Recommendation 1: Consider allowing institutions to offer programmes in three study modes, with some limits on study intensity

The report recommends Hungary to revise its existing categorisation of study formats by introducing a clear distinction between three modes of study (i.e. online, hybrid and in-person/blended) and two types of study intensity (i.e. full-time, part-time). Institutions should have full autonomy to decide whether to offer courses or programmes in the online, hybrid or in-person/blended study mode, whether to offer them on a full-time or part-time basis, and whether to introduce additional requirements or supports for fully online or hybrid study to mitigate the risk of study delays or drop-out.

The following definitions of digital education are proposed:

• Online education refers to a study mode where instruction is delivered off campus, either synchronously or asynchronously, or a combination of both. Students complete their course or programme of study at a distance, without the need for on-campus instruction.

• Hybrid education refers to a study mode where instruction involves a mix of on-campus and off-campus instruction. Learners have some flexibility regarding the location in which they complete their study. For example, learners might complete laboratory segments of an engineering course on campus, while participating in lecture-based course segments through live web streaming.

• Blended education refers to a study mode where courses are intentionally designed to harness the capacities of digital technology, using it to enrich rather than substitute in-person instruction. For example, a language or mathematics course delivered on campus might use learning analytics to adapt problem sets to learner abilities. Importantly, most instruction continues to take place on a physical campus.

Recommendation 2: Develop specific indicators for digital education and embed them in existing accreditation frameworks

The report recommends that Hungary co-ordinate the development and integration of specific indicators for digital education across all its accreditation frameworks, drawing on existing quality frameworks for digital higher education developed by the European Network for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA), the European Commission, and Hungarian HEIs.

To support Hungary with this task, based on an analysis of specific indicators for digital education included in international quality frameworks across the OECD and European Higher Education Area (EHEA), the report provides a list of:

• Potential minimum requirement for providers of digital higher education, related to HEIs’ capacity for digital delivery, pedagogical innovation and study flexibility.

• Potential indicators for institutional accreditation, including 24 additional indicators for digital education, as well as small revisions to the wording of existing indicators across all parts of the template.

Recommendations

Policy Options

Recommendation 3: Grant self-accreditation status to institutions with demonstrated capacity to manage study programmes at a high level of quality

The report recommends that Hungary considers granting self-accreditation status to HEIs with demonstrated capacity to manage study programmes at a high level of quality, in line with the ESG.

Based on international examples of best practice across the OECD and EHEA, the report presents a potential model for the introduction of a performance-based self-accreditation system in Hungary:

• Unlimited self-accreditation status could be granted to those HEIs demonstrating the capacity to manage all their study programmes at a high level of quality, including in different disciplines, study modes (fully online, hybrid, blended), intensities (full-time, part-time) and levels (bachelor’s, master’s, PhD).

• Limited self-accreditation status could be granted to those HEIs demonstrating the capacity to manage some (types of) study programmes at a high level of quality, for example programmes in certain disciplines, certain study modes (fully online, hybrid, blended), certain intensities (full-time, part-time) or at certain levels (bachelor’s, master’s, PhD).

Recommendation 4: Introduce a performance and outcomes-based programme monitoring system, coupled with a targeted cyclical programme review procedure

The report recommends that Hungary considers introducing a performance and outcomes-based programme monitoring system for all HEIs, based on a limited number of national key performance indicators (KPIs), complemented by a cyclical programme review procedure (in disciplinary clusters) for HEIs without self-accreditation status.

Based on international examples of best practice across the OECD and EHEA, the report presents a potential model for the introduction of a performance and outcomes-based programme review system in Hungary:

• Ongoing monitoring of programme performance against numerical thresholds for a limited set of national KPIs (e.g. drop-out rates, completion rates, graduate employment rates), developed in close consultation with HEIs and based on available national data on sectoral trends. The ongoing monitoring of programme quality could be used as a mechanism to identify “potential concerns with quality”, and form the basis for more in-depth and ad hoc reviews of specific courses or programmes, to understand the reasons and propose solutions for potential poor performance against national KPIs.

• Cyclical programme review (in disciplinary clusters) could be introduced for HEIs without self-accreditation status, and build on the approach followed by MAB for the accreditation of medical training programmes. This process consists of the preparation of a self-assessment report by the institution, based on the standards of the World Federation of Medical Education (WFME), followed by an institutional site visit and accreditation report, which are conducted and prepared by an external review team co-ordinated by MAB.

Recommendation 5: Increase institutional autonomy for the establishment of new programmes, depending on accreditation status

The report recommends that Hungary gives institutions and instructors more autonomy and flexibility to launch new study programmes in line with key societal challenges and emerging skills needs nationally and internationally, rather than the rarely updated education and learning outcome requirements included in the National Qualifications Register. A simplification of the two-stage programme accreditation process would free up MAB’s capacity to conduct cyclical quality reviews of programmes, and to play a bigger role in expanding its quality enhancement services for HEIs.

Based on international examples of best practice across the OECD and EHEA, the report presents a potential model for a simplification of the ex ante programme accreditation procedures in Hungary, with progressive responsibility for institutions depending on their accreditation status:

• Institutions with self-accreditation status could be allowed to establish new programmes directly with the Educational Authority (OH), providing basic information such as the relevance and need for the new programme, and the institution’s own account of the programme’s proposed educational content and learning outcomes.

• Accredited institutions without self-accreditation status could also be allowed to establish new programmes directly with the OH, except in the case of programmes launched in certain study fields, modes or levels within which the institution is not yet offering degree programmes.

• Only the new programme proposals of non-accredited institutions would be required to undergo a full quality review by MAB prior to the programme being registered with the OH.

Recommendations

Policy Options

Recommendation 6: Support the development of shared national standards and guidance for the purchase, maintenance, upgrading and effective use of digital technology

Based on international examples of best practice across the OECD and EHEA, the report presents the following policy options to support Hungarian HEIs with the purchase, maintenance, upgrading and effective use of digital technology:

• Steering and targeted funding: Through national steering as well as targeted and competitive funding, the government (KIM) and its responsible bodies (e.g. Digital Hungary Academy) could support and incentivise HEIs to invest in digital technologies that have demonstrated potential to enhance the quality of digital higher education, without prescribing which providers to choose.

• IT maintenance and support: Hungary’s National Research and Education Network (NREN), KIFÜ, could strengthen its role in supporting institutions with central network management and hosting services, to free up the capacity of institutional IT support staff to help instructors with the effective use of digital technology.

• Guidance and training: The NREN (KIFÜ), MAB or a sectoral (stakeholder) organisation could be tasked with coordinating the development of shared sectoral guidance and training, to support HEIs with the purchase, maintenance and effective use of digital technologies.

Recommendation 7: Introduce national regulation and support for the quality enhancement of staff professional development

Based on international examples of best practice across the OECD and EHEA, the report presents the following policy options to strengthen the professional development of academic staff for digital teaching and learning in Hungarian HEIs:

• National regulation on staff professional development: Hungary could introduce a requirement for HEIs to organise staff professional development and performance assessments of instructors’ pedagogical skills, including their skills for online course design, delivery and assessment.

• National standards for staff professional development programmes: Hungary could coordinate the development of national standards for the QA of HEIs’ staff professional development programmes.

• Guidance and training for the (self-) assessment of instructors’ digital skills: Hungary could coordinate the provision of national training, guidance materials and capacity building activities for the performance assessment of staff’s (digital) skills and competencies by HEIs.

• National centre for teaching and learning: Hungary could fund the establishment of a national centre for teaching and learning in higher education, with dedicated responsibility for developing quality enhancement activities for teaching and learning, including online course design, delivery and assessment.

• National digital content sharing platform: Building on already existing online platforms, Hungary could fund the development of a national digital education content sharing platform for higher education instructors.

Recommendation 8: Embed digitalisation in existing national data collection and monitoring instruments for higher education

Based on international examples of best practice across the OECD and EHEA, the report presents the following policy options for Hungary to strengthen its system-level evidence base on the quality of digital higher education, to inform institutional decision-making, inter-institutional benchmarking and best practice sharing:

• National administrative data collection and information on digital higher education: Hungary could add a “digitalisation lens” to its Graduate Career Tracking Survey (DPR), Higher Education Database and Information System (FIR) and Felvi.hu student admission and application website, to collect and publish up-to-date information on the performance of digital study programmes.

• National survey on digital teaching and learning: Building on existing national surveys of digital learning, Hungary could introduce a regular national survey of students’ and/or staff’s experience with digital teaching and learning, informed by a careful methodological analysis of the existing survey instruments.

• Thematic reviews of digital higher education: Through competitive funding calls, Hungary could fund thematic reviews of key challenges and best practices in digital higher education across institutions, focused on specific areas of focus or priority (e.g. student online mental health and wellbeing, online assessment).

• Thematic reviews of institutional quality assurance: As part of its accreditation reviews, MAB could ask experts to collect best practices identified as part of their analysis of institutional self-assessment reports and site visits, for dissemination through MAB’s communication channels with the sector.

Recommendation 9: Support and coordinate the development of an institutional self-assessment or benchmarking tool for digital higher education

Based on international examples of best practice across the OECD and EHEA, the report recommends Hungary to support the development of a Working Group (WG), consisting of national and international digital education experts and practitioners, to develop a self-assessment or benchmarking toolkit for digital higher education, adapted to the specific needs and challenges of the Hungarian higher education sector. The WG could focus on the following three questions:

• Plan and adjust: How can digital teaching and learning be embedded in the institutional strategy and quality culture, and supported through investments in digital technology?

• Implement: Which quality assurance processes and supports should be developed to enhance the quality of digital teaching and learning across the institution?

• Monitor: Which processes can be implemented to collect feedback on and monitor the performance of digital teaching and learning quality, and how is this data best used?