Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Dr David Woodhouse Executive Director AUQA President INQAAHE Reflections from a Global.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Dr David Woodhouse Executive Director AUQA President INQAAHE Reflections from a Global."— Presentation transcript:

1 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Dr David Woodhouse Executive Director AUQA President INQAAHE Reflections from a Global Perspective ECA Conference December 2009

2 2 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y A. Outline Reflections on patterns and trends of institution-level and program-level review world-wide Some national examples and systems from Asia and elsewhere What are the world issues in QA more broadly: the work areas of INQAAHE Evolution or revolution: events in Australia

3 3 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y B. Patterns A detectable (though not universal) pattern worldwide is as follows. 1.A new agency carries out reviews at institution level in order to set the ground rules. In the early 90s in Rumania, mid-90s in Chile, currently in Timor Leste, institutions of poor provenance have sprung up, and the main initial task of the QA agency is to weed out the worst ones.

4 4 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Patterns (cont) 2. Once that is done, the emphasis swings to program-level accreditation. The institutions have been judged to be adequate, but many will be immature, ignorant of systematic quality processes, etc, and not be able to guarantee the quality of every program they offer. This can weed out the worst quality programs.

5 5 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Patterns (cont) 3. However, programs are very numerous, and in anything but a small system this is a heavy load. Indonesia started with program level review, and BAN-PT accredits tens of thousands of programs. Therefore systems world-wide are looking how to reduce that load.

6 6 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Patterns (cont) But the forces are not all driving in one direction! Towards institution-level review: 1.The financial / human resources constraints point to institutional accreditation which is less resource consuming simply because there are fewer institutions than programs. 2.Some governments (eg Latin-America) like institutional accreditation because it makes it easier to use if for decisions on funding and other similar things.

7 7 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Patterns (cont) Towards program-level review 1.But some governments (like Australia) want to fund at discipline level, so they want to know discipline-level quality. 2. In many Latin-American countries, the market is very important, and this demands differentiation - which is much easier to achieve through program accreditation. 3. Mobility requirements also point to program accreditation

8 8 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Patterns (cont) From the INQAAHE database, about 60% of agencies review at program level; 50% at institution-level; and 40% at both.

9 9 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y C. Approaches Different approaches adopted include Go to institution-level review (possibly Indonesia, Israel – and probably many others) Sample: Combine this with a detailed check of a sample of programs (formerly QAA; South Africa to some extent; Malaysia moving this way) Check the institutions own program level QA processes, and perhaps sample some of the programs for closer inspection (AUQA)

10 10 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Approaches (cont) Risk assessment (which may inform the sampling within or between institutions) (forthcoming Oz - TEQSA); Accept professional accreditors findings (India, Korea); Review larger sub-units (eg faculties, departments – HEEACT, Taiwan); Delegate: Establish more EQAs with oversight by the original EQA (possibly Indonesia, in Argentina & Australia the national body has oversight of other agencies) or by a new regulating body (India, Netherlands?);

11 11 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Approaches (cont) Combine program and institution accreditation, especially for small providers which might deal with only one discipline (South Africa); Sector-wide reviews of identified problem areas (eg MBAs, joint programs, partnership arrangements (eg franchises), etc.) Voluntary: Make various accreditations voluntary (eg Brazil, Chile)

12 12 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Approaches (cont) External testing of students (eg Brazil) Heavy use of internal institutional QA units (eg Pakistan) Use of rankings (eg Taiwan, Pakistan)

13 13 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y D. Specific Examples China All degree programs have to be approved at the national level by the Ministry of Education in Beijing. Hong Kong Universities self-accrediting, subject to periodic institutional audit. They have also been subject to periodic thematic reviews, of teaching, research, and management. Taiwan One round of program (department) review almost complete Multiple teams to the institution simultaneously

14 14 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Examples (cont) Japan Things are going the other way, with increased attention being paid to program accreditation. Korea KCUE had two rounds of both institution and program accreditation; will continue with institution accreditation and program accreditation will mainly be picked up by professional accreditors.

15 15 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Examples (cont) Indonesia BAN-PT tried to create program-level QA agencies, without much success, and might move to institution-only accreditation. Malaysia MQA trying to maintain a regime of having streamlined program accreditation while introducing institutional audits with the aim of reducing load by giving self-accrediting powers to all public universities and campuses of overseas ones.

16 16 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Examples (cont) Singapore Institution-oriented Public – tightly controlled; tailored university and polytechnic QA schemes Private – student protection, but otherwise voluntary, quality award / business excellence approach New system, bringing all under the min of education, is imminent.

17 17 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Examples (cont) India 23,000 HE institutions, inc 500 univs. Over 100 of the univs have responsibility for the colleges – some oversee several hundred colleges. NAAC – institution level audit / assessment Legislation proposed to permit multiplicity of QA agencies (still institution level) Many professional accreditors (?20) reviewing at program level

18 18 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Examples (cont) South Africa 1.Public institutions do not have institutional accreditation, but must undergo a quality audit every 5 years. They must have program accreditation for new programs, and programs whose content has changed more than 50%. 2.Private providers are required to have institutional accreditation every 5 years or so. Private providers must have all programs accredited, and reaccredited about every 5 years. 3.There have been sector-wide national reviews conducted in specific areas (eg MBAs and teacher education – BEd and MEd – rising from concerns about the quality of these programs).

19 19 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Examples (cont) Israel Assembles discipline-based panels to look at all departments in that discipline, nation-wide (similar to the original Dutch VSNU system); targeted for completion in Looking to move to institution-level, or some combination of institution and program level.

20 20 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Examples (cont) Middle East Bahrain started with institutional but has now added program; Oman has both institutional and program (program came first) but is now wondering whether to manage program accreditation similar to SA HEQC for MBAs, ie in batches. UAE is using overseas program accreditors in some cases for public institutions but private institutions must have their programs accredited as well as being licensed. Saudi Arabia plans to do both but to coordinate institutional and program reviews where possible. Jordan has a government scheme at institution level and a private foundation (HFE) working at program level

21 21 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y E. What is important globally? INQAAHE tries to keep its finger on this question, and so its recent, current and imminent project areas provide some answers to what we think is important. 1.QAP The need for professionalism in QA GIQAC money Launched in Copenhagen

22 22 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 2. QAHEC INQAAHE was built on info sharing, and this is an attempt to bring one stream of info into the web-based age. One reason for the info-sharing was always capacity-building, and with so many new agencies emerging, there is a pressing need for info on the very basics of setting up an agency – policies, procedures and practices.

23 23 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 3. GPQA QAHEC will be comprehensive and indiscriminatory. Agencies also want to learn about practices that have proved to be particularly good. GPQA is intended to gather good practices from around the world. Input – anyone any good practices to share?

24 24 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 4. Query Service But we cant know in advance all the info that people want, so we have a Query Service. Answers to detailed questions on demand Value? Use?

25 25 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 5. Consultants Database Finally, when you dont know what you want to know, you appoint a consultant to tell you the question as well as the answer. Joint project of INQAAHE, APQN, ANQAHE

26 26 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 6. GGP Forerunner of the ESG

27 27 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 7. Supporting regions Area of INQAAHE website MoUs

28 28 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 8. Small states Special assistance

29 29 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 9. Professional Accreditors For years, some colleagues have been saying that this is the cutting edge, and it might have been for a while, but no longer. But may be increasing role as general accreditors move out of program-level accreditation.

30 30 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 10. Institution Members Characteristics of QA within institutions Forthcoming WG and special support

31 31 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 11 Accreditation Mills Forthcoming WG leading to white list (cf the UNESCO Portal on degree/diploma mills)

32 32 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 12. Mutual recognition Work on that in the APQN. Found to be very difficult. Alignment of QA systems might be more realistic.

33 33 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 13. DE/electronic DE Forthcoming joint project

34 34 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 14. Biennial Fora Namibia 2010 themes: QA methodologies and HE economic responsiveness QA agencies between the global and the local QA and HE Social Responsiveness Political constraints on EQA QA and the transnational

35 35 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 15. Biennial Conferences Madrid 2011 themes QA: The Foundation for the Future Evaluating the effectiveness of QA Globalizing forces and national/regional goals Professionalization of QA Independence of QA processes vis a vis different stakeholders Presentations of all conferences and fora are gradually being put on the website

36 36 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y What is important globally? (cont) 16. Glossary 17. Discussion papers and other presentations

37 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Australia : How Times Change Ten years ago – AUQA Two years hence – TEQSA

38 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y AUQA is the principal national QA agency in HE with the responsibility of providing public assurance of the quality of Australias universities and other institutions of HE, and assisting in enhancing the academic quality of these institutions. AUQA is a not-for-profit company limited by guarantee AUQAs shareholders are the State and Federal Ministers for Education (9 in all) AUQA

39 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y AUQA was set up primarily to audit universities (~40) AUQA was required to support and emphasise diversity of institutions To use audit not accreditation To audit at institution level, not program level And to write its reports in such a way as to avoid rankings AUQAs Approach

40 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Non-university HEIs (~150) are registered (institution-level accreditation) and their programs accredited by a state accreditation agency (9 of them) The agencies themselves are overseen and audited by AUQA, a scheme aimed at achieving consistency across the accreditation agencies. In an extra complication, AUQA now audits about 50% of the non-university HEIs. AUQAs Approach

41 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y 2009 federal government budget announcements: By 2025, 40% of all 25 to 34 year olds will hold a qualification at bachelor level or above By 2020, 20% of HE enrolments at the undergraduate level will come from a low SES background Closer alignment between vocational and HE in a unified tertiary education environment TEQSA

42 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Funding to follow higher education students Some funding will be based on achieved learning targets Needs stronger regulation

43 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y A new Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) will be established by 2011 TEQSA will include the functions of AUQA and the state accrediting agencies TEQSA will audit and accredit all institutions Audits may be risk-rated There will be sectoral thematic audits TEQSAs Approach

44 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y TEQSA will have and apply sanctions TEQSA will develop measures for learning and teaching outcomes and recommend on performance funding TEQSA will measure academic standards achieved Institutions actively seek rankings Plus ca change!

45 A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y T h a n k y o u !


Download ppt "A u s t r a l i a n U n i v e r s i t i e s Q u a l i t y A g e n c y Dr David Woodhouse Executive Director AUQA President INQAAHE Reflections from a Global."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google