1. DIRECTORATE: STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT A FRAMEWORK FOR QUALIFICATION STANDARDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION Quality Assurance Forum 25 August 2011 “The very concept of standards is riddled with ambiguity” (Becher, 1997)

2. The current situation Conceptualization Analysis and evaluation of previous CHE research (2006-2009) Analysis and evaluation of international trends Draft ‘Framework for Qualification Standards in Higher Education’ Discussion and review –CHE Senior Management, April 2011 –HEQC Board Workshop, July 2011 –Ad hoc Standards Reference Group, August 2011

3. Critical questions What do qualification standards wish to achieve, and for whose benefit? Will the development of standards justify the costs, in terms of human and financial investment? Will the exercise have long-term sustainability? How will the benefits be assessed (by the state, the HEI sector, institutions, academics, professional bodies, students, society at large)? Can standards generation serve as an academic stimulus for institutions, rather than an exercise in compliance?

4. More questions How will national standards recognize and accommodate institutional autonomy, and accountability? Can qualification standards accommodate institutional and contextual diversity? And accommodate field/disciplinary identity, authority and expertise (institutional systems of QA, e.g., external examination, and professional body authority)? And allow for innovation, and inter-disciplinary initiatives? And find a balance between durability (for long-term planning) and flexibility (to accommodate new academic developments)?

5. And a further question How should qualification standards be distinguished from: Institutional standards (capacity to offer qualifications) Content (curriculum) standards Performance (achievement) standards, e.g., individual student achievement (grading) student cohort achievement (throughput rates) market-place achievement (employment rates) teaching and learning standards research and publication standards Professional body requirements for accreditation and designation?

6. The ‘nested’ approach (1) NQF levels HEQF; level descriptors Qualification types: example Bachelor degree Qualification type variants ProfessionalGeneral NQF 8Bachelor degree 480 crBachelor degree 360 cr NQF 7Bachelor degree 360 crBachelor degree 480 cr

7. The ‘nested’ approach (2) Descriptors Bachelor of EngineeringBachelor of Science Bachelor of Vet. Bachelor of Science First qualifiers B Eng (Electrical)B Sc (Eng) n/aB Sc (Vet. Science) Second qualifier n/aB Sc (Eng: Electrical) n/a

8. What standards might do (in vacuo) PotentialAlready in place Establish NQF-related descriptorsSAQA: NQF level descriptors Purpose and characteristics of qualifications HEQF: purpose and characteristics Benchmarks for programme approval (leading to qualifications) HEQC Accreditation and Re-Accreditation: minimum standards Minimum requirements for offering qualifications (Public HEIs): DHET PQM approval (Private HEIs): DHET registration Criteria for institutional capacity to offer qualifications HEQC: Institutional reviews HEQC: Self-accreditation (forthcoming) Comparability of programmes leading to qualifications HEQC: National reviews Trade, occupational, vocational, professional designations Professional bodies

9. What should standards AIM to do? Provide a framework for consistent, coherent development of qualifications Clarify the meaning, purpose and distinctiveness of qualification types Guide accreditation and recognition of programmes within the context of qualification types (what a degree is; what it is not) Provide broad guidelines for graduate/diplomate attributes

10. What should standards AIM to do? Contribute to quality assurance of programmes, within and between institutions (Global context): establish benchmarks for international comparability Strengthen public confidence in the value and credibility of qualifications Establish qualification benchmarks for institutional self-accreditation.

11. What standards CANNOT do Form the basis for external rankings of institutions or their programmes Enforce any particular educational philosophy, pedagogical model or assessment regime Resolve all issues surrounding the academic quality of programmes Dictate the design of programmes (other than relations between purpose, characteristics and outcomes) Provide a template for programme design Guarantee the transferability of credits from one qualification (or institution) to another Establish a platform for addressing extraneous institutional issues.

12. The concept of qualification ‘pathways’ International trends: Different approaches to the trade/ occupational/ vocational/ professional/ general qualification spectrum. Recommended: three ‘pathways’: trade/occupational/vocational qualifications; professional qualifications; general (formative) qualifications. (Alternative terms: ‘streams’, ‘routes’, ‘tracks’, ‘orientation’).

13. Qualification ‘pathways’ Organizing basis Contextual emphasis Conceptual emphasis Proposed ‘pathways’ Vocational Professional General/Formative Learning outcome domains Applied competence Skill Knowledge

14. Proposed ‘pathways’ PathwayCriteriaCharacteristics Trade Occupational Vocational Apprenticeship Artisan practitioner Licence/certification Industry-controlled training Emphasis on context (skill, applied competence) Orientation to industry-employed diplomates Responsive to workplace demands Procedural knowledge Specific skills Conceptual knowledge to allow for continued learning Strong links with industry Professional Induction (eg, articles, housemanship) Professional body influences registration Emphasis on contextual/ conceptual blend Provision for continuing professional development Orientation to professionally-active graduates Demands of professional practice Skills adaptable to professional environment and ethics Workplace experience embedded in conceptual knowledge Teaching linked with research, legislation, prof regulations General Academic Formative No formal apprenticeship/ induction (limited/no WIL) No licensing/ certification/ registration Emphasis on conceptual learning Orientation to research-active graduates Emphasis on conceptual foundations of the knowledge field Strong links to knowledge advancement (research, disciplinary innovation) Introduction to research methodology

15. Qualifications and ‘pathways’

16. What ‘standard’ of standards? A ‘threshold’ standards model Qualification A (best practice: unacknowledged) Qualification B (typical: unacknowledged) Qualification B (threshold) NQF level n Qualification C (below standard) A ‘typical’ standards model Qualification A (best practice: unacknowledged) Qualification B (typical) Qualification C (threshold)NQF level n Qualification D (below standard)

17. What ‘standard’ of standards? A ‘range of standards’ model Qualification A (best practice) (Guidance) Qualification B (typical) NQF level n Qualification C (threshold)

18. Ho w will standards link with other CHE activities? National reviews Standards serve as guide to programme criteria Institutional reviews Standards are the benchmark for institutional quality assurance, programme design, student achievement, etc. Accreditation Standards guide accreditation minimum standards as they are applied to specific qualification types

19. A model for qualification standards Aspect of the qualificationControl / responsibility Admission requirementsHEQF / other legislation (admission requirements to certificates, diplomas, degrees) Purpose of the qualification (HEQF) STANDARDS Descriptors and qualifiers Accreditation STANDARDS Assumed entrance-level learning (Knowledge, skills, applied competence) Exit-level of lower qualification ( Standards developed for entry-level qualification) Programme design, content, sequence, internal progression, pacing, pedagogy, assessment, student achievement Field/discipline expertise; HEI quality assurance and approval processes Exit-level outcomesNQF level descriptors (?) Graduate/recipient attributes: Exit-level knowledge/skill/applied competence blend (and how they achieve the purpose and intended outcomes of the qualification) STANDARDS

20. CHE Standards Development QualificationApplication to Typesprofessional qualifications HEI Content, curriculum Prof. body

21. How will this affect HEIs? A programme is linked to a qualification and its standards. A qualification is linked to a pathway. The mission and goals of a HEI are linked to one or more pathways, and to all or some qualification levels and types. Each qualification must, minimally, achieve threshold standards. The HEI assesses its capacity to enhance threshold standards to “typical” or to “aspirational (best practice)” levels. Institutional and national programme reviews assess HEI capacity to enhance standards, and progress in doing so. A “hierarchy” of practice becomes intra-institutional rather than inter-institutional.

22. How many layers in the ‘nested approach’ should CHE standards address? Qualification types Qualification types and ‘pathways’ Initial phase Generic standards: qualification types and variants simultaneous with Specific standards: selected fields (designator – or/and, where appropriate, qualifier) All qualification types, descriptors, ‘pathways’ and designators All qualification types, descriptors, ‘pathways’, designators and first and second qualifiers

23. Qualification types and variants NQF level VocationalProfessionalGeneral 10Doctoral degree 9Master’s degree 8Postgraduate Diploma Bachelor’s degree Honours degree Bachelor’s degree 7 Advanced Diploma Bachelor’s degree Advanced Diploma Bachelor’s degree 6Diploma (360 cr) Diploma (240 cr)

24. Selected fields: sources Request from the Minister Field selected for HEQF National Review Recently modified, or currently modifying, field Request from a representative party in higher education (e.g., forum of VCs/DVCs; Deans) Request from an authorized professional body Selection by CHE (e.g., arising from other HEQC QA activities)

25. Outstanding issues Relations with QCTO; effect on NQF 5-6 standards Reconciling the pace of standards development with expectations of the HE sector Aligning standards development with existing field/disciplinary peer review procedures Developing a ‘range of standards’ model (benchmark, typical, enhanced standard-levels) while avoiding a real or implied (external) institutional ranking system Aligning standards development with both CHE and field/disciplinary peer capacity

26. Proposed stages (1) Draft Framework to HEQC Board for comment Draft Framework to CHE for approval Approved Framework to HE sector for comment Review of Framework by CHE (in the light of HE sector comments), and formal publication Formation of representative Standards Reference Group

27. Proposed stages (2) A model for generic qualification type and variant standards development A model for specific field/discipline standards development Selection of pilot-phase fields/disciplines for standards development Communiqué to HE sector: pilot-phase fields/disciplines, methods and procedures Promoting the cause: workshops/conference on qualification standards

28. Proposed stages (3) Establishment of select expert peer groups, for a) generic and b) specific standards development Selected draft qualification standards for public comment Standards Reference Group evaluates public comments, and advises CHE CHE determines roll-out: methods, scale and timelines.