04
U-
International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Vol XXXV, Part B6. Istanbul 2004
These joint programmes are not limited to exchanging students,
allowing them to do part of their study in their home country
and part at ITC in The Netherlands. It also involves the
exchange of staff for quality assurance purposes, not only ITC
staff visiting partner organisations but also the other way
around, with staff of partner organisations to supervise students
while studying at ITC. Moreover joint research and advisory
services complement the human resources development
activities.
4.3.2 Modalities of collaboration: Joint educational
programmes do not follow one fixed modality. Capabilities of
the partners, financial conditions as well as legal aspects may
play a role.
In the largest effort thus far with the KN Toosi University and
Soil Conservation and Watershed Research Institute in Tehran,
Iran the Professional Master course took place entirely in Iran.
For the Master of Science course, all course work took place
done in Tehran, while the research and thesis writing, including
final examination was done at ITC in the Netherlands.
The procedures for obtaining visa for long term stay in the
Netherlands for course participants from India may take almost
up to one year. For that reason (as well as the capacity of
national staff to guide MSc candidates in their research),
candidates of the joint programme with the Indian Institute of
Remote Sensing limit their stay in the Netherlands to the final
three months of their thesis writing and defence.
4.3.3 Quality assurance: The real challenge in joint
educational programmes appears to be quality assurance. Both
partners have to apply quality standards to fulfil accreditation
requirements applicable to each of them separately as well as
jointly in each country. Although in the early stages of
“decentralisation” ITC criteria were considered as point of
departure, it became quickly clear that partner organisations are
bound by official regulations as well.
Quality assurance of joint educational programmes is pursued in
three ways:
l. Organisation of the collaboration: directed at creating
equal quality of the programmes offered by the partners:
Management of the collaboration: directed at ensuring
efficient and effective quality control; and
3. Quality assurance instruments: both during the
preparation, implementation and consolidation phase.
(Beerens, S.J.J. and I. ten Dam, 2002)
LD
The organisation of collaboration for a joint educational
programme goes through three phases:
a) identification, pre-feasibility assessment and selection on
the basis of the criteria listed in Section 4.3.1;
b) formulation and design, elaborating above mentioned
criteria in more detail; and
c) implementation and consolidation, including an extensive
training of trainers programme.
At the end of each phase partners explicitly decide whether or
not to proceed with the collaboration.
The management of joint educational programmes pays specific
attention to simultaneously address the requirements both
partners have to comply with according to national accreditation
regulations.
A series of quality control instruments have been put in place
for joint educational programmes:
e Training of Trainers: A ToT programme is initiated in the
earliest possible stage of the collaboration. The aim is to
provide the partner organisation with adequate capacity
and capability to ensure quality education (including the
capacity to replace teaching staff if events so require).
* Joint assessment of module performance: The teaching
staff of the partner organisation and the teaching staff of
the respective subject at ITC jointly develop the
examinations and assess the performance of individual
course participants.
* . Joint final assessment (of assignments, theses): Since both
partner organisations issue a degree, both are jointly
responsible for the final assessment, by involving
representatives of both partners in the final examination.
* Joint quality review of the programme: The entire
programme will be reviewed by the two partners on an
annual basis, using the results of individual subject
evaluations, the end-of-programme evaluation, assessment
results of the course participants, and the opinions of
teaching staff of both partners.
® Independent review: Every three years, both partner
organisations arrange for a review by independent
specialists (at least one external specialist in the
programme field and an education specialist).
® External review/accreditation: Partners will be obliged by
national laws to have their programmes accredited
according to criteria and procedures that differ from
country to country.
One instrument introduced to control quality of the joint
educational programmes deserves special mention, i.e. internet-
based remote support. Recently, and initially as a by-product of
the development of distance education programmes, an internet-
based education platform called Blackboard? has been
introduced. This platform has various functions, including
presenting lecture materials and conducting exercises, as well as
chat and discussion board facilities.
Although the introduction of this internet-based support is
occasionally being confronted with technical limitations, it
allows supervising staff from both the partner organisation and
ITC, thousands of kilometres apart, to co-teach at a distance and
monitor the quality of the teaching. It simultaneously allows the
individualisation of the support to course participants — a
requirement when dealing with mid-career professionals from a
variety of backgrounds and with a wide range of experience.
4.3.4 Sustainable partnerships in capacity building: In
terms of “financial sustainability” one of the basic principles of
the joint education initiative of ITC relates to the requirement
that partners will each arrange funding of their own share in the
activities from their own regular resources as applied in their
home countries. The student-related expenses are jointly
pursued from a variety of fellowship- and scholarship
programmes.
In building capacity in the recipient countries since the mid-
1960-s ITC was confronted with the problem of “scientific
sustainability” of the various programmes. Although an
adequate capacity was built to delivering in particular the
human resources component, an inherent capacity to
continuously adjust these programmes to technological changes
in the knowledge field and demand was lacking. This became
185
