CALL FOR COMMUNICATIONS

Vinokur already indicated in 2008, we observe, from the 1980s, a proliferation of instruments and systems for evaluating quality in education. However, this inflation, which involves policies of tests, self-assessments, external assessments by specialized agencies or governmental or international organizations and the production of standards tending to standardize the functioning of university and training institutions must be questioned. Indeed, if some see in it the transition from a policy of trust to a policy of mistrust (Vonokur, 2008) or the importation of an entrepreneurial model (Bouchardy, 2009) aimed at integrating educational institutions into a local, national and international training and knowledge market, others see it as a necessary improvement factor to meet the need for increased human capital and thus participate in the social and economic development of states.

The symposium will examine the notion of quality management when applied to higher education and adult training, from the perspective of quality assurance policies and their implementation, actors involved in quality management, processes, approaches and instruments developed to monitor quality, as well as the relevance of results from the implementation of quality management systems. It will therefore be a question, at the same time, of defining the notion of quality management when it is applied to higher education and adult training, of specifying the objects of the evaluation and management of quality (institutions, programs, courses, teachers, students, etc.) and to examine the way in which these objects are articulated within the framework of quality management.

The process of producing standards, often within the framework of reforms of education systems such as that initiated by Law 01.00 in Morocco, and instruments aimed at evaluating and piloting their adoption by universities and training organizations, seems to be an area of questioning necessary to understand how quality management has imposed itself in educational institutions, what are its key elements and how it has adapted to different local contexts. This question also involves questioning the measurement of quality, by examining, on the one hand, the relevance of the indicators resulting from the standards defining quality and, on the other hand, the psychometric qualities of the measuring instruments developed, the quality management process as a continuous improvement process based on feedback loops requiring the availability of relevant information. IT and communication specialists who are behind the production of this information could therefore play an essential role in the evaluation of quality management of universities and training organisations. The conditions for the effective involvement of these technologies in quality management will therefore be analysed. The link between quality management and policies based on efficiency seems to be a necessary questioning when efficiency seems to increasingly justify public policies in the field of education. This question can be addressed both from the angle of the knowledge produced regarding the effectiveness of higher education or adult training systems and from the analytical angle of the link between quality and effectiveness. Similarly, as referred by Unesco in its framework elements for higher education reforms in Africa (2008), we can also introduce the issue of equity to analyze how quality management can contribute to increasing the equity of higher education systems. Finally, quality management is based on numerous evaluation processes, the results of which are mobilized within the framework of improvement loops. University actors can be both the objects of this evaluation when it relates, for example, to student performance, the linearity of their study paths or, for teacher-researchers, when it is to assess the quality of their teachers or their scientific production.

The evaluationis also about the action of the actors concerned by the administrative dimension of the university when it is interested in the quality of the services provided. On the other hand, the same actors can also participate in the production of evaluative data, either by being evaluators themselves, as is the case when students participate in the evaluation of teaching or when administrative services produce data on the professional integration of students. This evaluative dimension, the role of the actors, the way in which the data produced are mobilized within the framework of quality management, are all dimensions that the colloquium proposes to examine.

Themes of the colloquium :

The colloquium will be structured according to the six lines of questioning that emerge from the previous questions and observations:

1. How to define quality management in higher education and training, what do we know about its implementation in universities and, more generally, in institutions of higher education and adult training? What does the implementation of quality management produce in the institutions concerned? How do the pedagogical, scientific (oru ? ) . Are the social and professional aspects of higher education and training institutions influenced or transformed by the implementation of a quality management approach?

2. How is the evaluative dimension of quality management structured? we ll as questions about both the place of evaluation in the management of quality and the role of the actors (students, teacher-researchers, actors involved in the administration of institutions, evaluation agencies and political bodies).

3. What tools are needed for quality management? Here we can focus on both quality assessment tools and quality improvement process management tools, whether technological artifacts or conceptual tools.

4. How are information and communication technologies used in the quality management process and how can they, in turn, influence or modify it?

5. Are the notions of efficiency and equity mobilized within the framework of quality management of teaching and training institutions? If so, how does this mobilization take place and what are the effects and results?

 6. Who are the actors involved in quality management? What are their involvement, their function and their importance in the quality management process? How can the results of quality management in turn have an influence on these actors?

Beyond the scientific communications which may be part of a particular axis or articulate several, based either on the presentation of results or on a conceptual reflection with a critical dimension, the symposium will offer a space allowing to exchange of experiences. and practices between the actors of quality management, whether they are internal actors in universities and other training organizations or external actors, belonging to evaluation or accreditation organizations, with a view to to identify the pitfalls encountered and the solutions developed and to report on the results from the approaches implemented within the framework of quality management. It will be a question of setting up, through this sharing of experiences, a constructive debate participating in the empowerment of all the actors involved in the management of quality.

Prof. Abderrahim KHYATI

President of the EIDS&S 2023 Colloquium

Head of the Research Team in Interdisciplinary Science Didactics at ENSC

Mail: abderrahim5khyati@gmail.com

Mobile: +212663442854