Quality Agreements 2019-2024

QUALITY AGREEMENTS IN EDUCATION.

The Quality Agreements were created by the abolition of the study scholarship in 2015. The Minister of Education, Culture and Science and the higher education institutions agreed that the money that came available as a result, the WSV funds, now goes directly to the higher education institutions and must be spent on improvements and innovation in education. It was agreed that the educational institutions will invest the money within six themes:

  • More intensive and small-scale education
  • More and better student guidance
  • Study success of students
  • Educational differentiation
  • Adequate and good educational facilities
  • Further professionalization of teachers

The NVAO* reviews and assesses the Quality Agreements. You can read more about it on their website (in Dutch and English).

The WSV budget is divided as follows at the UT: 80% to the faculties and 20% to central services for UT-wide plans. The starting point of all faculties were 5 UT themes: 

  • Talent development of students
  • Global citizens
  • Teaching professionalization
  • Learning facilities  
  • Community building.

Here you can read more about the development process of implementing the Quality Agreements within BMS.
Within BMS, an action plan was made around those themes containing several ambitions and measures. The Faculty Council gave consent on that plan and is and continuously will be involved in this progress. A part of the WSV funds is allocated annually to educational innovation within Teaching Professionalization: the innovation projects. Teachers and students are asked for input and interpretation each year, so that the spending of this budget is always recognizable and relevant.

An update on how BMS spent the WSV funds so far and what plans we have for this year and the upcoming years will follow soon.

PLANNING OF ACTIONS

Given the NVAO timeline, there will be two moments on which the realisation of the intentions are assessed:

  1. a mid-term assessment in 2022 based on the progress until 2021, and
  2. a final evaluation based on the results until 2024.

Faculties are asked to specify in detail what they intend to accomplish in 2021 and to describe in more general terms what the intended outcomes are for 2024. In order to evaluate the progress on the quality agreements in the upcoming years, it is important to have a frame of reference. Therefore, faculties are asked to describe the current situation based on the five programmes mentioned earlier.

*NVAO: De Nederlands-Vlaamse Accreditatieorganisatie (The Dutch-Flemish Accreditation Organization).