Learning Regions: discussion on quality criteria and indicators

PROPOSED BY R3L+ PROJECT TO LEARNING REGIONS/CITIES PARTNERSHIPS/NETWORKS   

Main aspects important for quality assurance in the case of a specific quality area (i.e. partnership)

DESCRIPTORS)

Establish if and to what degree the quality criteria is address/achieved.

Constraints and challenges
IN PRODUCING/ USING QUALITY INDICATORS

What difficulties/barriers you foresee in following this quality criteria ? (i.e. collecting information/feedback from network partners)

Partnership is ‘deep’ (not just one person if representative of a network partner)

BUT also ‘deep’ if at personal level the participants bring/shere all experience and competences they have

Mechanisms in place for assuring that partnership is proactive (participative) not passive (representative)

Could be relevant also for the next area

Specific strategies for assuring that engagement of each partner is voluntary, not enforced

Evidences are collected that partnership is valued by all members (time is paid for)

Appropriate support for partners is provided to take initiative and leadership space is created

Basis of partnership can be reviewed (changing to suit needs and challenges as they arise)

Partners are kept motivated – ensuring network agenda matches partner expectations – is value-added (but not cherry-picking); ‘what’s in it for us?’
More relevant for the next area

Consistency – language, concepts clearly understood to facilitate partnership (common sense)
Also relevant for the next area

Coverage: all necessary partners are involved to address needs

Partners understand their own role (responsibilities) and the connections they need to make

Flexibility: partnership arrangements are not too rigid as to impede responsiveness

Trust and openness amongst partners exist (even within competitive conditions)

There is Ownership: autonomy as well as sense of responsibility

B. QUALITY AREA: PARTICIPATION

CORE QUALITY CRITERIA

Main aspects important for quality assurance in the case of a specific quality area (i.e. partnership)

QUALITY INDICATORS (CORE AND ADDITIONAL/

DESCRIPTORS) 

Methods, approaches and tools for PRODUCING/USING QUALITY INDICATORS

Constraints and challenges 
IN PRODUCING/ USING QUALITY INDICATORS

What difficulties/barriers you foresee in following this quality criteria ? (i.e. collecting information/feedback from network partners)

Involving the wider public or community

Network is known and understood by general public

Clear measures to involve those most distant from learning opportunities

Beneficiaries have a chance to express their needs

Beneficiaries are involved in decision-making (governance)

Beneficiaries are involved in review of network interventions

Beneficiaries are actively supported (and opportunities created) to express needs and be involved in all decision-making activities

Language, materials, resources, published materials are clearly understood in everyday life: not just at overall network level, but also in constituent activities and programmes

Strategy in place to define and address learning needs meaningful to all life-styles of adults

C. QUALITY AREA: PROGRESS AND RENEWAL

CORE QUALITY CRITERIA

QUALITY INDICATORS (CORE AND ADDITIONAL/

DESCRIPTORS)

Establish if and to what degree the quality criteria is address/achieved.

Methods, approaches and tools for PRODUCING/USING QUALITY INDICATORS

Constraints and chhallenges
IN PRODUCING/ USING QUALITY INDICATORS

The capacity to continuously understand results, reasons; and the capacity to use this understanding to influence ongoing planning

Partners ‘internalise’ evaluation and review (identifying benefits and not just an imposition)

Evaluation and review (quality) are prioritised – seen as a core activity and not just an add-on

Resources are allocated (not just finance but human responsibility)

Methods and mechanisms should not be cumbersome or divert from the main purpose of the network.

Means of measuring must be appropriate in context of learning region (not just quantitative; and also longer-term)

Results and findings must be able to be widely understood

Must be macro as well as micro picture (product as well as process)

Flexibility of partners to share information (not defensive)

Flexibility and openness of partners to accept results (failures as well as successes) and act on results – open to change

Benefits identified are broad-based (not just education-linked)

Outcomes and impact is regularly checked, demonstrated and communicated to all members of the network

Results and learning is used to influence policy (not just practice)

Unintended as well as planned outcomes are documented and shared

PROPOSED BY R3L+ PROJECT TO LEARNING REGIONS/CITIES PARTNERSHIPS/NETWORKS

Main aspects important for quality assurance in the case of a specific quality area (i.e. partnership)

DESCRIPTORS)

Establish if and to what degree the quality criteria is addressed/achieved.

Constraints and challenges
IN PRODUCING/ USING QUALITY INDICATORS

What difficulties/barriers you foresee in following this quality criteria ? (i.e. collecting information/feedback from network partners)

Mechanisms in place for assuring that partnership is proactive (participative) not passive (representative)

Could be relevant also for the next area

Specific strategies for assuring that engagement of each partner is voluntary, not enforced

Evidences are collected that partnership is valued by all members (time is paid for)

Appropriate support for partners is provided to take initiative and leadership space is created

Basis of partnership can be reviewed (changing to suit needs and challenges as they arise)

Partners are kept motivated – ensuring network agenda matches partner expectations – is value-added (but not cherry-picking); ‘what’s in it for us?’
More relevant for the next area

Consistency – language, concepts clearly understood to facilitate partnership (common sense)
Also relevant for the next area

Coverage: all necessary partners are involved to address needs

Partners understand their own role (responsibilities) and the connections they need to make

Flexibility: partnership arrangements are not too rigid as to impede responsiveness

Trust and openness amongst partners exist (even within competitive conditions)

There is Ownership: autonomy as well as sense of responsibility

B. QUALITY AREA: PARTICIPATION

CORE QUALITY CRITERIA

Main aspects important for quality assurance in the case of a specific quality area (i.e. partnership)

QUALITY INDICATORS (CORE AND ADDITIONAL/

DESCRIPTORS)

Methods, approaches and tools for PRODUCING/USING QUALITY INDICATORS

Constraints and challenges
IN PRODUCING/ USING QUALITY INDICATORS

What difficulties/barriers you foresee in following this quality criteria ? (i.e. collecting information/feedback from network partners)

Involving the wider public or community

Network is known and understood by general public

Clear measures to involve those most distant from learning opportunities

Beneficiaries have a chance to express their needs

Beneficiaries are involved in decision-making (governance)

Beneficiaries are involved in review of network interventions

Beneficiaries are actively supported (and opportunities created) to express needs and be involved in all decision-making activities

Language, materials, resources, published materials are clearly understood in everyday life: not just at overall network level, but also in constituent activities and programmes

Strategy in place to define and address learning needs meaningful to all life-styles of adults

C. QUALITY AREA: PROGRESS AND RENEWAL

CORE QUALITY CRITERIA

QUALITY INDICATORS (CORE AND ADDITIONAL/

DESCRIPTORS)

Establish if and to what degree the quality criteria is address/achieved.

Methods, approaches and tools for PRODUCING/USING QUALITY INDICATORS

Constraints and chhallenges
IN PRODUCING/ USING QUALITY INDICATORS

The capacity to continuously understand results, reasons; and the capacity to use this understanding to influence ongoing planning

Partners ‘internalise’ evaluation and review (identifying benefits and not just an imposition)

Evaluation and review (quality) are prioritised – seen as a core activity and not just an add-on

Resources are allocated (not just finance but human responsibility)

Methods and mechanisms should not be cumbersome or divert from the main purpose of the network.

Means of measuring must be appropriate in context of learning region (not just quantitative; and also longer-term)

Results and findings must be able to be widely understood

Must be macro as well as micro picture (product as well as process)

Flexibility of partners to share information (not defensive)

Flexibility and openness of partners to accept results (failures as well as successes) and act on results – open to change

Benefits identified are broad-based (not just education-linked)

Outcomes and impact is regularly checked, demonstrated and communicated to all members of the network

Results and learning is used to influence policy (not just practice)

Unintended as well as planned outcomes are documented and shared