EduCom Minutes 2019-05-03

Agenda

Welcome

• Participants

• Jürgen Brandstätter
• Alexander Ihls
• Jamie Dulkowski

• Review and Approve Agenda

• Approved

Exam status update

• Report on operation, # of exam takers, issues, etc. (Jürgen, Werner)

• So far one exam passed: Charles Parisot is the first :) (consent given for publication in these minutes)

• Charles's feedback:

• Registration for the exam

• Process is complex and has gaps, several different websites (GASQ, ProctorU, Exam site) involved
• Since price is given as "netto" price (which cannot be changed), the registration process ends up with more money to be paid after taxes are applied -> this can be received as a bad surprise

• Action item Wording on ihe.net website and in registratino process shall be enhanced, so that there is no "bad surprise" effect

• Exam itself

• Timing: 30min for Charles out of 1 hour -> seems to be ok
• Out of 40 questions:

• 14 questions needed deeper analysis
• Question/answers were unclear, ambiguous or mulitple answers could work or answers were not clear
• Comments were given in the exam as comments
• Only 4 out of the 5 sections of the Syllabus were covered by the exam questions

• Alexander: Questions for all sections are available, must be a randomizing or structuring issue in the exam

• Issue resolution

• Issue received about "Pin", which is asked, but not given. Reason was bad wording in GASQ registration email, reported to be fixed now

• Fixed

• Issue not fixed yet: There are things to do on the GASQ website, which have to be done first (registering and paying) in order to do the exam -> instructions are not complete

• Action item: GASQ to review the instructions by following the instructions (starting from the IHE website) and remove all gaps (Werner)

• Refer to Charles's emails from April 30, 23:25 and the ones resent on May 3rd, 15:25 and May 3rd, 15:28

• Feedback given on exam (see above)

• Action item: Process feedback on exam (Werner, Exam question group)

• Feedback loop

• A feedback look is required to debug the exam
• Certain experts could be asked for sitting the exam and give feedback

• They shall be given instructions, how to provide the feedback

• Action item: Education Committee shall search and ask experts (Jürgen)

Logo

• FTP Logo
• Formal decision on logo

• Logo colors
• Decision: Based on the offline voting between blue and red, the final logo is the "blue" one
• Action item: Finalize logo (web version, print version, etc.) (Chris)

• including putting logo on website and transfer logo to Werner for finalization of certificate

Certificate

• []
• Logo and feedback has been/will be provided to Werner
• Action item: Provide second version of certificate based on logo and input given so far (Werner)

Processes Document

• FTP Processes

• Status and review of additions

• Version 0.18_jb

• Clarification on the question: Who is the highest authority on the certificate?

• Option 1: GASQ (or any equivalent exam provider) is the highest authority for issuing certificates, which are all equivalent according the the agreed scheme of IHE
• Option 2: IHE is the highest authority for issuing certificates, and the exam providers are "just" the fulfillers and delivery of the certificate to the person

• Answer: According the ISO Standards it's option 1

• If you have an issue with your current exam, the exam provider is responsible for all issues (but acting on behalf of IHE)

• That's why the certificate is branded with the exam provider

• Even includes that in case of re-certification at another exam provider instead of the first one, this is seamless possible and does not break the "certified since ..." chain

• Action item: Provide next version of process document based on comments given (Werner)

Accreditation of training providers

• Status and next steps
• Interested:

• University of Applied Sciences, Austria
• ZTG, Germany

Next call

IHE Education Committee