised by themselves, which is submitted to a panel of representatives from
the international business environment. Students then pitch their product idea to the panel in
the hope of receiving the investment they require to set up their business.
Both students and teachers on the discussion panels refer to the Dragon’s Den project, when
requested to deliver examples of good practice.
In Years 3 and 4, students are supposed to work on assignments for commissioning clients
from the real-life business world. This is particularly the focus of the IBMS in-depth
differentiation minors. Students can, however, also submit a proposal to the Examination Board
to be allowed to choose a broadening minor. This is only possible in year 3 and even then the
Examination Board said to be highly critical in granting the student permission.
In order to further improve connections with the business environment, two brand new DMs
were introduced in the curriculum, one dealing with the digital environment and the other
reflecting on changes in the global economy since the crisis in 2008. The panel reviewed both
Handbooks to go with these minors and subscribes to their relevance.
Knowledge development and practice oriented research
The panel has looked into both the required and recommended literature of the programme and
has come to the conclusion that internationally-recognised professional up-to-date literature is
used for all courses. Even, in quite a few modules the students themselves must search actively
for appropriate resources and, confirm students and teachers, are challenged to consult both
digital and non-digital sources to substantiate their papers and projects.
Also, students in the audit confirm that their lecturers regularly refer to relevant business
cases, either from their own (previous) experience or on the basis of current business affairs.
‘This topical input may sometimes lead to discussions in class and exchange of views on how to
tackle certain business issues,’ says one of the students.
Research
During 2011 and 2012 the Curriculum Committee critically examined the programme’s research
pathway. So far Business Research Methods and Academic Writing had merely been part of the
third and fourth’ year and had not been explicitly dealt with in the first and second year.
The increasing demand for IBMS graduates who are able to conduct business research and the
reinforced incorporation of this competence into the updated IBMS profile (see Standard 1),
made the Curriculum Committee of IBMS-Inholland incorporate a solid research track
throughout the programme into the revised IBMS programme to be launched in year 1 in 201213 (which had just started at the time of the audit) and in year 2 in 2013-14.
As part of the audit the panel scrutinized the redesign of the research pathway and concluded
that it contains valuable adjustments to prepare students better for their final theses and, thus,
for professional practice. Furthermore, the panel is convinced that the revised research
pathway, as outlined below, will offer better support in the development and assessment of
analytical skills at an individual level throughout the entire programme. Lastly, the panel spoke
with the research lecturers on the course and concluded that they were very committed to the
redesign of the research component of the course.
As per September 2012 practice oriented research comes to the fore in a research pathway
that extends from Year 1 right up to graduation. The curriculum includes independent units of
study in which research features. In term 1, this is Desk Research and in term 2 Field Research
(interviews and surveys). In terms 7 and 8, students carry out research, where possible, for an
external commissioning client. The newly designed Year 1 and Year 2 curriculum, which was
developed in 2011-12 by the Curriculum Committee, and reviewed by the panel members, will
further strengthen the research pathway throughout the programme. The panel judges positive
on the enhanced research component in the initial phase of the study.
During the placement in Year 3, students work on in-depth assignments that include a research
element. In terms 13 and 14 in the semester preceding the graduation phase, students choose
one of the in-depth differentiation minors (D minors) offered by the IBMS programme, in which
there is a strong research component, as well as a focus on business research methods and
academic writing. In the D minors where this is not the case, additional workshops are offered.
Finally, the graduation phase focuses on a research assignment in which students, having
reached an agreement with a commissioning client, draw up a research proposal that forms the
basis for student’s final paper.
In summary, the panel considers the revised research pathway in the programme of the right
substance. It now explicitly contains all elements that prepare students to conduct practice
oriented research in a business environment. On paper, it ensures that students learn how to
tackle a research project, use appropriate sources and collect and analyse primary and
secondary data. It is now up to the management to safeguard a proper execution and
monitoring of the revised research track.
In the fourth’ year the student is supposed to demonstrate his knowledge and know-how in the
field of business research by delivering a well-substantiated research report, which not only
should meet the academic requirements, but also should add value to a commissioning client’s
business. The panel’s assessment of theses in general is positive and included in Standard 16.
Students’ assessment of curriculum level and topicality
From the National Student Enquiries of 2011 and 2012 a positive student judgement emerges
on both level and quality of the IBMS curriculum. The positive ratings vary slightly between
locations, but are never under 3.3.
Evaluation Question
The level of the programme
2011
2012
The extent to which the content of the programme is thought provoking
2011
2012
The extent to which the programme focuses on professional practice
2011
2012
The academic skills and practice-orientation attained
2011
2012
The development of analytical thinking
2011
2012
The critical assessment of practice-based research
2011
2012
Reporting in writing on practice-based research
2011
2012
The methods and techniques used for practice-based research
2011
2012
The general skills attained
2011
2012
The alignment of programme content to current developments
2011
2012
The substantive quality of the study material
2011
2012
The extent of attention for international developments
2011
2012
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
3.5
3.7
4.0
3.8
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.5
3.9
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.7
3.8
4.1
3.9
3.7
3.5
3.7
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.3
3.5
3.8
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.3
3.4
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.7
3.8
3.7
3.5
3.3
3.8
3.7
3.9
3.6
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.9
3.8
3.9
3.8
3.4
3.6
4.1
3.7
3.7
3.9
3.6
-
4.2
-
3.6
-
From the previous findings the panel concludes that the curriculum offers ample opportunities
for students to develop skills in the field of scientific research and the professional practice.
Projects that offer increasing degrees of professional reality challenge students to practise their
professional abilities at an ever higher level, and the required professional attitude is directed
through different components of personal and professional development.
Particularly the reinforcement of the research component in the first two years of the
programme contributes to an even more substantial programme which ties in nicely with the
current requirements of the professional field. The literature being used, the topical contents of
the projects and the supporting courses, as well as the focus on the international business
environment demonstrate that the curriculum of Inholland-IBMS has clear links with current
developments in the professional field and with the discipline.
The panel therefore considers Standard 2 to be ‘good’.
Standard 3: The contents of the curriculum enable students to achieve the
intended learning outcomes.
Explanation: The learning outcomes have been adequately translated into attainment targets for
(components of) the curriculum. Students follow a study curriculum which is coherent in
terms of content.
Findings
In order to assess this standard the panel looked at the course descriptions in the various
Course Handbooks as well as the complete set of ‘Descriptions of Units of Study’ that have
been incorporated in the programme-specific part of the Tuition and Examination Regulations
(TER) of the course. In view of this standard the panel members reviewed the learning goals of
the course modules in particular. In addition it evaluated the course structure, both on paper
and, in more detail, to learn how course components have been scheduled in order to facilitate
course coherence. Aspects of these were also discussed and verified with the students and
lecturers on the discussion panels.
The overview of the programme which has been incorporated in the Annex III to this report
indicates which subjects have been included in the curriculum. These are (i) International
Business, (ii) International Marketing, (iii) Financial management and Economics, (iv)
International Human Resource Management, (v) Strategic Management, (vi) Business
Communication, (vii) English, (viii) Applied research, (ix) Professional Skills (learning and selfdevelopment), (x) Business Ethics, (xi) Culture and (xii) Foreign languages.
These subjects can easily be linked to the set of final competencies of the course and the
composite domains of IBMS.
In addition to the major programme, the course offers in-depth differentiation minors.
Currently the course offers the following DMs: (i) Psychology at work, (ii) International Trade
China, (iii) Strategic Management, (iv) International Corporate Strategy, (v) Global Economy in
Transition and (vi) Doing Business in the Digital Age. The panel finds these in-depth minors
relevant and of added-value to the content of the IBMS programme.
Transfer of final competencies into learning goals
In reviewing all of the course descriptions, including the documentation on placements and the
final thesis, the panel has established that all of the learning goals set out in the course
materials are formulated in such a way that they cover the full range of final competencies.
For example the final qualification 'International Finance and Accounting', level 2, implies that
‘The student can apply the competency independently in a relatively clearly arranged situation’.
Subsequently, the module Management Accounting in year 1 has broken down and transferred
this final qualification into six learning goals (‘examination criteria’), including: ‘Define how a
budgeting process works, particularly financial budgets’.
The panel has established that this has been done in a similar fashion for all course
components. Moreover, the examination criteria in each of the course descriptions have been
stated in such a way that they provide clear understanding of what is expected of the students
in terms of behaviour, insight and knowledge.
Implicitly the phrasing of the learning goals relates well to any of the three levels of
competence as discussed under Standard 1. However, for reasons of ultimate transparency, the
panel finds it advisable to give a more explicit indication of the levels in the course descriptions
and/or Student Handbooks.
In all, the panel ascertains that the learning outcomes of the course have been adequately and
comprehensively translated into the learning goals for each of the course components.
Curricular coherence in terms of content
As already indicated under Standard 2, vertical cohesion in programme content is foremost
structured through the five pathways: placement (practice), integration, concepts, skills and
personal development. The development of skills, both in the field of professional practice and
scientific research is chiefly encouraged in the placement pathway, the integrative pathway and
the skills pathway. In addition, the recent redesign of the first and second year research
component (see Standard 2) as part of a clear research pathway throughout the programme,
also adds up to the vertical coherence of the curriculum.
Along the course, each of the pathways demands of students an increasing degree of
complexity in problem solving and a higher hierarchy of self-reliance, as already denoted by the
three levels of competence which are described under Standard 1.
Project-based
A pivotal element of curricular coherence is formed by the projects. In the first two years of the
programme each semester (2 terms) revolves around an authentic, business-world type of
assignment or task, which is directly derived from the final qualifications and the competency
indicators relating to the relevant phase (level) of the programme.
The semester projects and the overarching themes for each of the semesters of the first and
second year are presented in a clear manner. Each of the semesters is accompanied by a clear
Student Handbook that outlines the project and informs the student about the learning goals,
deliverables and examination content and format. Also, a clear week planning for the
supporting modules to the project is given and their contents are described.
Students work in a project-based way in teams on the authentic project assignment or task.
The objective of the projects is the acquisition and/or improvement of the competencies, which
can be and are required to be demonstrated when students are assessed. Key in this projectbased environment is working and learning together in multi-cultural teams. A proper execution
of the projects is supported by scaffolding modules being offered in the same semester.
‘Knowledge from supporting classes helps a lot to complete the project successfully,’ says one
of the students, ‘and apart from our regular study books, we also had to consult company
websites and read articles from The Economist and the Financial Times. Very rewarding,’ she
added.
Project assignments are designed as theoretical case studies based on real-life business
situations. The idea is that they enable students to understand what will be expected of them in
a professional working environment in terms of problem-solving abilities, the required
competencies and indeed the context in which they will need to demonstrate their
competencies. ‘In the first semester of the second year we had to work on a business game
that involved all aspects of running a full scale international business,’ explains one of the
students on the panel. ‘We had to deal with every aspect of the company, such as marketing,
finance, HRM, legal issues and supply chain management. In the end we were supposed to
deliver an advisory report on the company’s corporate strategy.’
In the audit students respond enthusiastically to the project-part of the programme. Although,
in higher professional education not rarely students feel overloaded with too many projects,
this does not appear to be the case at all for Inholland-IBMS. ‘Projects teach you skills that are
essential to the business world,’ say students, ‘good communication and collaboration are
crucial, and dealing with real-life assignments is fun.’
Internationalisation
In an international course the degree of internationalisation can also be considered a keyelement of programmatic coherence. The panel established that IBMS-Inholland is an
international classroom, due to the diversity in its student and staff population. From an
overview of the different nationalities on the course it can be gathered that 63.1% of the
students were born outside the Netherlands. The chart with countries of birth shows a nice
range of nationalities from all over the world with slightly larger populations of Chinese,
Germans, Nigerians, Somalis, Nepalese, Arubans and Bulgarians. During the at random
classroom visits the panel established that classes are composed accordingly. Students of all
locations also confirm that they study in an international classroom. ‘It is a real international
environment with a range of cultures and ample opportunities to exchange different views,’
says one of them and another one adds: ‘For instance in Business Culture classes the teacher
uses everyone as an example to see where you come from and they try and mix in as much of
cultural exchange as possible.’
In the eyes of the panel members the diverse populations and the diversity approach of the
course contribute clearly to the cross cultural learning experience which is key in preparing
students to work in an international business environment.
In addition, as well as working with international course content in multicultural teams, IBMS
students are also encouraged to spend at least one or two semesters of study at one of the
many foreign partner institutions around the world, in some cases for a one-year, matched,
study abroad programme. The programme can, however, be completed in full in The
Netherlands, which in the eyes of the panel members should not be possible for Dutch nationals
(see Recommendations section), but judging from the panel discussions a large number of
IBMS students do opt to study and/or do their work placement abroad. Furthermore, the IBMS
student population in The Netherlands is enriched by (exchange) students and staff (guest
lecturers) from the partner institutions.
Students’ assessment of programme coherence
The 2011 IBMS NSE shows that students in all three IBMS locations have positively evaluated
the programme.
Evaluation Question
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
3.4
3.8
3.6
2012
3.4
3.9
3.5
2011
3.3
3.5
3.5
2012
3.6
3.4
3.3
The cohesion between the various components of the programme
The alignment of placements with other education
On the basis of the previous findings the panel concludes that the course has adequately
translated its learning outcomes into the learning goals of each of the curriculum components.
From the documentation, as well as from the audit discussions and programme evaluation
results, it became unambiguously clear that the students follow a study curriculum which is
coherent in terms of content. However, with an international programme like IBMS the panel is
of the opinion that a work placement and/or study abroad should be an inherent and, thus,
obligatory part of the study programme. Therefore the panel judgement on Standard 3 reads
‘satisfactory’.
Standard 4: The structure of the curriculum encourages study and enables
students to achieve the intended learning outcomes.
Explanation: The teaching concept is in line with the intended learning outcomes and the teaching
formats tie in with the teaching concept.
Findings
Structure of the programme
The IBMS programme spans over four study years, each of which consists of four terms of 10
weeks each. The first two year semesters are entirely structured on the basis of projects, with
an overarching project theme for each semester. While students carry out their projects they
receive supporting education to provide them with the knowledge and skills to resolve the
project assignment. Students on the auditees panel strongly expressed their support for this
project-based model. ‘It enhances the sense of community, collaboration and exchange of
views between students from different cultures,’ circumstantiate students. ‘And just as
important, it gives clear structure to the programme.’
In years 3 and 4, the programme components comprise a work placement, differentiation
minors, an optional year abroad, a dissertation and professional portfolio. In this phase of study
students work more individually and independently on the basis of a more flexible programme
that offers optional and partly interchangeable units of study. At this stage, students can
choose differentiation minors or can take advantage of one of the Erasmus exchange
programmes at one of Inholland’s partner universities.
Students can also opt to do a one-year, matched exchange programme at one of the partner
universities. The course has defined these matched programmes in their Tuition and
Examination Regulations (TER).
Students graduate in their fourth year on the basis of an individual research study
(dissertation), an oral defence thereof and the composition of a professional portfolio. All of
which are delivered along strict and well-structured guidelines that have been set out in the
Programme Specific TER of the course.
In studying the programme and talking with teaching staff and students, both in and outside
the audit discussions, the panel is confident that the programme solidly prepares students for a
career in the international business environment. In the first two years of the programme their
work in project groups encourages them to acquire the collaboration and cross-cultural
competencies they will need to succeed. In the intermediate and final phase of their studies
both deepening and broadening of their competencies are provoked, as well as ample
application of what they have learned in previous years, but now in a real business context.
Teaching concept
To attain the competence-based learning outcomes, the course offers four basic teaching
formats that, in the opinion of the panel members, tie in well with the nature of competencebased tuition and therefore clearly facilitate students to acquire the final qualifications of the
course.
Knowledge, Skills and Learning Ability
As already stated, throughout the programme, the student is challenged to assimilate
knowledge and skills by applying them in solving authentic projects and assignments. Various
assessment formats are used to achieve this: project assessment, case-study assessment,
knowledge and insight assessment, skills assessment and PDP assessment.
The panel establishes the presence of a strong focus on learning to deal with people from
diverse cultures, both in the structure of the curriculum and in the multicultural environment in
which students find themselves. As became clear from the panel discussion, students work
together with people from so many different cultures and backgrounds that to some extent,
without even noticing it, they become confident and effective multicultural communicators. Also
the IBMS alumni on the panel confirmed that their experience of working intensively in multicultural project teams during the IBMS programme has been extremely beneficial to them in
their present business environment.
With regard to the acquisition of knowledge and understanding, in the interim-examination
weeks at the end of each term individual knowledge tests are an important method of
assessment (also refer to Standard 16).
Authentic Professional Assignments
Throughout the programme, students work on authentic, professional-style assignments and
tasks that they will be required to perform as professionals in the business world. As they
follow the programme they are required and/or encouraged to seek out clients to carry out as
many of their research projects as possible, thus learning how to deal with customers in a
structured way.
Competency-based Development
To enable students to make professional and training choices in their future careers, students
are prepared for this by constantly having to reflect on their own competency development and
by having to make choices to the achievement of this development. The culmination of this
competency development is the Professional Portfolio, the final assignment in the Graduation
Phase, a selection of which was reviewed and generally appreciated by the panel members. The
panel found that quite a few of these were substantial in demonstrating students’ command of
their competencies and the ability to reflect on them, but others looked rather skinny.
The course management is aware of this and believes that the element of self-management still
needs more attention of both staff and students in the sense that critical reflection in the form
of a professional portfolio is a crucial tool that students need to graduate with and one that is
essential to a culture of life-long learning. The panel strongly agrees to this view.
Self-management
Throughout the programme, students build on their abilities to tackle ‘real-world’ business
problems from various perspectives, to choose the right approach and to substantiate the
choices that they have made and reflect on the result. As was illustrated by clear examples
given by students on the auditees panel, the Study Career Coaching pathway supports the
personal and professional development of students, encourages them to plan, structure and
reflect on their progress in the on-going development of their competencies. The appreciation
for this element of the programme is exceptionally high, as is substantiated by the ratings in
the National Student Enquiries (see Standard 12).
Supportive evidence from the NSE shows that the students of the course in general are
satisfied with the way the programme is structured and conducted:
Evaluation Question
The instructional formats used in the programme
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
2012
3.5
3.4
3.7
3.6
3.4
3.7
2011
2012
3.4
3.5
3.9
3.6
3.5
3.4
The extent to which the content of the programme is thought
provoking
On the basis of the previous findings the panel concludes that the curriculum of the IBMS
course is clearly structured and carried out in such a way that it encourages students to acquire
their competencies and to enable them to achieve the intended learning outcomes of the
course. The teaching concept and the teaching formats being used nicely match the
competence-based approach of the course and facilitates students to eventually acquire the
intended learning outcomes.
The panel therefore rates Standard 4 as ‘good’.
Standard 5: The curriculum ties in with the qualifications of the incoming students.
Explanation: The admission requirements are realistic with a view to the intended learning outcomes.
Findings
The course, in all three locations, maintains the customary formal admission requirements of
Dutch higher professional education. These requirements have been stipulated in the general
section of the TER. Alongside, the course has formulated some specific admission requirements
for IBMS.
Students from Non-native English speaking countries are required to pass an IELTS of TOEFL
test with an overall average of six (6) or higher prior to admission. Also additional requirements
will have to be met when enrolling for the fast track programme, which is only offered in
Diemen.
Introduction and Intake procedure
Before intake, international students are interviewed by phone or Skype. Upon arrival students
are given an introduction in studying at Inholland UoAS and in the study career coaching
(SCC/PD) programme. ‘The introductory period is an intensive one and our study career
coaches are really committed to help us come to grips with our study,’ confirm students.
Languages within IBMS
A near-native proficiency in the English language is considered a pre-requisite to become a
successful international business manager. To this effect students should have some basic
command of English on entry and to improve skills in this field the curriculum offers English
throughout the entire first two years of the programme. The students with whom the panel
members spoke, as well as the students in class all had a fair to good command of English.
Students are also required to opt for a foreign language (Dutch, French, German or Spanish) in
years 1 and 2, with the exception of Rotterdam where students can only choose from Dutch or
Spanish. At the beginning of the first term they do a language test to determine the level they
start at in this language.
To help incoming students come to grips with their new study, in term 1, individual intake
meetings are scheduled with their study coaches. Since cohort 2010, these intake meetings
ideally take place during the first three education weeks. Half an hour is reserved for each
student. All meetings are well-documented as can be gathered from the study coaching
introductory meeting forms for the first period, some of which were on display in the audit.
In Year 1 students attend weekly group meetings with the purpose to socialize and familiarize.
Term 1 is clearly considered a break-in period, in which both practical and substantive matters
are featured and students are invited to exchange experiences with each other. During the
initial weeks of the programme, the study coach strongly emphasise group dynamics.
Content wise, term 1 is intended to introduce students to the international business
environment and to the project-based approach of the programme. Students also learn how to
operate in a multi-disciplinary team utilising the appropriate cooperation and meeting
techniques. When evaluating the term 1 course materials, such as the Professional
Development unit and the Inside Information project, the panel found these fit for this
introductory purpose.
In all, the panel finds the course’s approach very appropriate for introducing new students to
the programme and to really get them ‘on board’. Many a student, in the audit, commended
the study coaches and other members of staff on the way they were introduced into their
study. It became clear that in some cases this had helped them not to drop out and become
successful in their later study careers. That is one of the reasons why the panel members are
very positive about the way the course has attuned its introductory period to the diverse
population of incoming students.
IBMS fast track programme
In Diemen students can apply for a fast track position, meaning a student can graduate in
three years. To be eligible a student has to have a vwo (or international equivalent like Abitur
or International Baccalaureate) diploma. To make sure the student is indeed qualified an
admission interview is held. He then has to apply to the Exam Board to obtain permission to
enter the fast track programme based on regulations stipulated in the Institution-wide part of
the TER 2012-2013. The panel has taken note of the specified intake procedure for the fast
track and considers it adequate.
Lastly, the NSE student evaluations (see below) support the view that the programme meets
student’s expectations when joining and that it appears to align well with their previous
education. The students with whom the panel members spoke by and large confirmed these
ratings. ‘In the initial stage I was very well introduced to the programme and once I got further
it was exactly what I had expected of it,’ said one of them, ‘and the course connects very well
with my previous havo education,’ said another one.
Evaluation Question
The alignment of content to the picture that you had of your
programme
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
2012
3.5
3.5
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.6
2011
2012
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.4
3.4
3.6
The alignment of your programme to your prior education
On the basis of the previous findings the panel considers the admission requirements very well
attuned to the intended learning outcomes of the course. Particularly the first phase of the
curriculum, that comprises a solid intake procedure and a well-organized break-in period, ties
in very well with the qualifications of the incoming students. This initial period clearly facilitates
students to adjust to their HBO bachelors study and to come to grips with the contents and
purpose of the course.
The panel therefore awards Standard 5 the judgement ‘good’.
Standard 6: The programme is feasible.
Explanation: Factors pertaining to the programme and hindering students’ progress are removed as far
as possible. In addition, students with functional disabilities receive additional career tutoring.
Findings
In studying the programme design the panel established that the curriculum components are
structured in such a way that the 10-week terms of the first three years of study comprise an
equal study load of 15EC each, which indicates a well-balanced distribution of the total of
240EC over the four years. In their fourth year the students follow two semesters of 30EC
each.
Instead, the fast track spans a study load of 80EC per year, which ‘is hard work and no time for
side jobs. It can be done though, with the right study background, focus and attitude,’ indicate
students on the panel.
All of the students in the audit say that their average study load lies somewhere in between 30
to 40 hours a week and some even claim to study an odd 50 hours a week. Still they maintain
that ‘the course is absolutely doable’.
Raising the bar
In 2011-2012 Inholland UoAS had already raised the required number of EC for the Foundation
Year from 40 to 45 out of a total of 60. From September 2012, the Binding Study
Recommendation (BSR) norm has been raised further to 50EC. The panel very much agrees to
this measure, that aims to improve student motivation to really work hard and very much
reflects the general tendency in higher professional education to raise the bar for the
Foundation Year qualification.
In addition, IBMS requires the 50EC to include a pass for 2 first-year modules of English (2EC),
Business Organisation & Management (2 EC) and International Business (1EC).
The programme management is aware of the fact that this may put extra pressure on students.
From the panel discussions with students it appeared that the course is now paying extra
attention to this qualifying criterion at the start of the programme, particularly in the sessions
with their Study Career Coach.
Timetabling of classes and exams
Classes are ideally planned on a maximum of four days a week. Written exams and resits are
organised in the last three (so called Exam) weeks of each term. Students who fail an exam
can have one resit only in the same academic year, which will take place in the exam weeks of
the following term (except for the fourth term when resits will take place in the same term).
The students are allowed another two resits in each subsequent year.
In the audit students indicate that study peaks arise during examination periods. The
management indicates that it seeks to reduce the number of interim-examinations by assessing
larger units of study in a more integrative way. The management expects this measure will free
up more study time for students in between interim-exams and will also reduce the work load
for lecturers. The panel supports the idea of reducing the number of tests on relatively small
units of study in favour of merging them into a more substantial and integrative assessment.
In studying the timetables and curriculum design the panel concluded that the programme is
designed and organised in such a way that students, beyond doubt, are able to meet the
established norms and eventually should be able to attain de intended learning outcomes of the
programme.
Study coaching and information provision
In general, important factors that affect programme feasibility are the quality and intensity of
study coaching and the timeliness and quality of the available information provision. Both of
them appear to be of the right quality. These topics, however, will be dealt with in detail under
Standard 12.
Policy on disabled students
On the institutional level Inholland has issued policies on disabled students2. The document
contains appropriate guidelines on additional support and study career tutoring for disabled
students, for which Inholland should be commended. However, there appears to be some
discrepancy between the institutional policy and the execution of it, as may be gathered from
the low satisfaction rates. This issue will be further discussed under Standard 14.
The ratings in the National Student Enquires of 2011 and 2012 support the views and thoughts
of the auditees on the feasibility of the programme. Students’ assessment of feasibility
connected issues has been stable for many years, say the management, and varies between
3.3. and 3.8 on a scale of 1 to 5.
Evaluation Question
The distribution of the study load across the academic year
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
2012
3.3
3.4
3.8
3.8
3.3
3.6
2011
2012
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.9
3.4
3.5
2011
2012
The extent to which it is possible to do the programme in the time
available
2011
2012
The extent to which the post-foundation stage of the programme is
feasible in the time available
2011
2012
3.3
3.2
3.8
3.7
3.4
3.4
3.3
-
3.8
-
3.3
-
3.5
-
3.6
-
3.5
-
The feasibility of deadlines
The alignment between credits and the actual study load
In considering all of the above, the panel concludes that the programme has been designed and
structured in such a way that it facilitates students to follow the study without any
impediments. The imposed study load is in line with what may be expected of a professional
Bachelors’ programme: tough but doable, and the measures that have been introduced lately
to raise the bar, combined with targeted study counselling, are very appropriate.
The management will take measure to reduce interim-exam peaks, that may possibly hinder
students’ progress.
Furthermore, the panel has established that students with functional disabilities receive
additional support and study career tutoring.
Thus, with regard to the feasibility of the programme the panel rates Standard 6 as ‘good’.
2
Studeren met een Functiebeperking, Kaderstellend beleidsdocument Inholland
Standard 7: The programme meets statutory requirements regarding the scope
and duration of the curriculum.
Explanation: Scope and duration of a bachelor programme (professional orientation) equal 240 ecs.
Findings
The programme, with 240 European Credits, takes four years to complete. Each year consists
of two semesters, and each semester consists of two terms. In terms of study, each term is
equally important: 15 EC. The distribution of the various credits is described in the Tuition and
Examination Regulations.
With regards to the Fast Track programme being offered in Diemen, the 240EC are acquired in
three years of 80 credits each.
The panel has inspected the overview of programme components and the number of ECs
awarded per educational unit and has concluded that the programme is consistent with a fouryear or a three-year Bachelor’s course respectively of 240EC, which equals 1,680 hours of
yearly study, divided over 42 weeks or (in case of the Fast Track) equals 2,240 hours of yearly
study, divided over 50 weeks.
Therefore the panel defines the programme in full compliance with statutory requirements
regarding the scope and duration of the curriculum.
4.3.
Staff
Standard 8: The school has an effective staff policy in place.
Explanation: The staff policy provides for the qualifications, training, assessment and size of the staff
required for the realisation of the programme.
Findings
On the faculty level Inholland has adopted a strategic personnel plan, as well as a staff training
scheme. On the basis of these documents and the panel discussions with the management and
staff in particular, the panel formed its judgement on this standard.
The panel took note of the fact that at the time of the audit, in the context of Inholland’s
Strategic Agenda, the internal and external profiling of the programme are under discussion.
The management, in the audit, indicated that this might well impact the future size of the
programme and require higher standards and, thus, stricter appointment criteria for teaching
staff who would like to work in the International College (see Chapter 3, Introduction). These
higher standards mainly refer to ‘a truly and substantial international business background of
the lecturers’. The founding of the International College in Diemen may therefore imply that the
long-term staff policy adopted by the programme will have to be aligned accordingly. The panel
appreciates the logic of this, but at the same time recommends a considerate, and wellcommunicated, staff policy to be carried out to this end. When the audit took place the panel
experienced that teaching staff had only been incidentally involved in and had received limited
information on these developments so far.
Staff qualifications policy
As to the course’s staff appointment policy, the level of education and a connection with
professional practice are key. The policy is geared towards putting together programme teams
that consist of lecturers (i) with appropriate education, (ii) good specialist knowledge, (iii)
instructional skills and (iv) a knowledge of professional practice.
According to institutional policies all lecturers must be able to contribute to (i) education
development, (ii) education implementation, (iii) study coaching (iv) placement and graduation
supervision, (v) tutoring, (vi), assessment, ( vii) research and development, (viii) coordination.
Non-native lecturers need a minimum of CEF level C1 in the English language and previous
experience of teaching in English.
In addition, to be considered eligible for a permanent appointment, lecturers must have
attained a teaching certificate. The panel considers these appointment criteria both relevant
and sufficient.
The education and research policy document entitled Ruimte voor presteren, Inholland 20122014 stipulates that 80% of lecturers will have a Master’s title in the academic year 2016-2017.
The issue of actual staff qualifications, including Masters degrees, is dealt with under Standard
9.
Staff continuation policy
In view of the strengthening of staff loyalty and the desired quantitative and qualitative body of
staff, the Inholland staff policy plan states specific targets, such as (i) the reduction of the
percentage of small contracts (< 0.49), (ii) the reduction of sickness absence by teaching staff
at group level/at a central level from 5.85 % (the situation in 2006) to 4.0%, (iii) the reduction
of the number of permanent contracts at group level/a central level from 79% (the situation in
2006) to 70%, (iv) the achievement of a staff base that reflects its student population, (v) the
achievement of a balanced male-female ratio.
In the audit teaching staff members confirmed that the management was indeed implementing
the aforementioned policies. When asked about their view on how the management was
tackling absenteeism, lecturers confirmed that ‘the management allocated more hours when we
submitted a request. Only problem is that the management changes every year,’ added one of
them. In the eyes of the panel, this is a key-problem that needs to be seriously addressed and
calls for ‘a management continuation plan’, particularly at the Rotterdam branch.
Still, judging from the staff questionnaire (see below), staff in general consider their work as
rather stressful, with too little time available to execute their jobs in a proper manner. Teaching
staff on the panel do not explicitly bring forward this topic, but when asked, they do not deny it
either. Simultaneously some lecturers show signs of dissatisfaction related to the process of
merging the three locations into one International School in Diemen. Needless to say that this
will have consequences in particular for staff in the Rotterdam location.
Staff performance cycle
Performance & Competency Management (PCM) is part of staff policy. Inholland, and thus the
IBMS course, has adopted an annual PCM cycle that comprises both performance and appraisal
interviews. These meetings are held on the basis of an Individual Professional Development
Plan (IPDP), which is drawn up in a separate meeting with the teaching staff member in
question. Fixed items on the agenda for the PCM meetings are development and training,
reflection on the results of education evaluations, continual connection with the field of work,
deployment for the next academic year and the contribution to the objectives of the faculty and
Inholland University of Applied Sciences. During the IPDP meeting, individual agreements are
made about the further development of expertise.
In the audit, the panel members have looked into (anonymized) files with records of PCM
meetings and Individual Professional Development Plans. Also, the panel spoke about staff
development with teaching staff members who were on the panel. By and large, the files
demonstrate that the course applies a regular staff performance and competency cycle, with a
clear focus on the elements as mentioned.
Training and education
Inholland’s training policies in general focus mainly on six objectives: (i) to make organisation,
communication and culture more effective, (ii) Quality assurance, (iii) Examination
development, (iv) Internationalisation, (v) Research, (vi) Leadership. In view of (ii) and (iii) in
particular Inholland, and thus IBMS, has concentrated its training and educational activities on
making the course ‘WHW-proof’. Therefore the institute has developed its WHW training plan
for 2011-2012 (Scholingsplan WHW 2011-2012, Inholland WHW-proof) which outlines a
structural and cohesive professionalisation policy with the purpose to facilitate Inholland UoAS
in its ambition to be WHW-proof. This extensive improvement plan has provided – and partly is
still providing – customised training for all parties involved, such as: (i) Management, (ii)
Lecturers, (iii) Support staff, (iv) Examinations boards and (v) Programme advisory
committees.
Employee satisfaction
The results below of the Inholland Staff Questionnaire illustrate some important issues to be
dealt with, particularly in the field of work pressure/available time (management focus),
communication and culture. The outcomes of the questionnaire fully match the impressions that
emerged from the panel discussions. Although, the expression of staff dissatisfaction,
particularly in Rotterdam, in the eyes of the panel members may be largely attributed to the
uncertainties arising from institutional policies, the panel still believes that on the programme
level these issues need urgent attention, particularly in view of a successful intended merger of
the three locations.
Evaluation Question
Pressure of work
The time available to carry out the work
The amount of time available for IBMS to carry out the work
The emotional pressure your work puts on you
The pressure of work within IBMS
The extent to which you can separate work from your private life
Working atmosphere
Good working relationships with IBMS colleagues
Cooperation with IBMS colleagues
The openness and honesty of the communication within IBMS
The willingness of your IBMS colleagues to take over your work if necessary
Respect for each other within IBMS
The extent to which colleagues tackle each other about their behaviour and
responsibilities
Your manager
To what extent do you trust your line manager?
How easy is it to approach your line manager with questions or problems?
To what extent are you motivated and coached by your line manager?
Your line manager shows his/her appreciation of your work
Your line manager informs you in a timely manner
The available time to speak 1-to-1 with your line manager
Rating (1 – 10)
3.0
2.6
5.2
3.3
6.4
7.2
6.7
5.2
6.7
7.2
5.1
6.5
6.8
5.7
7.0
5.9
5.4
In studying the relevant documents, both on the institutional and faculty level, the panel
concluded that IBMS-Inholland has in itself described a full-fledged staff policy that covers all
areas of human resources management. However, in many respects the execution of these
policies leaves ample room for improvement, as it reveals severe discrepancies between paper
and reality. Therefore the panel believes the staff policy cannot be called an effective one in all
areas.
The panel, as such, appreciates the recent strategic decisions that were made by the (top)
management of the institute, as a result of which at the time of the audit a clear discrepancy
could understandably be noticed between the solidness of the policy documents on the one
hand, and the lack of effectiveness with the implementation on the other.
However, in the light of a successful transition process to a single International College in one
location, the panel is of the opinion that urgent attention should be paid to issues like work
pressure, re-energizing staff, management continuation and focus, as well as communication
and culture.
As it turns out now, with still ample room for improvement on the parameters as mentioned
above, the panel rates standard 8 as ‘unsatisfactory’.
Standard 9: The staff are qualified for the realisation of the curriculum in terms of
content, educational expertise and organisation.
Explanation: The actual expertise available among the staff ties in with the requirements set for
professional or academic higher education programmes.
Findings
The programme has provided an overview of the staff composition in the three locations. Also,
in the audit, the course had the resumes of lectures on display and the panel spoke with a
selection of teaching staff members to base its judgement on this standard. The overview of
the staff composition is incorporated in the Annex IV to this report and gives details on their
level of education, their teaching qualifications and their connection with the professional field.
The tables show that in Diemen, Haarlem and Rotterdam, 75%, 43% and 75% of the lecturers
have an academic background respectively.
Qualifications
At the time of the audit three IBMS lecturers in Diemen are doing a Master’s degree, two of
them in Learning and Innovation and one in European Union Studies. One lecturer in Rotterdam
is also doing a Master’s degree while two lecturers are doing a PhD (Nyenrode University and
University of Bath). Surprisingly, no lecturers from Haarlem are taking their Master’s degree,
which in the opinion of the panel members should be stimulated more considering the relatively
low percentage of Masters in this location. In Haarlem, however, the staff orientation towards
the professional practice seems to have slightly more emphasis.
In studying the lecturers’ resumes the panel observed a well-balanced range of former work
experiences and expertise, all relevant to the domains on which the IBMS course is based; staff
expertise relates to (international) marketing and sales, to supply change management, HRM
as well as to finance & accounting. Quite a few lecturers hold experience in higher strategic
business management positions. However, their professional experience is a long time ago (5
years and more) and is now mostly fuelled by contacts through students’ work placements.
Still, the lecturers with whom the panel members spoke in the audit demonstrated topical
knowledge of the IBMS domains. They said to be encouraged to keep their professional
performance up-to-date by attending internal and external study sessions, symposia,
conferences, as well as courses and training courses via the Inholland Academy. This also
comprises the completion of an in-house, two-year course, awarded with the University of
Cambridge Certificate of Proficiency in English (CPE).
Additionally, the course makes frequent use of guest lecturers to fill possible gaps in staff
knowledge on current developments. The panel reviewed a list of relevant guest lecturers to
IBMS and verified their actual input in the programme with the students. It appeared that not
only teaching staff members invite guest lecturers, but students themselves too are
accustomed to organizing sessions with guest lecturers when collaborating in projects.
As for formal teaching qualifications, in Diemen, Haarlem and Rotterdam the respective
percentages are 59%, 57% and 50%. The remaining staff members (mostly from the
professional field) possess endorsements to teach in higher professional education.
Student assessment
Students’ evaluations on staff performance show that students are generally positive. They
value the content expertise of their lecturers between a 3.5 and a 4.2 (on a 5-point scale); the
knowledge lecturers have about the international business environment scores between a 3.7
and a 4.2 (on a 5-point scale).
Although the aspect of ‘teaching abilities’ receives an average 3.6, students in the audit
indicate that teacher’s didactical skills still leave room for improvement. ‘Some of them should
be better prepared,’ say students, ‘and quite a few of them should respect their time schedules
better.’ Also, students from Diemen and Rotterdam state that the timely delivery of test results
needs attention.
Evaluation Question
The content expertise of lecturers
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
2012
3.5
3.7
4.2
4.0
3.8
3.9
2011
2012
3.4
3.6
3.9
3.6
3.7
3.6
2011
2012
3.2
3.5
3.9
3.8
3.4
3.4
2011
2012
3.4
3.4
3.8
4.1
3.6
3.4
2011
2012
3.4
3.4
3.7
3.9
3.6
3.3
2011
2012
3.3
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.5
3.1
2011
2012
3.3
3.3
3.8
3.6
3.5
3.3
2011
2012
3.7
3.7
4.0
4.2
3.7
4.0
The teaching qualities of lecturers
The accessibility of lecturers outside contact hours
The involvement of lecturers with students
The quality of supervision by lecturers
The quality of feedback from lecturers
The extent to which lecturers are inspiring
The knowledge that lecturers have about professional practice
On the basis of the previous findings, the panel concludes that the staff as a whole are basically
qualified for the realisation of the curriculum in terms of content, educational expertise and
organisation. All of the staff qualifications neatly cover all curriculum component in all locations.
However, the element of actual professional knowledge of the international business world
needs attention, as well as the further strengthening of staff to acquire academic abilities,
particularly in the light of the increasing focus within higher professional education on the
component of practice oriented research and the guidance thereof.
Also, in some cases improved staff performance is needed when it comes to class preparations
and the timely delivery of test results.
In all, the panel’s judgement on Standard 9 reads ‘satisfactory’.
Standard 10: The size of the staff is sufficient for the realisation of the curriculum.
Findings
The course management has provided an overview of the realized lecturer-student ratios of the
two consecutive years of study 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. This overview of the lecturerstudent ratios in the three locations is provided in the Annex IV to this report.
The tables show that, as a consequence of declining student numbers in all of the three
locations the lecturer-student ratios have improved and now vary from 14,18 (Haarlem) to
27,10 (Diemen). Considering that an average ratio of 1 : 25 in higher professional education is
quite acceptable, the ratios of IBMS-Inholland, on average, fall within this norm.
A ratio of 1 : 25 is considered one of the quality requirements to be maintained for the new
International Business School. The panel agrees very much to this basic quality requirement.
In the audit, the panel did not get any signs of understaffing as such, although many lecturers
indicated to work hard and experience some workload pressure, due to the recent review of the
programme and, particularly the reorganization of the final trajectory of the course.
Also, the relatively small size of the IBMS programme in its three locations may be considered
a contributing factor to the workload pressure experienced by IBMS staff. Bringing the three
teams together in one single location could possibly help to reduce pressure on staff.
Student enquiries support the view that understaffing is not the real issue, as e.g. ‘staff
accessibility outside regular hours’ is still rated 3.4 to 3.8. ‘Teachers work hard, but are mostly
available when you need them, also outside classes,’ confirm students on the panel.
On the other hand, teaching staff members themselves indicate that work pressure is also felt
due to the national turmoil on Inholland, as well as the forthcoming reorganization and the
merging of the three locations into one International Business School in Diemen. Obviously this
also involves uncertainties about their future employment and – particularly for staff residing in
Rotterdam – whether or not to move to Amsterdam. With respect to this, the panel
recommends more management effort to communicate with and involve, commit and energize
lecturers.
The evaluation results of the Teaching Staff Questionnaire (see below) fully reflect the
impressions the auditors gained from the panel discussions with the lecturers. In general the
findings boil down to a hard working teaching staff experiencing uncertainty of its future and
thus showing clear signs of weariness and stress. This, obviously, is something that should be
resolved by a transparent management communication policy (see Standard 8) and possibly by
the deployment of additional temporary force.
Evaluation Question
Pleasure in your work
Your work has clear goals
Variation in your work
The freedom you have in carrying out your work
Opportunities in your work to develop (new) skills
Opportunities for development within the UAS
Opportunities to follow training and courses
7.2
6.1
7.7
6.0
6.1
5.8
5.9
Just on the basis of lecturer to student ratios and the student appreciation of staff availability
as such, the panel considers the number of IBMS staff sufficient to enable the proper execution
of the programme.
Nevertheless, the teams experience high work pressure, which is partly due to the decline in
the number of students, as a consequence of which there is less volume for fixed educational
tasks. Change of programme management in various locations has also hindered the smooth
execution of some of the educational processes and the high work pressure experienced by
staff is also down to the revision of the assessment system (see Standard 16) and the
tightening up of the WHW requirements.
Also, the uncertainty about the future of Inholland UoAS and the possible consequences of the
reorganization in view of the developments concerning the Inholland International College have
had a significant impact on the IBMS team.
These HRM issues require enhanced management attention and possibly some measures in the
field of temporary additional workforce, which has already been incidentally granted as some of
the lecturers confirmed.
Considering all of the above, the panel rates Standard 10 as ‘satisfactory’.
4.4.
Standard 11: The accommodation and the facilities (infrastructure) are sufficient
for the realisation of the curriculum.
Findings
As part of the audit the panel members went on a guided tour to see the housing and facilities
of the Haarlem location of the programme. Prior to the audit the housing and facilities at the
Faculty of Marketing, Tourism and Leisure Management had already been visited by other
panels. In theirs audit they also reviewed the quality of the accommodation and the facilities
available.
Study areas and technical facilities
In all three locations, IBMS has its separate study area in the building where students can
study and work, either individually or together, supported by the appropriate IT facilities.
In general, the panel considers the Inholland accommodation and facilities state-of-the-art and
believes they clearly add up to a functionally effective learning and working environments in all
three locations. Blackboard, the digital environment has become an indispensable support tool
for study and work. All computer systems, of which there are sufficient, are running on the
latest operating system and have installed current Office software. Students can use of these
facilities anywhere in the world using weblogin, which allows them to access their desktop and
use the software from school. In Diemen the students also have special Mac rooms at their
command. Equipment such as beamers, laptops, cameras, etc., can borrowed via an elaborate
Service Desk.
This desk, which is available in each location, is the central first point of contact for any
students and staff at Inholland University of Applied Sciences who want to borrow laptops or
audio and video equipment, arrange locker hire or reserve (meeting) rooms, or who need help
to resolve technical problems experienced with computers, printers and scanners or problems
encountered with the software packages offered, etc. The students with whom the panel spoke
were in general very satisfied about the service being offered.
Library
Each location has access to the digital library, which has a collection of information carriers that
are relevant to the IBMS programme. The course provided the panel with an overview of
relevant data bases to which IBMS students have access, such as A to Z, Academic Search
Elite, Business Source Elite, LexisNexis Academic, Regional Business News, etc.
The collection policy adopted by the library focuses on the purchase of specialist literature at
the level necessary at a university of applied sciences. This involves information sources like
books, magazines and audio-visual materials. When visiting the physical libraries on-site,
however, the panel would have liked to see the availability of more relevant business
periodicals, like e.g. The Economist, Financial Times, Harvard Business Review, etc. The panel
would recommend to add a number of business magazines to the collection, e.g. on finance,
management and HRM, and subsequently incorporate them more actively in lectures and
project work.
Student accommodation
Specific to IBMS is the provision of suitable student housing for international students. Students
from abroad can arrange for appropriate accommodation through the International Offices in all
three locations. Still, judging from the ratings of the NSE, students of Diemen and Haarlem in
particular are not satisfied with the restricted availability of suitable accommodation (2.9 and
2.7 respectively).
However, from the audit the panel gathered that this is not an issue of lacking service, but
dissatisfaction caused by sheer absence of suitable student housing. Inholland is seeking ways
to resolve this problem, e.g. by making framework agreements with housing agencies.
Assessment of students and staff
As the NSE ratings from the table below indicate, that the students are quite satisfied with the
services and facilities and the way in which they are organised. In the panel discussions it
became clear that the teaching staff members on the panel were also satisfied about the quality
of the physical teaching and learning environment.
NSE evaluation questions
The suitability of education areas
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
2012
3.6
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.8
3.7
2011
2012
3.6
3.8
3.5
3.6
3.4
3.8
2011
2012
3.6
3.5
3.8
3.9
3.7
3.6
2011
2012
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.8
3.4
3.8
2011
2012
3.5
3.6
3.0
3.4
3.2
3.8
2011
2012
3.7
3.5
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.8
2011
2012
3.9
3.8
3.7
4.0
3.4
3.4
2011
2012
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.4
3.4
The suitability of workspaces
Programme material
The library
ICT facilities
The digital learning environment
The information desk
The student administration
In considering all of the previous findings the panel is of the opinion that the accommodation
and the facilities offered by the IBMS course in all three locations are more than sufficient for
the realisation of the curriculum.
The panel therefore rates Standard 11 as ‘good’.
Standard 12: Tutoring and student information provision further students’
progress and tie in with the needs of students.
Findings
The programme offers various forms of supervision: (i) Study Career Coaching (SCC), (ii)
Process supervision (project coaching), (iii) Substantive supervision (by an expert from the
knowledge domain, Project Consultant), (iv) Placement supervision, (v) Graduation supervision,
(vi) The supervision of delayed-study students, (vii) Supervision by student counsellors,
confidential counsellors (vertrouwenspersonen) and the student pastor.
Tutoring
One of the key-elements of study coaching is SCC. It is part of what the course calls academic
scaffolding (‘flankerend onderwijs’), courses and workshops designed to support students’
project work and competencies development, expressed in the students’ Personal Development
Plans (PDP). PDPs are assessed and require students to formulate and develop learning targets
or goals, to reflect on and be accountable for their actions and performance.
The panel studied the course book and materials on Study Career Coaching and got impressed
by their substance. SCC is not a tag-on, but an integral and structural part of the curriculum
with set goals for each year of study. It runs across the four years of study, starting from day
one and ending at graduation. In tune with the course’s educational principal to demand of
students an increasing sense of responsibility and accountability while the course evolves, SCC
is conducted in a similar fashion: from relatively intensive supervision in years 1 and 2 to a
less-intensive form of coaching in year 4.
The panel very much agrees to the design of the Study Career Coaching track as outlined
below:
Autonomy of student
Topics during meetings with Study Coach
Year 1
Towards self-management and
taking responsibility for one’s own
learning process
Year 2
Towards managing and being
accountable for one’s own learning
process
Year 3
Students actions demonstrate their
self-management skills and
accountability
Getting acquainted, learning targets, extra-curricular
activities term 1, analysis of one’s strengths and
weaknesses and strategies to work on them
Reflection on competencies development per term and
justification of competences development (based on
content of assessment blueprint), learning targets and
extra-curricular activities for the next term (based on a
written proposal, the Binding Study Advice.
Reflection on competences development per term and
justification of competencies development (based on
content of assessment blueprint), learning targets and
extra-curricular activities for the next term (based on a
written proposal
(justification of) choice of elective minor and work
placement (what & where?)
Reflection on and justification of competencies
development and integrating the competencies in the
context of the future career.
Year 4
Ready to start as a professional;
completely self-managing and
accountable
Reflection on and justification of competences
development (based on longitudinal reflective analysis),
long-term career goals (PDP)
Placement and Graduation Supervision
Another important part of student tutoring is done during the placement. During their work
placements students are supervised by their company coach (supervisor from the company).
Students have regular progress meetings in which the company coach gives feedback on the
performance of the student. Simultaneously, the academic supervisor will check competency
development and will correct the direction taken by the student where necessary. He will visit
the placement organisation at least twice. The placement lecturer, the company coach and the
student will have regular contact with each other. Students doing placements abroad will be
supervised through email and/or telephone contact.
Third-year students on the panel confirmed this process to work accordingly in practice.
Once students are allowed to start the graduation phase (see Standard 16), a graduation
supervisor is allocated. The supervising lecturer, who will be mostly a lecturer with an academic
background, will assess whether students are on the right track in relation to the achievement
of objectives. He will have meetings and/or regular email contact with students on the progress
being made with research. Students will also be supervised by the organisation for which the
research report is being produced. Students will be advised on how to conduct their research
and discuss it within the company.
Fourth-year students were in general very positive about the way they are being guided
through the final stage of their studies. One of them said: ‘My school supervisor was very
helpful and eventually got me started with my research. He made some really good suggestions
as to how I might approach my topic.’
Supervision of students with study-delay
In all three locations specially appointed Study Career Coaches have been allocated to students
with study-delays. They contact the students concerned at the beginning of an academic year
and make arrangements with their students on how to finalize their studies. It remains the
student’s own responsibility to draw up a study plan and to arrange a discussion on it with the
Study Career Coach. As this supervision of study-delayed students has entered into force only
recently it is yet too early to present significant results. However, the initiative alone to allocate
special supervisors to study-delayed students in the eyes of the panel members should be
commended, as the percentage of sixth’ year students on the course still vary between 33 and
43%.
With regards to the conclusion of the Foundation Year, the panel is happy to see that the
percentage of students that obtain their Foundation Certificate only after three years of study
has declined sharply from the 2008 intake (from 59.1% for 2007 intake to 14.3 for 2008
intake).
Student assessment
The NSE 2011 shows that students are in general satisfied with the supervision they receive.
The study supervision and the quality of supervision in general are rated 3.3 (on a five-point
scale) and the Placement supervision is averagely rated 3.4.
Information Provision
As a policy, the programme frequently communicates with students in a digital format.
Therefore all information is made available to students in a digital format, preferably from any
workspace. As such, policy is geared towards ensuring that programme documents, study
handbooks, forms, education timetables and study results are available in a digital format.
The two most important media for information provision are the Intranet for Inholland
University of Applied Sciences (Insite) and Blackboard.
The panel members were provided entrance to Inholland’s e-learning platform Insite and
established that students can find there their annual timetable, the study timetable, the
examinations schedule and all examination results that have been registered.
The Students’ Charter is available on Insite too. This is considered the basic document for each
student, in which all of the information that students will need to know about Inholland UoAS,
the site and the programme have been brought together.
This is practical information about ‘who’, ‘what’ and ‘where’, but also information about the
rights and obligations applicable to students and Inholland University of Applied Sciences, the
Tuition and Examination Regulations, rules and regulations and substantive information about
the programme.
The various study handbooks with detailed information on the courses, are available to
students on Blackboard well in advance of the kick-off for each term. The course descriptions,
include a weekly schedule of the content of the classes, and indicate the literature to be
studied, the assignments to be carried out and give details relating to assessment.
At the beginning of each term, students are notified of the annual schedule, independent study
weeks and project presentations. The schedule for the exam and resits for the term are
published on Blackboard in the first two weeks of each term.
Students are able to contact the Education Service Centre with questions about any
administrative and logistical matters relating to the programme.
Student assessment
In line with the panel’s findings in the audit, students appear on average to be pleased with the
way the course provides them with information, with ratings in between a 3.1 and a 4.0 across
locations:
Evaluation Question
Information from your programme
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
2012
3.2
3.3
4.0
3.5
3.4
3.2
2011
2012
3.1
3.2
3.6
3.5
3.2
3.3
2011
2012
3.2
3.0
3.2
3.3
3.2
3.0
Information about your study progress
Information about rules and procedures
Throughout the programme, in an integrated way, the course offers various forms of tutoring
with the purpose to facilitate students’ professional and personal development and to prepare
them for practice. Also, the course focusses on bringing down study delay rates and on
improving the low Foundation success rates by appointing special study supervisors.
The course provides all the course details in a timely manner and in an accessible form.
Students are content about the quality of the tutoring and the provision of information.
Therefore the panel rates Standard 12 as ‘good’
4.5.
Quality Assurance
Standard 13: The programme is evaluated on a regular basis, partly on the basis of
measurable targets.
Explanation: The school ensures the quality of the intended learning outcomes, the curriculum, the
staff, the services and facilities, the assessments and the learning outcomes achieved through regular
evaluations. The school also collects management information regarding the success rates and the staffstudent ratio.
Findings
With regards to this standard the panel inspected the course’s Quality and Evaluation Plan and
discussed with all parties involved, in particular with the central management, location
management and the lecturing staff the execution of their quality assurance policy. The panel
has established that the periodical evaluation of the programme comprises the following
elements: (i) the system of evaluation questionnaires, (ii) the interpretation of management
information, (iii) the assessment of educational products and (iv) the execution of the list of
WHW items, the latter being specific for Inholland as part of the inspection improvement plan.
System of Evaluations
The Annual Quality and Evaluation Plan (on the Faculty level) describes the Evaluation System
in detail. As part of the audit, the panel members reviewed a selection of evaluation forms and
minutes of evaluative meetings and established that these raise relevant questions that cover
all of the items of NVAO’s Accreditation Framework, thus ensuring the quality of (i) the
intended learning outcomes, (ii) the curriculum, (iii) the staff, (iv) the services and facilities, (v)
the assessments and (vi) the learning outcomes achieved. The programme also collects
management information regarding (vii) the success rates and (viii) the staff-student ratio.
The course has defined response targets for each evaluation instrument, e.g. > 60% for
internal periodical evaluations. All closed questions of the student evaluations are based on a 5point scale. The following quality targets have been defined by the IBMS team: (i) average
score > 3.5: result is good, (ii) average score < 3.5: needs investigation, and (iii) average
score < 3.0: result is not good, improvement required.
The panel agrees with the relatively high target score of 3.5, but at the same time concludes
that most of the evaluations result in ratings between 3.0 and 3.5 and thus need investigation
(see Standard 14).
Apart from the internal evaluations, Inholland also participates in the National Student
Questionnaire (NSE), which is a benchmark for all Universities. Unlike the questionnaire on the
programme itself, the NSE information is not specified for different year groups or classes.
The Quality and Evaluation Plan of IBMS also describes the evaluation process for each of the
stakeholders. The panel established a closed-loop PDCA cycle.
On the basis of the previous findings the panel concludes that the programme employs a welldesigned quality assurance system with measurable targets that delivers regular output. The
evaluations produce information that underpins possible adjustments and improvements to the
intended learning outcomes, the curriculum, the staff, the services and facilities, the
assessments and the learning outcomes achieved as well as success rates and the staff-student
ratio.
Therefore, the panel rates Standard 13 as ‘good’.
Standard 14: The outcomes of these evaluations constitute evidently the basis for
measures for improvement that contribute to the attainment of the targets.
Findings
The panel has evaluated this assessment criterion foremost by studying analyses reports of
evaluation outcomes, the Inholland Improvement Plan and a selection of minutes of staff and
Committee meetings. Also, various documents related to the improved Graduation Phase and
the research track in the programme were subject of study. The panel observed the following
examples of how evaluation results fuel measures for improvement:
WHW compliance
Like all other Universities of Applied Sciences, Inholland will also have to comply with the newly
adjusted regulations of the WHW. However, for Inholland UoAS WHW compliance is even a
much more leading issue as a 2010-2011 report by the Inspectorate for Education stated,
among other things, that Inholland UoAS did not operate in accordance with a substantial
number of aspects.
As a consequence of this, the Board of Directors (CvB) has taken measures to make every
course meet all WHW requirements. To this end, a tool (checklist) was designed which is used
by Faculty Deans (domeindirecteuren) to direct the improvement process and to report to the
Board on the progress being made in this area. The panel received a copy of this elaborate
checklist and was impressed by its level of detail. The compliance checklist, among other
things, governs the strict application of examination regulations and enforcement of guidelines
related to the safeguarding of the achieved level of the course. At present, the results of these
improvements are quite impressive (see Standard 16) and show that the measures were based
on a thorough analysis of the graduation process.
Similarly, the panel found good examples of improvement measures being implemented and
maintained in minutes of the Programme Teams, the Programme Advisory Committee and the
Examination Board.
Dealing with complaints and dissatisfaction
An issue that emerges from the evaluation results are the low satisfaction rates of disabled
students in Diemen and Rotterdam. In the audit no analysis of these ratings could be given.
The panel recommends some further investigation into the reasons behind these weak results
and to take appropriate actions.
The panel has also established that the results of the 2012 student evaluations reveal some
incidents at the Rotterdam branch. In term 1 and 2 of 2011-2012 it appears there were several
problems with the processing of the grades due to the transfer to a new data entry system.
The IBMS staff has been busy resolving these arrears, which has resulted in a slightly improved
score for terms 3 and 4 of 2011-12.
Another significant issue is the ‘dealing with complaints’, particularly in the Rotterdam location
and to a lesser extent in Diemen. The IBMS management suggests that the dissatisfaction
concerns the IBMS Examination Board only, as some students complain that they do not get
instant answers, whereas the Examination Board meets once a week.
However, close reading of the outcomes learn that Rotterdam students are dissatisfied about (i)
management response to complaints (2.5, Diemen: 2.9), (ii) feedback on study evaluation
results (2.6), (iii) the yield of study evaluations (2.6) and (iv) student involvement in improving
education (2.9).
The panel is of the opinion that this type of dissatisfaction should probably sooner be attributed
to frequent management changes and poor communication, as was confirmed by underlying
substantiations of students’ judgements. Besides, if students expect to get instant answers
from the Examination Board, apparently the complaints lodging process has not been clearly
communicated. Moreover, students at the other branches do not experience similar issues in
this field, with the exception of Diemen on ‘management response to complaints’. The panel
strongly recommends the management to reconsider their analyses of students’ dissatisfaction
on these QA items and to take appropriate measures.
Staff satisfaction
Similarly, the IBMS management attributes the relatively poor ratings for staff satisfaction on
some items (also see Standards 8 and 10) to the uncertainty about their future perspective,
caused by the possible consequences of the reorganization and the developments concerning
the Inholland International College.
MTV staff, and thus IBMS staff as well, appear to be less satisfied in general than staff in other
Inholland clusters (5.8 against 6.4 on a 10-point scale). Pressure of work is experienced as
high and their ratings for the atmosphere at work (5.9), pressure of work (4.1) and perspective
(6.4) are lower than Inholland averages.
Again, the panel makes the observation that these low ratings cannot entirely be ascribed to
the reorganization process. Instead, it became clear in the audit that mediocre communication
and management discontinuity are also factors to take into account. The panel recommends the
management to investigate the relatively poor ratings for staff satisfaction more thoroughly.
The previous findings, in general, confirm that the evaluation data are properly analysed and
lead to actions for improvement. Particularly, the strict compliance with WHW regulations is
salient. However, analyses of some of the results appear to be a bit simplistic, particularly with
regards to some staff and student satisfaction ratings and the way complaints are dealt with.
This concerns the Rotterdam location in particular.
Thus, the panel judgement on Standard 14 reads ‘satisfactory’.
Standard 15: Programme committees, examining boards, staff, students, alumni
and the relevant professional field are actively involved in the school’s internal
quality assurance.
Findings
The IBMS evaluation system includes all relevant stakeholders, such as: (i)
lecturers/programme teams, (ii) students, (iii) Examination Board, Assessment Committee and
Programme Advisory Committee, (iv) External Advisory Board, (v) Company supervisors and
(vi) alumni. In the audit, the panel verified how stakeholders’ input in the programme is
appreciated and transferred into improvements. For instance, one of the field representatives
said he talked a lot with the programme management about what could be improved or what
was missing in the programme. ‘And this has certainly led to changes, particularly in projects,
that are now even more realistic.’ Similar remarks were made by other auditees.
The document ‘Kwaliteitsmanagement primair proces domein MTV’ describes, among other
things, the roles of all stakeholders. Especially the Examination Board and the Curriculum
Committee play a leading role in the safeguarding of quality.
Students
At the end of each term, students fill in questionnaires with closed questions to provide
feedback on the design, content, delivery and organization of the course. Students can check
the results on Blackboard.
Teaching Staff
Results of student questionnaires/evaluations are made available to all lecturing staff. Analyses
and improvement plans are discussed in team meetings and in IPOP meetings and appraisals.
Also staff members are invited to participate in the Staff Satisfaction Enquiry (MTO,
MedewerkersTevredenheidsOnderzoek).
Since December 2011 an IBMS Curriculum Committee (CC) composed of lecturers has been set
to work. The CC is supposed to be the ‘owner’ of the curriculum and responsible for its content,
level, quality and coherence.
Programme Advisory Committee (PAC)
Both lecturers and students are involved in the PAC. In this body the student evaluations are
discussed and appropriate actions taken. Also, the PAC conducts an annual assessment of the
Teaching & Examination Regulations (TER).
Exam Board
In tune with the revised WHW, the Exam Board has been placed in a pivotal role with regards
to the safeguarding of the quality of the programme. The panel has reviewed the Examination
Board’s annual report of 2011-12, which shows clear involvement in quality assurance (see
Standard 16).
Professional field
Alumni
IBMS tries to keep in touch with as many of its alumni as possible through E-mail, social media
and by occasionally organising email events. Mostly this is on an individual lecturer-alumnus
basis, rather than a central alumni administration. Many of the IBMS alumni are no longer in
The Netherlands, but attempts are made to organise alumni gatherings with those graduates
who are at each location at various times. In addition, alumni are invited to give guest lectures,
participate in projects (e.g. Dragons’ Den in year 1) and indeed in the acquisition of
placements. Alumni are regularly involved in student study trips (e.g. to China). In recent years
there have been alumni gatherings in Diemen, London and Beijing.
Still, as already stated under Standard 1 the panel would like to see a more structured
approach of the course towards quality input from their alumni. The panel is content to learn
that the course management shares this view and seeks ways to profit more from the everexpanding body of IBMS graduates all over the world.
It welcomes the course initiatives to strengthen ties with IBMS alumni and to involve them
even more in the programme, both in terms of content (e.g. guest lectures, placements,
dissertation subjects etc.) and in terms of the further development of the programme.
In this respect, the panel recommends activities be organized by the Student Society to the
benefit of both parties, such as seminars, to initiate an exchange between current students and
course alumni. (see the Recommendation Section of this report).
External Advisory Board
In the past, cooperation with the course’s External Advisory Board (EAB) has not been optimal,
in that EAB members did not always feel that much, if anything, was being done with their
input. In May 2011 there was a very positive EAB meeting, in which members looked forward
to regular involvement, including with the PISP and indeed this current Critical Reflection
document. The minutes of recent PAC meetings as well as the panel discussions with some of
the members, showed real commitment to the quality assurance of the course.
From its findings as outlined above, the panel concludes that all relevant parties, such as the
Programme Advisory Board, the Examination Board, lecturers, students, alumni and
professional field representatives are actively involved in the school’s internal quality
assurance.
The course management is taking measures to improve alumni involvement and to further
strengthen the quality input from the professional field.
Therefore the panel judgement on Standard 15 reads ‘good’.
4.6.
Standard 16: The school has an adequate assessment system in place and
demonstrates that the intended learning outcomes are achieved.
Explanation: The level achieved is demonstrated by interim and final tests, final projects and the
performance of graduates in actual practice or in subsequent programmes. The tests and assessments
are valid, reliable and transparent to the students.
Findings
Assessment system
During or after the end of each term, assessments are used to establish whether students have
attained the level of competence required. To this end, different assessment formats are
applied throughout the four study years.
The assessment format used and the relevant examination criteria for each of the units of study
are denoted in the programme-specific part of the Tuition and Examination Regulations of the
course, which comprises all course descriptions. Test formats are indicated in terms of ‘Written
exam with open questions (50%) and multiple choice questions (50%), or ‘Portfolio and
Personal Interview’.
In the first two years of study the course applies different type of assessments for projects,
case-studies, knowledge and understanding, skills and Personal Development. The project
assessment is a joint group assessment, while all the other assessments are taken individually.
The various assessment formats focus specifically on one or more competencies, on elements
of a competency or on knowledge and skills. Interim-examinations are designed according to
the four-eye principle, meaning all tests are peer-reviewed before deployment.
The project assessment establishes whether students are able to produce relevant professional
products in collaboration with others (see Standard 2) and to learn from this. Groups of
students work together to produce a certain professional product that complies with certain
specifications, for a certain situation or client (real or simulated), all based on the “I-you-wethey” project-based learning approach. Assessment focuses on the professional product itself
(does it comply with the specifications?), the process (collaboration), and finally on the
performance and learning process of the individual student. This assessment consists therefore
of both group work and individual work. Students are awarded a collective grade for their
project result. However, students are also peer-evaluated individually, based on their personal
contribution to the project. As part of the audit, the panel reviewed several project assessment
forms that dealt with both individual and group assessment. The assessment criteria could well
be related to the learning goals from the course description.
A case-study assessment establishes whether students are able to handle the kind of problems
that occur in a professional, ‘real-world’ environment and a knowledge and insight assessment,
mostly in the form of open or closed questions, evaluate whether a student is in command of
the conditional knowledge and understanding required to deliver a professional performance. In
skills assessments, which are usually presentations, written assignments and case-simulations,
students are required to demonstrate their skills. The panel reviewed some of the case-study
assignments that were on display in the audit and found them both topical and on the right
level.
The assessment of student’s Personal Development Plan is part of the Study Career Counselling
and the module Professional development. Through this PDP students are assessed on their
reflective competence and their professional behaviour. This comprises the capability to
substantiate one’s development and behaviour and the ability to set their own learning
objectives on the basis of thorough reflection.
In their third year the assessment of their work placement is key. The core of the placement in
Year 3 is the performance of the student in a professional environment, together with his ability
to use applied research to successfully carry out a project defined by the company and come up
with useful recommendations.
In the Supervised Work Experience Review that the students have to draw up, they must
demonstrate the competencies they have been working on while on placement and the extent
to which they have attained their pre-determined learning objectives. Here students also reflect
on their own professional activities, taking the level of competency required of a professional at
the start of his career as their benchmark. The panel reviewed some Placement Essays together
with students’ logbooks of their placement experiences. By and large, the panel found that
students could be guided more in their reflective skills, as quite a few of the files showed
descriptions of activities and work processes rather than fruitful reflections.
In the last semester of Year 4 the Graduation Assessment takes place. In order to start the
dissertation, students are required to get a go-ahead from their graduation supervisor on the
basis of their research proposal. The graduation stage consists of three assessable units.: (i)
the written dissertation, (ii) student’s Professional Portfolio and (iii) the oral defence thereof.
The thesis is worth 25EC, the portfolio part is awarded 5EC.
In their dissertations students analyse a problem for a commissioning client and do applied
research. Students submit their research proposal to the Graduation Coordinator, who will
allocate an academic supervisor to guide the student through the entire process of the
dissertation. This academic supervisor is the first marker and another member of IBMS staff is
allocated as an independent, second marker. The two markers decide together on the grade for
the Advisory Report and for the Defence. In addition, IBMS decided to submit all dissertations
with a grade between 5.5 and 6.5 to a third marker, whose feedback generally concurs with the
first and second assessors. The panel commends the staff for this extra quality assurance
measure to safeguard the caesura. Similarly, the panel would suggest to also triple-check
papers that are about to be graded > 8.0.
To assure quality, the course had fifteen dissertations reviewed by an independent Inholland
researcher as to whether they were indeed at HBO level. The review revealed that the course
needs to reinforce the research skills of students, such as the formulation of research
questions. This led to a mid-term evaluation in all three locations among students doing their
dissertation to see whether their research questions needed adjustment and whether additional
guidance was required. The outcome showed that in some cases research questions were too
broad. This led to the Graduation Coordinators e-mailing all students doing their dissertations in
2011-2012, requiring them to submit their work in progress for examination. The teams in the
three locations met to discuss the work submitted and, if necessary, took measures to guide
students accordingly. The panel is positive about these measures to upgrade the quality of the
dissertations as they appear to have strengthened students’ skills to apply research methods
and techniques (see ‘Panel Assessment of Students’ Dissertations’).
As part of the Graduation Assessment, student’s Professional Portfolio is also being evaluated.
In this oral assessment on the basis of his Professional Portfolio, the student will be expected to
substantiate his competency development throughout the programme. The presentation of the
Professional Portfolio takes the form of a discussion between two assessors and the student on
the suitability of the student to enter the international labour market.
The panel reviewed a couple of portfolios and found some of them rather skinny, particularly if
they are meant to give an overview of a student’s personal and professional develop in his
study career. Notwithstanding the fact that personal and professional development plays such
an important part in the curriculum, the actual output looks rather thin on the basis of the
portfolios. The panel believes that more effort should be put into getting students to deliver a
portfolio that reflects their professional and personal development to the full. The panel learned
that the course is aware of the fact that the assessment of the Professional Portfolio still needs
more attention and needs to become more professional. Therefore the panel welcomes the
setting up of a cross location team that, according to the management, will further develop the
professional portfolio itself and indeed all aspects of its assessment.
As it stands, the 5EC awarded to the portfolio is rather overdone. The files on display do not
represent 140 hours of work and this should therefore be reconsidered. On the other hand, the
panel could imagine a more thorough and demanding approach to the portfolio assessment
would equal 140 hours of work and thus legitimatize a value of 5EC.
In the audit a large number of marked interim-examinations were on display. The panel
members reviewed them thoroughly and came to the conclusion that the content and level of
the interim-examinations are quite good, topical and with a nice variety of formats that tie in
well with the contents and learning goals to be assessed.
However, when it comes to the graduation phase of the study one can clearly see that recently
a vast number of adjustments and improvements have been implemented. And unfortunately
these are not all for the better. The graduation process is clear and so are the requirements,
but the number of different assessment forms in use are quite confusing and do not add the
required transparency to the final assessments. Also, they cause confusion about the weighting
of the three graduation components.
Another measure for improvement would be to make the assessment criteria more explicit and
to train examiners how to apply them. As discussed with the Examination Board, this is best
done through joint peer reviews of graduation papers with all examiners.
Examination Board and Assessment Committee
As part of the audit, the panel spoke intensively with members of the Examinations Board and
the Assessment Committee. The panel is impressed about the professional attitude and knowhow of the auditees. Both Examination Board and Assessment Committee members know what
is expected of them. They have reviewed samples of students graduation papers and show
clear understanding of what should be done, which loopholes should be closed and how to
prioritize. Moreover, both Examination Board and Assessment Committee contribute actively to
the improvement process and show full commitment.
Main thing for the Examination Board is now to get full control over the output and level of the
programme and to take up the required ‘watchdog’ stance.
The panel has taken note of the Board’s Annual Report and considers it of the right substance:
it contains both an overview of the Board’s activities as well as an analysis of current policies
and recommendations for improvement, e.g. with regards to enrolment for differentiation
minors and the validity of grades.
Students’ assessment of the assessment system
Students are in general satisfied with the way the course deals with (interim)-examinations,
although in Rotterdam students appear to have problems with the understanding of assessment
criteria, which could have been caused by issues of communication as students at the other
branches do not seem to have similar judgements.
Evaluation Question
The clarity of criteria on which assessment is effected
Diemen
Haarlem
R’dam
2011
2012
3.2
3.5
3.1
3.6
3.2
2.9
2011
2012
The extent to which the content of assessments has been discussed
afterwards, where required
2011
2012
3.3
3.4
3.4
3.8
3.3
3.3
3.3
-
2.9
-
3.3
-
The alignment of testing and assessment to the content of the
programme
Panel assessment of students’ dissertations
A random selection of 22 theses, together with their assessment forms, was evaluated before
the audit took place. An overview of the inspected theses is provided in the Annex VI to this
report. The choice was made by the panel members from a list provided by the staff, that
included the final papers of all course graduates of the past two years of the three locations.
The sample was taken in proportion to the numbers of students in each location. On-site the
panel reviewed an additional selection of theses, internship reports and portfolios as part of
students’ graduation trajectory.
Panel judgement
It seems that the elaborate improvement scheme for the graduation phase of the study pays
off. The panel members were in general enthusiastic about the content and level of the
dissertations they had reviewed prior to the audit.
All of the theses dealt with relevant and topical issues, such as ‘Business Communication and
Autism’, ‘A Market Introduction plan for Green Products from India’, ‘The Development of An
App for an International Clothing Company’. The papers were well-structured, most of them
had realistic and workable thesis statements, based on a literature search.
It is clear that the extensive proposal and timescale which should be submitted and approved
prior to the kick-off, offer an anchor to students in conducting their research and in drawing up
their theses. The dissertations were generally written in correct English and showed students’
command of how to go about practice oriented research.
All but one of the theses were graded correctly. The panel had doubts about a single
dissertation that had been graded a six, which in the eyes of the panel members should rather
have been marked insufficient instead. All other 21 theses had been graded correctly.
The panel was not particularly satisfied about the variety of assessment forms being used in
the final phase of study.
The panel suggests to reduce the number of assessment forms and to re-introduce ample room
for substantiation of assessors' judgements. The newly introduced set of forms breaks down
the criteria nicely, but at the same time invites assessors to fill them out rather mechanically.
This does not add any transparency as to how the judgement was formed, as was the case with
the previous assessment forms. It demonstrates that sometimes not all improvements are for
the better.
The panel discussed this with the Examination Board and was pleased to learn that the Board
had already arrived at the same conclusion. ‘This calls for peer review session in which an
accurate synchronization between examiners will take place,’ was the general view. In fact, the
Examination Board had already scheduled a few intervision meetings for examiners in order to
establish common assessment criteria and weighting.
The panel considers it important that the Examination Board leads the way in initiating the
discourse on the quality structure of assessments and is highly recommended to integrate this
quality assurance process in the course culture.
In tune with NVAO regulations, which allows for a panel deviation rate of no more than 10% of
the papers randomly inspected, the single mismatch between examiners and the panel did not
trigger a scale-up.
Professional field
Finally, the field representatives with whom the panel spoke are enthusiastic about the way
graduates perform in practice: ‘They have the knowledge and know-how to apply it as well.
Compared to graduates from other courses they appear to think more out-of-the-box, they are
more creative and interact better with their co-workers,’ says one of them, ‘Their social skills
are absolutely a major feat and their level of thinking comparable to that of other HBO
programmes.’ ‘And they are very delivery focussed too,’ confirms another one.
An alumnus adds: ‘I perform very well and was hired from my internship. I missed the research
part, but this is exactly what they are working on now.’
In summary, the panel takes the view that on the basis of the evaluated graduation papers and
the supportive statements of the work field representatives, the course clearly demonstrates to
achieve its intended learning outcomes.
The previous findings lead the panel to the conclusion that the school has designed an
adequate assessment system that in general evaluates students’ performance with the
appropriate assessment tools and formats. The Examination Board is well-equipped to play its
pivotal role and should now get full control over the output and level of the programme and
take up the required ‘watchdog’ stance.
Considered from the content and level point-of-view, the course clearly demonstrates that it
achieves the intended learning outcomes of the programme continually. These observations are
shared by the professional field.
However, there is still room for improvement when it comes to issues of ‘judgement
transparency and consistency’, particularly in the final phase of study.
Therefore, the panel judgement on Standard 16 reads ‘satisfactory’.
5.
OVERALL CONCLUSION
Despite the serious turmoil Inholland as an institution has gone through and, to some extent, is
still experiencing to this very day, the constant excitement hardly appeared to have affected
the proper execution and the intrinsic quality of the programme, on which foremost the IBMS
staff should be congratulated.
The course history shows a continual process of reorganisations and radical changes, the most
significant of which is still to come: the merger of the three locations into one strong
international programme through the establishment of an International College in Diemen. This
step, in the eyes of the panel members, requires the execution of an applicable HRM policy.
In summary, on the programme level the panel has seen:

A set of demanding and inspiring final qualifications, that have a clear international focus.
The final competencies could still be furnished with some course identifiers to make the set
of qualification statements stand out from similar programmes in the Netherlands;

A coherent programme that ties in nicely with competency based learning in an
international and multi-cultural setting, as adhered by the school;

A qualified staff that is very committed to their students;

Appropriate services and facilities that meet the standards of higher professional education;

An elaborate QA system that contributes to the fulfilment of the Deming cycle;

An assessment system that is already quite good, but still requires some adjustments and
more formal direction from the Examination Board;

And, not in the least, an output that reflects HBO level.
Further improvements in the field of HRM policy and the alignment and transparency of
assessments could eventually lead to an overall judgement ‘good’ for Inholland’s IBMS
programme.
As it is now, in tune with the NVAO assessment rules, the panel’s judgement on the entire
programme reads ‘satisfactory’. It recommends the NVAO to extend the programme’s
accreditation for another six years.
6.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Alongside the audit the panel members made a few observations that might be of interest to
the school. They are lined up in this chapter of the report as suggestions and recommendations
for improvement.
In general, the panel found the course’s Critical Reflection by far the most process-oriented
paper of all IBMS programmes it had audited until then. It hardly contained good practices or
concrete examples of what actually takes place in every-day practice, it was not very critical
either, and was generally written from a management perspective. These are usually signs that
a Critical Reflection is not the end product of a process in which all stakeholders have been
consulted and involved, but merely an exercise at management or quality assurance staff level.
In the light of the present developments this approach may be understandable, but still the
panel would highly recommend to turn the writing of future Critical Reflections into an integral
part of the QA process, to emphasize programme level and to give more examples of actual
practice, and to safeguard the involvement of all relevant parties.
Related to topic 1 (4.1): intended learning outcomes

In order to make the intended learning outcomes more specific, the panel in the audit
discussions noted some suggestions for ‘course identifiers’. Work field representatives
praised the IBMS-Inholland students for their focus on delivery and their creative abilities
to apply their knowledge base to ignite innovation and called for further development of
this property. The panel shares their view and recommends to consider these remarks
when reviewing and refining the set of qualification statements.
Related to topic 2 (4.2): curriculum

The panel would recommend to make an Internship Abroad compulsory for all (Dutch)
students;

The panel recommends to review the 5EC awarded for the portfolio reflection. This part of
the programme should either be intensified and upgraded or the number of credits awarded
should be reduced; additionally, the panel would recommend that students are guided
more accurately in their reflective skills, as quite a few of them now appear to misinterpret
process descriptions as reflections.
Related to topic 3 (4.3): staff

The panel recommends more attention be paid to (i) signals of continual work pressure and
(ii) sound communication with staff on issues emerging from the on-going reorganisations
and the forming of the International College in Diemen in particular and, related to these,
(iii) re-energize staff and improve management loyalty.
Related to topic 4 (4.4): services and facilities

The panel would recommend to add a number of business magazines to the collection, e.g.
on finance, management and HRM, and subsequently incorporate them more actively in
lectures and project work.
Related to topic 5 (4.5): quality assurance

The panel recommends a more in-depth analysis be made of staff and student satisfaction
ratings, particularly those of the Rotterdam location;

The panel recommends a more active approach be adopted towards the involvement of
alumni and the arrangement of activities that could be beneficial for the course as well as
for the alumni themselves.
Related to topic 6 (4.6): assessment and learning outcomes achieved

As yet, the Examination Board has not established its own mechanism to evaluate the
achieved level of the course by itself, e.g. by regularly double-checking a sample of final
papers. The panel recommends to give priority to reinforce the Examination Board’s keyresponsibility;

The panel recommends to reconsider the recently revised assessment forms in use as they
still leave room for improvement when it comes to issues of ‘judgement transparency and
consistency’;

In the audit work field representatives and alumni in particular drew the panel’s attention
on the importance of students’ diplomatic skills or – as they called it – the ‘moulding of
Dutch bluntness’, which considered from a cultural awareness perspective is quite
desirable;

The panel also recommends more emphasis on students’ writing skills, both in view of a
follow-up Masters’ study and a possible next career step in business management.
ANNEXES
ANNEX I
Overview of judgements
Overview of judgements on the Bachelor of Business Administration
in
International Business & Management Studies of Inholland University of AS
Standards
Standard 1: Intended learning outcomes
Curriculum
Standard 2:
Standard 3:
Standard 4:
Standard 5:
Standard 6:
Standard 7:
Orientation of the curriculum
Contents of the curriculum
The structure of the curriculum
Incoming students
Feasibility of the programme
Scope and duration of the curriculum
Staff
Standard 8: Staff policy
Standard 9: Quality of the staff
Standard 10: Size of the staff
Standard 11: Housing and infrastructure
Standard 12: Tutoring and information
Judgements
good
good
satisfactory
good
good
good
in order
unsatisfactory
satisfactory
satisfactory
good
good
Quality assurance
Standard 13: Evaluations
Standard 14: Measures for improvement
Standard 15: Involvement of stakeholders
good
satisfactory
good
Standard 16: Assessment system and learning outcomes achieved
satisfactory
Overall judgement
satisfactory
ANNEX II
The course’s learning objectives and outcomes
The IBMS competencies provide the filling in of the BBA domain competencies in the sense that
the IBMS-context and the description of the professional tasks and responsibilities are given.
The profession-related competencies refer to competencies specific for an IBMS professional.
They specify the tasks and responsibilities that distinguish an IBMS professional from others.
In order to perform the professional’s tasks described in the former section a graduate needs to
have general competencies: behaviour and skills that are general for professionals operating at
bachelor’s (HBO) level. Often they are referred to as personal effectiveness or personal skills.
On the basis of the 10 generic HBO-qualifications IBMS will focus on interpersonal, taskoriented and intra-personal competencies.
The course focusses on 9 professional competencies and 7 generic competencies:
Profession-related competencies
I
International business competencies
1. International business awareness
2. Intercultural competence
II
General Management competencies
3. International strategic vision development
4. Business processes & change management
5. Entrepreneurial management
III
Functional key-areas competencies
6. International marketing and sales management
7. International supply chain management
8. International finance & accounting
9. International human resource management (HRM)
Generic competencies
IV
Interpersonal competencies
1. Leadership
2. Co-operation
3. Business Communication
V
Task-oriented competencies
4. Business research methods
5. Planning and organizing
VI
Intra-personal competencies
6. Learning and self-development
7. Ethical and corporate responsibility
RENEWEL
II.1: Leadership
II.2: Co-operation
II.3: Communication
II.6: Learning and selfdevelopment
I.1: International Business
awareness
I.2 : Intercultural competence
II.7 : Ethical responsibility
MENTOR &
FACILITATOR
ADVISOR &
VISIONARY
I.9: International Human
Resource Management
I.5 : Entrepreneurial
management
I.4 : Business Processes &
Change Management
II.4:Business Research Methods
Internal
I.7: International Supply
Chain Management
CONTROLLER &
COORDINATOR
STRATEGIST &
PRODUCER
I.3: International
Strategic Vision
Development
II.5: Planning and
Organizing
I.6: International
Marketing & Sales
I.8: International Accounting &
Financial Management
Management
Control
Competency Chart IBMS National Curriculum
This chart shows how the 16 IBMS competences equip graduates as generalists with basic
knowledge in all the main areas of business.
External
ANNEX III
Overview of the Bachelor’s programme
The following chart shows the full IBMS curriculum for 2013-2014 (year 2 differs in academic
year 2012-2013)
Year 1
Term 1
Term 2
Term 3
Term 4
Theme:
Inside information
Theme:
Explore your market
Theme:
Entrepreneurial Business 1
Theme:
Entrepreneurial Business 2
Project:
This project intends
to introduce the
students to business
organisations from
the perspective of a
newly hired
employee.
Project:
The students will develop
a critical understanding
of the various aspects of
a business organisation,
such as its operations,
organisational structure,
management and its
financial situation
Project:
Entrepreneurial Business
development (Dragons
Den part-1)
For the project Assignment
in term 3 students will be
expected to submit a
business investment
proposal (feasibility
analysis), with a
conceptual realisation of
the product/idea.
Subjects offered:
Management
Business &
Organisation
Essentials of Business
Finance
HRM 1
Business Culture 1
Excel
Business
Communication 1
English
Second Foreign
Language
(G/F/Sp/Du)
Professional
Development
Subjects offered:
Principles of Marketing
Marketing Research
Micro-Economics
Business Statistics - 1
Law - The Regulatory
Environment
Business Communication
2
English
Second Foreign
Language (G/F/Sp/Du)
Professional
Development
Subjects offered:
Entrepreneurial Thinking
Business Statistics 2
Business Strategy
International Economics
Property & Contract Law
Business Communication 3
English
Second Foreign Language
(G/F/Sp/Du)
Professional Development
Project:
Entrepreneurial Business
development (Dragons
Den part-2)
In term 4 the project
teams will be expected to
work out the business
investment proposal
(feasibility analysis) of
term 3 into a business
investment plan, for
attracting investment
(finance and /or expertise)
from an investor “Business
Angel”.
Subjects offered:
Management Accounting
Logistics and Distribution
Marketing Mix
International Business
English
(G/F/Sp/Du)
Year 2
Term 5
Term 6
Term 7
Term 8
Theme:
Integrated business
simulation 1
Theme:
Integrated business
simulation 2
Theme:
Move it! 1
Theme:
Move it! 2
Project:
The scope of the
strategy and
operations by
periodic decision
making per round of
the game involves all
integrated aspects of
running a full scale
international business
in real. Marketing,
Finance, HRM, Legal
and
Supply Chain
Management are the
core components
besides Corporate
Strategy.
Subjects offered:
Managerial
Economics
HRM 2
Strategic
Management 1
Supply Chain
Management
Business
Communication 5
English
Second Foreign
Language
(G/F/Sp/Du)
Professional
Development
Project:
Idem
Project:
Students in a project team
will form a consultancy
company specialised in
marketing and market
research, and advising
clients on their import and
export activities.
Product: marketing plan
Project:
Students in a project team
will form a consultancy
company specialised in
marketing and market
research, and advising
clients on their import and
export activities
Product: import or export
plan
Subjects offered:
Finance
HRM 3
Strategic Management 2
Business Ethics 1
International Contracts &
Sales Contracts
Business Communication
6
English
Second Foreign
Language (G/F/Sp/Du)
Professional
Development
Subjects offered:
International Business
Strategy
Management Dimensions
of Law
Financial Economics
Business Culture 2
Business Research
Methods
English
(G/F/Sp/Du)
Subjects offered:
International Marketing
International Leadership &
Management
International Managerial
Finance
Business Ethics 2
Academic Writing
English
(G/F/Sp/Du)
Year 3
Term 9
Term 10
Placement or In-depth or in-breadth
differentiation minors or Study Abroad
Year 4
Term 13
Term 14
In-depth differentiation minors or
placement in case of one year study abroad
programme in year 3
Term 11
Term 12
Placement or In-depth or in-breadth
differentiation minors or Study Abroad
Term 15
Term 16
Graduation
Overview 1: Overview of the IBMS Curriculum for 2013-2014
ANNEX IV
Overview of staff at the three branches
(Situation as of 01-02-2012)
Composition of IBMS Team Amsterdam-Diemen
Number of Persons
Percentage
12
-
100
-
Highest Level of Education Achieved
University
University of applied sciences
Other
9
3
75
25
Teaching Qualifications
Grade one teaching qualification
Grade two teaching qualification
Teaching endorsement for lecturers at universities of applied
sciences
5
2
4
42
17
33
4
1
4
2
8
33
8
33
17
67
Number of lecturers with a permanent contract
Number of lecturers with a temporary contract
Connection with the Field of Work
Recent work experience
Currently employed in the professional field (in part)
Originating from the professional field
Still employed in the professional field less than three years ago
Relevant contact network
Composition of IBMS Team Haarlem
Number of Persons
Percentage
7
-
100
-
University
Other
3
4
43
57
sciences
3
1
2
43
14
29
3
43
4
1
7
57
14
100
©Hobéon Certificering | Assessment Report Extensive Assessment of the Bachelor International Business & Management
©Hobéon Certificering | Assessment Report Extensive Assessment of the Bachelor of BA in Hotel Management |
Hotelschool The Hague65
Composition of IBMS Team Rotterdam
Number of Persons
Percentage
8
-
100
-
University
6
75
Other
2
-
25
-
sciences
2
2
3
25
25
38
1
5
6
12
63
75
Academic year
2010-2011
2011-2012
Teaching staff in FTE
Students enrolled (all students)
Weighted funded students (students from Years 1 to 4 inclusive)
Lecturer-student ratio (weighted)
Lecturer-student ratio (unweighted)
22,59
658
558
24,70
29,13
22,24
595
475
21,36
26,75
Development of teacher to student ratios
Realised lecturer-student ratios since 2010-2011 (total overview)
Realised lecturer-student ratios since 2010-2011 (location Amsterdam/Diemen)
Academic year
2010-2011
2011-2012
9,79
330
277
28,29
33,71
9,41
307
255
27,10
32,62
Academic year
2010-2011
2011-2012
5,1
114
96
18,82
22,35
5,5
106
78
14,18
19,27
Academic year
2010-2011
2011-2012
7,7
214
185
24,03
27,79
7,33
182
142
19,37
24,83
Realised lecturer-student ratios since 2010-2011 (location Haarlem)
Realised lecturer-student ratios since 2010-2011 (location Rotterdam)
ANNEX V
Programme of site-visit
Programme 1st of October 2012 – day one
Location: Inholland Haarlem, Bijdorplaan 15, 2015 CE Haarlem
Time
08.00 –
08.10
08.10 –
09.00
Auditees
Reception by school management
Preparatory meeting panel members
School Management and Programme
management
09.00 –
10.00
10.00 –
10.15
 Yvonne Kanters - Programme Director IBMS
a.i.
 Willem Viets – Director International Affairs
(university-wide)














mission & strategy
developments in professional field
market position / competitive position
education performance / success rate
interaction with professional field /
customer relationship management
curriculum development
international focus
intrinsic backbone of the programme’s
contents
distinctive features of the programme
(applied) research & development
personnel management / staff policy
grounding of the domain quality
assurance policy into IBMS







curriculum development
involvement professional field
intrinsic backbone of the programme’s
contents
distinctive features of the programme
practical components
learning assessment (methods,
standards,
parties involved, scoring & feedback)
tutoring
(applied) research & development
education performance / success rate
interaction with the management
Break/panel retrospective
Teaching staff members
 Tatyana Rashkov-Todorova – Chair Central
Programme Advisory Committee
 Gijs Vlas – Lecturer/ Curriculum Committee
 Tanya Dimitrova – Chair Curriculum
10.15 –
11.15
Topics
 establishing of agenda
Committee
 David Wilson – Lecturer + Graduation
Coordinator
 Brian Downey - Lecturer
 Elke Pronk- Bernreiter – Lecturer +
Placement Coordinator





 Marja Anderton- ter Heide – Lecturer
 Andy Denz - Lecturer
11.15 –
11.30
Students
11.30 –
12.30
12.30 –
13.30
 Victoria Farrelly – Diemen – year 1
 Kai Pham – Diemen – year 1,5 February
intake
 Orkhan Aghazada – Diemen – year 2
 Stacey Zweers- Diemen- year 3
 Justin Carré – Haarlem- year 1
 Mark van Deurzen – Haarlem – year 1
 Tatiana Stankovianska - Haarlem – year 2
 Ubaid Babrakzai – Haarlem – year 3
 Jingyu An – Haarlem – year 4
 Anne Zoutendijk – Rotterdam - year 1
 Silvana Cepesi – Rotterdam - year 2
 Baraka Nahimana – Rotterdam – year 3
 Amy Activille – Rotterdam – year 3
 Martine Vogel – Rotterdam –year 4








quality of teachers
information and communication facilities
learning assessment / feedback
tutoring (incl. practical periods)
feasibility and workload
educational facilities
final projects/exams
student participation in the school’s
decision making
Lunch / Panel retrospective
Time
13.30 –
14.30
14.30 –
14.45
Auditees
(simultaneously: tour around the
school/programme facilities)
 Peter Stikker (blackboard)
 Rudolph Wilson and one or two IBMSstudents (facilities Haarlem)
Assessment system and Examination
Board
14.45 –
15.45
15.45 –
16.00
16.00 –
16.30
Parallel
sessions
16.30 –
17.30
Topics
 demonstration of blackboard
 specifically library, media centre and
classroom facilities
 Jeannette van Geuns – Chair Exam Board
 Rudolph Wilson – Exam Board
 Peter Stikker – Member Assessment
Committee
 Anthony Murphy – Member Exam Board
 Ingrid Pancras – Advisor Assessment
Committee
 quality assurance learning assessment
 achievement of intended learning
outcomes
 authority of the examination board
 relation to the management
 assessment: involvement of the
professional field
 assessment expertise
Break/Panel retrospective
Consultation session for students and
teaching staff
Review of additional documents
Panel reflection on the day and prep for next
day
Programme of 2nd of October 2012 – day two
Location: Inholland Haarlem, Bijdorplaan 15, 2015 CE Haarlem
Time
Auditees
08.30 –
09.00
09.00 –
09.30
Panel preparation
09.30 –
10.15
Research staff
10.15 –
10.30
10.30 –
11.15
Panel retrospective
Topics
Programme location co-ordinators
 Asta Helsper
 Peter Stikker
 Rudolph Wilson
 Helen de Haan PhD
 Raymond Zaal – lecturer (Phd topic: Ethics
in banking)
 Schelte Beltman - lecturer
 Rene van der Linden - lecturer
 Asta Helsper PhD - lecturer
Field representatives/alumni
Field representatives
 Hugo Nijssen – Consultancy - owner
 Henk Janssen – Lightwell Holding - CEO
 Eric Legdeur – EWAC - CEO
 Daniel de la Parra – OGD ICT diensten CEO
 involvement in reorganisation scheme
 impact on staff cohesion
 aspects of change management
 research activities
 impact on the programme
 involvement of teachers and
professional field
 results and further development
mission & strategy
developments in professional field
market position / competitive position
education performance /output/ success
rate
 interaction with professional field /
customer relationship management
 international focus




Alumni
 Caitlyn de Wild – Assistant Investor
 development coordinator Amsterdam in
 Business
 Svetozara Koleva – Master student
Nyenrode Business University
 Kasper Overtoom – brand manager –
L’Oréal
 Tim de Zwart – Store manager KPN
 Vivian Faceto - Order Manager BP
11.3012.15
At random classroom visits (depending
on scheduled classes)/
12.15 –
13.00
13.00 –
13.30
13.3014.00
14.00
Lunch
 application of didactical concept
Panel retrospective (drawing up of
preliminary conclusions)
Pending issues (if any)
Panel feedback to all invited by the school
Selection of the delegations / the auditees
In compliance with the NVAO regulations the audit panel decided on the composition of the
delegations (auditees) in consultation with the course management and on the basis of the
points of focus that had arisen from the panel’s analysis of the school’s documents prior to the
audit.
An ‘open consultation session’ was scheduled as part of the site-visit programme. The panel
verified that the scheduled times of the consultation session had been made public to all parties
involved in the school community correctly and timely. No students or staff members attended
the open consultation session. However, prior to the audit the panel received two emails from
students in their placements abroad. These emails were in general testimonies of the qualities
of the course.
During the site-visit the audit panel members spoke randomly to students and attended a
number of lectures.
ANNEX VI
Documents examined
List of documents examined




































Critical Reflection, Management Review
HBO Monitor 2010/2011
Kaderstellende beleidsdocumenten Inholland: (i) Verbinding als opdracht (2011), (ii)
Ruimte voor Presteren (2011), (iii) Presteren in Verbinding (2012), (iv) CvB kaders voor
examencommissies (2011), (v) Taken en bevoegdheden van de examencommissies van
Inholland (2011), (vi) Scholingsplan WHW 2011-2012, Inholland WHW-proof, (vii) Studeren
met een functiebeperking
Kaderstellende beleidsdocumenten domein MTV: (i) Kwaliteitsmanagement primair
proces MTV (update 2011), (ii) Opleidingscommissies Domein MTV versie 2.2 (2012), (iii)
Domeinplan Onderwijs 2012-2014 (2012), (iv) Jaarplan 2012-2013 MTV (5 juli 2012), (v)
Strategisch personeelsplan 2010-2014 MTV (2010), (vi) Scholingsplan domein MTV 20112012 (2011), (vii) MFRMTV Examencommissies 2010-2011 fase 2, (viii) MFRMTV
Examencommissies Brievenprotocol 2011-2012, (ix) Toetscommissies MTV, (x) Strategisch
personeelsplan domein MTV 2010-2014, (xi) Curriculumcommissies MTV-MFR (2011)
IBMS-specifiek deel studentenstatuut IBMS 2012-2013, including TER
IBMS Inholland Competency Chart
Matrix Competencies - Curriculum
IBMS National Profile (PISP)
Study Handbooks with detailed information on the courses, including: placement,
graduation, year 1, terms 1 + 2/year 2, terms 5 + 6, differentiation minor, term 1
Overview of students’ nationalities and their spread over the classes/years
Overview of IBMS staff
Selection of filled-in PCM forms (anonymised)
IBMS lecturers’ resumes of all locations
Results Inholland staff questionnaire 2012
Execution Plan training IBS 2012-2013
Overview international databases of available libraries
IBMS Quality and Evaluation plan 2012-2013 (draft)
Results NSE IBMS 2012
Results HBO-monitor 2010
Selection Results student questionnaires 2011-2012 (Term 1 Diemen, Term 3-4 Rotterdam
and Term 3 Haarlem
Verbeterplan Inholland
WHW-lijsten IBMS versie augustus 2012
Stappenplan evaluatie en verbetering afstudeerfase opleidingen domein MTV
Vastgestelde processtappen afstuderen. Wijzigingsvoorstellen n.a.v. versnellingskamer
Afstuderen 13 september 2010
Proposed changes in graduation phase 2012-2013 (linked to improved research line
curriculum)
Minutes External Advisory Board
Minutes PAC
Evaluation report 2011-2012 PAC
Evaluation report 2011-2012 Assessments Committee 2011-2012
Minutes team meetings
IBMS team days
Agenda and minutes MT IBMS
Annual Report 2011-2012 Exam Board
Additional selection of final papers
Selection of students’ portfolios
Cross section of interim examinations, assessments and tests


Selection of project reports and internship assignments, marked and unmarked
List of 22 final projects examined prior to the audit3:
445198
462496
452469
514076
462236
443572
439408
452986
451369
451377
405189
456309
424904
452950
1400084
446811
422670
454071
4234162
429930
467040
452516
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Diemen
Haarlem
Haarlem
Haarlem
Haarlem
R'dam
R'dam
R'dam
R'dam
R'dam
R'dam
R'dam
Additional documents examined

3
No additional documents were inspected after the audit took place.
Following NVAO regulations student enrolment numbers have been denoted here. For reasons of privacy
names of students and projects are known to the panel members and panel secretary only.
ANNEX VII Composition of the audit panel
Expertise
Panel members
Drs. W.G. van
Raaijen,
Chair
S. Buivys (MSc),
Expert
Mr. G. de Herde,
Expert
J. Marty,
Student
auditing
and
quality
assurance
X
education
professional
field
discipline
X
X
International
studentrelated
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
co-ordinator/certified secretary
H.R. (Rob) van der Made
On 22 August 2012 the NVAO approved the composition of the panel of the HBO Bachelor
International Business & Management Studies # 000737 – Hogeschool Inholland, locations
Amsterdam/Diemen, Haarlem and Rotterdam.
Succinct CVs of panel members and secretary/co-ordinator
1
2
3
4
5
Mr W.G. (Willem) van Raaijen is partner at Hobéon, one of the evaluation agencies with
regards to accreditation of higher professional education in the Netherlands. As a leadauditor he has conducted numerous audits in higher professional education, both inside
and outside of the Netherlands.
Mr Van Raaijen is a certified lead auditor (LRQA QMS Lead Auditor Training Course,
based upon ISO 9001:2008).
Mr S. (Saulius) Buivys is a teaching staff member at the IBMS course of the Rotterdam
Business School (UoAS Rotterdam). In that capacity he chairs the Examination Board and
is a member of the Curriculum Committee. Mr Buivys has a background in economics and
teaches Finance and Accounting, as well as Business Ethics & Policies, and Interactive
Project Design.
Mr G. (Guy) De Herde had a long career at Unilever where he worked in different leading
positions, especially in the field of Human Resources Management with a focus on
leadership and organisation development. Currently he is the Managing Director of a
strategic Business HR Consulting Agency.
Mr J. Marty is a third year IBMS student of the University of Applied Sciences Utrecht and
vice-chairman of the Faculty Student Council. He has lived, studied and worked in both
France and Great-Britain.
Mr H.R. (Rob) van der Made is an NVAO certified secretary and senior-consultant at
Hobéon. He has a background in teaching languages and communication in both
secondary and higher professional education. As a member of the executive board of a
Dutch private university of applied sciences he was, among other things, responsible for
the development and execution of various bachelor programmes. Mr Van der Made has
supported numerous audit panels in conducting quality assurance audits at Universities
of Applied Sciences.
Declarations of independence / confidentiality

ASSESSMENT REPORT Extensive programme assessment

Transcription

Similar documents

Building Code Training – August 30th at Burgundy Basin Inn

MA6900

Microtherm® Overstitched Panel - Inn

RAPID-1 INGLES

HIKVISION ARG-77xxseries

series 400 technical details

MFJ-4125P - KG4RUL.INFO

here

Making PV Panels Smarter

4M605051 Raaco Kufry na náradie Polypropylene XL - 34