Possible changes to the Accreditation Process Quality Assurance Forum August 2011

Why necessary? Broad level: Existing framework sound in terms of principles but relates to programmes only – candidacy and accreditation phases. Overambitious? Currently not implementing accreditation phase. No real link with institutional quality capacity – audit/institutional review/site visits …. Self-accreditation?

Regulatory issues: Some principles need amendment or foregrounding e.g. blind peer review Spell out re-accreditation in relation to registration with DHET Better provisions for complaints, withdrawing of accreditation and appeals

Context changes: 2 nd cycle – institutions at different stages of “quality maturity” Mergers, growth in private sector, established institutions now developing new sites/changing sites HEQF – new framework for all qualifications, not just new Changing roles of CHE/SAQA

Purposes of accreditation Assure and enhance quality in higher education programmes and the institutions that offer them – grant recognition status for meeting minimum standards Protect students… Support providers to institutionalise a culture of self-managed evaluation Increase public confidence…

What do we want to do with new framework? Integrate institutional accreditation with programme accreditation and with other HEQC processes (institutional audits/reviews, national reviews), and deal with promised self-accreditation Therefore, build a system of institutional accreditation

Some context factors 23 publics (22 audited in 1 st cycle), 116 privates (a handful audited, some site- visited) HEQF – need to get over first before implementing big new parts of framework (2014/15) New and existing programmes – diff acc statuses Regulatory changes urgent

Institutional accreditation Purpose – to determine institutional capacity to offer HE programmes Outcome: –provisional accreditation (if new) –conditional accreditation –on notice of withdrawal of accreditation –accreditation (self-accreditation status) –not accredited

Processes New institutions – application, SER, site visit, (3yrs) Existing institutions – –Those audited with no serious recommendations, plus good accreditation history – simple process, application, a reviewer, AC, HEQC –Those eligible for audit but not audited need audit first –Those not audited – self-evaluation, site visit.

Programmes Candidacy phase for new programmes Existing programmes – HEQF alignment, deemed accredited (structural coherence, names etc) – link to institutional accreditation Re-registration – summarised report on current status of programmes to DHET.

Appeals Representation within 21 days, re- evaluate, back to AC and HEQC Can re-apply after 12 months New appeals process: Appeals Cttee, meets 2x per year (1x) Composition: - CHE member (not also HEQC) – chair ED QA 2 HEQC members ( on AC) 1 IAC member

If appeal lodged, appeal and all original reports and submissions evaluated by 2 independent reviewers, recommendation to Appeals Committee

Document processes for: –representations, –new sites of delivery, changes of mode, changes of name, –complaints –notice of, and withdrawal of, accreditation

Summary Mandatory site visit for new institutions Linking programme and institutional accreditation Institutional accreditation – self- accreditation