Assessment frameworks. The main difference between the assessment frameworks of AACSB and NVAO is their perspective: AACSB accredits at institutional level and the NVAO accredits at program level. The following paragraphs discuss the combining of the assessment frameworks. An important principle in the cooperation is that both levels (institutional and program) are assessed by the panel in order to ensure valid decision-making processes for both accreditation organizations. The AACSB assessment framework for the initial accreditation is an extended framework that covers, among other standards, the first three standards of the limited program assessment of the NVAO. The fourth standard of the latter mentioned framework, concerning achieved learning outcomes, is not covered in the AACSB framework. The panel will assess this standard according to the procedures described in the NVAO framework. Workable conditions (the number of theses1 the panel needs to assess) will be determined per audit. Following discussion with the review team the organization under review may decide to outsource the assessment of theses to a third party. In principle, the panel will assess at least 15 theses for each program. A reduction of this number can only be considered if programs share an Examination Board and if there is a demonstrable overlap of courses between the programs of at least one year or 60 EC for a bachelor’s program and 20 EC for a master’s program. In that case the panel will assess a minimum of 8-10 theses per program. NVAO must agree before the start of the assessment to the reduction in the number of theses to be assessed. The extensive program assessment of the NVAO is also mostly covered by the AACSB initial accreditation framework. Standard 11 of the NVAO framework, concerning achieved learning outcomes, is the only standard that is not covered in the AACSB initial accreditation framework. The panel will assess this standard according to the procedures described in the NVAO framework. Workable conditions (the number of theses2 the committee needs to assess) will be determined per audit. Following discussion with the review team the organization under review may decide to outsource the assessment of theses to a third party. The same rules pertaining to the possible reduction of the number of theses to be assessed that are stated above for the limited program assessment apply to the extensive program assessment. In addition to the assessment of achieved learning outcomes, the NVAO framework requires programs to justify their choice for the teaching language if a program is taught in a language other than Dutch. This also applies if the program uses a foreign language name. The program should also demonstrate that teachers have a sufficient command of the language in which they are teaching. In addition, the extensive assessment framework of NVAO requires programs to demonstrate that staff policy is conducive in this respect. These elements are not covered in the ▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇. The AACSB continuous improvement review (CIR) framework has, in contrast to the standard-by-standard approach of the initial accreditation framework, a more consultative and strategic approach and therefore less of a focus on the individual programs. In order to ensure that the NVAO standards are sufficiently addressed, the NVAO accreditation framework for the limited program assessment will be the leading framework for the double accreditation. The section Learner Success of the AACSB continuous improvement review is per program thoroughly addressed by the limited program assessment of the NVAO. This assessment should suffice for the AACSB CIR. However, none of the other areas listed in the continuous improvement review report outline are addressed by the NVAO limited program assessment and therefore will need to be addressed as indicated in the outline provided by AACSB. In the case of the extensive program assessment of the NVAO framework, the NVAO framework will also be the leading framework for the double accreditation. The sections Strategic Management and Innovation (assuming that staff in the NVAO assessment includes professional staff and faculty) and Learner Success of the AACSB continuous improvement 1 Theses or any other product or products that the program regards as the final product of a student.
Appears in 2 contracts