Research in Comparative and International Education |
|||
Other issues available | Journal home page | Publisher home page | |||
|
|||
|
CONTENTS [click on author's name for abstract and full text] | |||
| |||
|
SPECIAL ISSUE
| |||
|
Introduction |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.1 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
The world has changed considerably over the last few decades. The introduction of the personal computer in the 1980s and the World Wide Web in 1993 have transformed the academic experience. Information can now be gained via mouse click, and exchange among academics is not dependent on location as online-conferencing is now common practice. The international academic community has therefore drawn closer together. Academics and students, too, are being encouraged to be mobile and experience other systems of higher education, which expands their horizons and increases their knowledge. Against this backdrop of change it has become apparent that universities are being increasingly compared with each other, not only nationally, but internationally. Whereas in the past it might have been usual for students to look nationally for their locus of study, they are now looking internationally for the location that will best suit their needs. Many spend at least part, if not all, of their studies abroad. Of course, quality has been present (more or less) since universities were founded. The professor or lecturer with the greatest amount of knowledge and the most dynamic, interesting teaching practices would be regarded as ‘best’. In the past students would flock to hear certain professors expound on particular subjects (as was the case in Germany). However, it is unrealistic to expect that each individual who is entitled to teach within a university will be working on this level. It is more realistic to work towards achieving a certain standard of achievement and ability. Processes therefore need to be established that will encourage quality to be not only assured, but further enhanced. Universities consist of teaching staff, researchers, administrative staff who are responsible for the smooth running of various supporting areas (university libraries, for example), and students, who come to the institutions to broaden their knowledge base which will enable them to take up leading positions in society thereafter. The university as an institution therefore has an important role to fill. Its actors cannot simply be left to themselves to do as they please. However, how is the tension between the individual autonomy of the lecturer, for example, to teach and research those areas that are of particular interest to be resolved against the expectations of a state to receive a certain number of qualified graduates per annum? As higher education across the globe has increased vastly lecturers are expected to teach far greater numbers of students, while nonetheless being expected to maintain a consistently high level of work. It is therefore the responsibility of the university to ensure that support is in place to help guarantee the quality of what its staff is achieving. This forms part of the core of quality assurance. The present special volume looks at quality assurance in higher education from around the world. It traces the history of its implementation and focuses in particular on the role of the external evaluator who is asked to examine an institution or department and pass judgement on its overall merit. We have been very fortunate to draw contributions from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and North America. Many of the authors have worked as external evaluators, have held directorships within quality assurance agencies or have conducted research in quality assurance. David Woodhouse & Terry Stokes report firstly on Australia and tell us about the transition of quality assurance from audit to one of Total Quality Management, in which quality at every level is under examination and where feedback loops are in place to ensure that any arising problems are immediately addressed and removed. Donald Baker & Terry Miosi provide a detailed account of the individual quality agencies within Canadian higher education. They describe the differences in the methodology of each agency, but highlight the importance of maintaining dialogue among the agencies to ensure that each of the federal states is working according to the same understanding of quality. Yuan Li reports on the different phases of experimentation that China has undergone since it decided to implement national quality assurance. She shows that through a process of trial and error China has arrived at a system which embraces institutional autonomy on the one hand with, on the other, state expectations that standards will be met and quality enhanced. Stephen Jackson & Janet Bohrer focus on recent developments in the Quality Assurance Agency in Great Britain which has been in operation since 1997 and has undergone numerous revisions according to the feedback from universities undergoing disciplinary review. Not immune to public concerns or changing political directions, the QAA works consistently towards reaching a consensus with the institutions under examination that allows for constructive criticism and ongoing self-reflection. Bernhard Schmidt, Aiga von Hippel & Rudolf Tippelt describe the present situation in Germany, which has undergone major changes since the introduction of the Bologna Process. Degree programmes have been altered to fit the new BA/MA model of tertiary education found elsewhere. They tell us about the challenges that this has put on a system which was not used to such rigid structures before. Their article focuses also on the methodology of evaluation. Henk van Berkel & Wynand Wijnen describe a major change in quality assurance in the Netherlands: one that has moved from external evaluation through peers, with no risk of sanctions, to one of governmental control through accreditation of programmes. They highlight the risks that this new system holds and argue that it might be time to start a discussion about a globally agreed system of quality assurance. Peter Materu & Petra Righetti describe the situation in a total of 52 countries in sub-Saharan Africa, drawing in particular on case studies conducted in six. They highlight the difficulties of establishing a quality assurance system in countries that are frequently limited in their financial means in terms of implementing processes that will allow the quality of their institutions to be addressed and hopefully raised. Their report is nevertheless optimistic, as it seems that the countries do have a clear idea of what needs to be done to improve standards overall. In the concluding article, Susan Harris-Huemmert searches for best practice throughout the world and concludes that dialogue, ongoing self-reflection and the possibility of sanction serve to promote quality assurance and increase what universities are achieving. It is not possible to pinpoint one system of quality assurance as ‘best practice’, but elements from all can be useful to improve already existing practices. Another conclusion is that it is a sensible practice to look at other countries for inspiration or emulation and that to some extent quality assurance itself is in a consistent state of trial and error in the search for optimum methods. Susan Harris-Huemmert |
|
Quality Assurance in Sub-Saharan Africa |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.3 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
This article assesses the status and practice of higher education quality assurance in sub-Saharan Africa, focusing on degree-granting tertiary institutions. A main finding is that structured national-level quality assurance processes in African higher education are a very recent phenomenon and that most countries face major capacity constraints. Only about a third of them have established structured national quality assurance mechanisms, often only as recently as during the last ten years. Activities differ in their scope and rigor, ranging from simple licensing of institutions by the minister responsible for higher education, to comprehensive system-wide program accreditation and ranking of institutions. Within institutions of higher learning, self-assessment and academic audits are gradually being adopted to supplement traditional quality assurance methods. However, knowledge about and experience with self-assessments are limited. The main challenges to quality assurance systems in Africa are cost and human capacity requirements. |
|
Australia: evaluation and quality in higher education |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.18 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
Modern Australia evolved from separate colonies, which came together as a federation a century ago. The balance of state/federal responsibilities is relevant to most aspects of Australian life. This includes higher education, where universities are largely state owned but federally funded (with government funding declining), while the other higher education institutions are largely under state oversight. The article begins by describing the evolution of the higher education sector and the various approaches taken to addressing its quality over the years. Ten years ago, the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) was established as the national quality agency with responsibility for auditing universities (emphasising good processes and achievement of objectives within the universities, and diversity between them) and the state accreditation agencies (with emphasis on national consistency of treatment of the non-university institutions). The article describes AUQA’s approach and actions that have led to effectiveness nationally and internationally, and an international reputation. The article also refers to other issues, including funding, rankings and standards. It concludes with an outline of the Federal Government’s current plans to bring AUQA and the state agencies into a single national agency. |
|
The Quality Assurance of Degree Education in Canada |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.32 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
Under the Canadian constitution, responsibility for education is assigned to the provinces. In some provinces, universities are based in institution-specific statutes, in others, in system-wide legislation. Except for the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, the provinces leave the quality assurance of academic activities to the universities. In the last 15 years, the post-secondary landscape has become more complex. Four provinces have enabled non-degree-granting colleges to offer specific degree programs on the basis of government approval; three have transformed colleges into universities; four permit external universities, public and private, and new private universities based in Canada to offer programs. Though the innovative provinces established quality assurance agencies to screen programs and organizations, the new degrees met resistance from many public universities, which, in the absence of a national accrediting body, took the position that they would only recognize degrees from institutions belonging to their own promotional national body, the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC). Though the new agencies have published both academic standards and rigorous external review procedures, this response from the public universities in effect marginalized the new degree programs and providers. Thus, the state of quality assurance in higher education in Canada is in a state of flux. This article reviews the state of quality assurance activity across the country in both public universities and in the new quality assurance agencies. It concludes with reflections on the challenge of inserting new degrees and new kinds of degree-granting institutions into a framework of academic legitimacy that all players will accept. |
|
Quality Assurance in Chinese Higher Education |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.58 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
Quality assurance has been integrated into the fabric of higher education in China, with the issue of quality in higher education – how to evaluate it and how to enhance it – now taking centre stage in Chinese higher education. In the past decade, the development of quality assurance in Chinese higher education has covered a broad spectrum of initiatives, from national policy, quality evaluation methodology, and institutional adoption of quality assurance schemes, to the matrix of quality evaluations. This article attempts to present a comprehensive overview of quality assurance in Chinese higher education by reviewing and analysing the context and development of quality assurance initiatives, alongside the current structure and management of quality assurance in Chinese higher education. By commenting on the current realities and remaining challenges in Chinese higher education, this article also points to some implications for Chinese higher education institutions in their further progress along the quality assurance path. |
|
Quality Assurance in Higher Education: recent developments in the United Kingdom |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.77 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
Since coverage in the press, in the summer of 2008, of concerns about quality and standards in English higher education, there has been a continuing debate about the nature and extent of the issues and about who is responsible for assuring quality. This article charts the background to these discussions and highlights the characteristics of the English system based on autonomous institutions and self-regulation. It also identifies the role played by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), and its predecessor organisations, in shaping the debate and determining the systems and processes that are used to demonstrate the security of academic standards. |
|
Accreditation in the Netherlands: does accountability improve educational quality? |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.88 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
This article traces the changes in quality assurance within the Dutch higher education system. It starts with a brief history of the development of the Dutch accreditation system, which is the latest step in a process that started with an external quality assurance system. This is followed by an extensive description of the present accreditation system, its structure, its processes and its key players. Finally, it concludes with an attempt to summarise the pros and cons of the system and makes some suggestions as to how the system might develop in the future. |
|
Higher Education Evaluation in Germany |
|
doi:10.2304/rcie.2010.5.1.98 |
| VIEW FULL TEXT | BACK TO CONTENTS LIST |
|
Quality assurance in the area of higher education has become a central issue among both politicians and scientists. University evaluations which refer to both research and teaching are an important element of quality assurance. The present contribution starts out by determining the different components of quality at universities according to different perspectives. In a second step, the authors take a closer look at evaluations in higher education and differentiate subjects and levels, as well as forms of university evaluation. On the basis of these theoretical-conceptual reflections, it is possible to sketch the different trends in the current practice of higher education evaluation in Germany. Here, the development seems to lead towards a growing significance of accreditation. The spheres of action in university evaluation comprise not only these procedures and agencies of accreditation, but also the evaluation of different faculties, and rankings, which have become increasingly influential in Germany. In a final part, the authors discuss current trends and challenges in higher education evaluation in Germany. |
© SYMPOSIUM JOURNALS Ltd |
