As higher education institutions in the developing world struggle to meet growing demand, the issue of quality assurance is in the spotlight. A number of initiatives – including COL’s “do it yourself” approach to quality assurance audits–are rising to meet this challenge.
UNESCO’s World Conference on Higher Education (WCHE) held in Paris in 2009 was a notable international event that drew some 1,200 participants. One of the results was the identification of eight new dynamics in higher education. They are:
- Rising demand and massification
- Diversification of providers and methods
- Private provisions
- Distance education
- Cross-border higher education
- Quality assurance
- Teacher education
- Academic profession
Each of these new dynamics is related to open and distance learning (ODL). Quality assurance–and particularly the internationalisation of quality assurance–is one of the most striking new developments in higher education. It is a worldwide concern because of the growth of cross-border education, eLearning, ODL and Internet use. As education spreads across borders, so too, must quality assurance.
UNESCO has responded in several ways:
- Standard-setting tools: the Conventions for the Recognition of Degrees and the 2005 Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-Border Education.
- Capacity building: global forums on quality assurance, accreditation and the recognition of qualifications. This has facilitated the revision of quality standards within universities and accreditation processes in many countries.
- Regional networks: the UNESCO-World Bank Global Initiative for Quality Assurance Capacity (GIQAC) supports regional networks of quality assurance agencies.
- Web portal on Recognised Higher Education Institutions: a list of accredited higher education institutions that are recognised or otherwise sanctioned by competent authorities.
- Deterring degree mills: joint publication with the US Council for Higher Education Accreditation of “Toward Effective Practice: Discouraging Degree Mills in Higher Education”.
QA and Distance Education
“Quality distance education is a subset of quality education,” said COL President Sir John Daniel in another recent speech. “Distance education should be subject to the same quality assurance mechanisms as education generally.”
This allows for comparisons to be made between the quality of distance and face-to-face provision –comparisons that can reflect well on distance education. For instance, the UK Open University was rated fifth out of 100 institutions by England’s Teaching Quality Assessment System. This assessment found that the quality of teaching at UKOU was superior to many august institutions, including Oxford University.
Learning from Institutional Audits
COL was involved in two institutional quality audits in 2007 that provided excellent learning for all involved. Sir John chaired an international visitation panel to the University of Ghana, which sought to re-establish its former national eminence. The panel of ten international experts made two visits to the University of Ghana and submitted a final report that addressed academic programmes, governance and administrative structures, infrastructure and resources.
Both the university and the Government of Ghana found the report valuable, and it stimulated major reforms. But the costs were high: this was not a model for quality improvement that could be rolled out on any scale in developing countries.
Also in 2007, the University of South Africa (UNISA) asked COL to conduct a trial audit to help them prepare for an institutional audit by the South African Council on Higher Education. Dr. Willie Clarke-Okah, COL Education Specialist, Higher Education, co-ordinated a panel of seven international members and one local member. The panel held a preliminary meeting in the UK with UNISA officers and then visited UNISA for a week, publishing its report two months later.
Once again, UNISA found the panel’s report most helpful, both as a dry run for the official audit and for the learning it provided about creating an institutional culture of distance learning while engaging in continuous improvement. But, like the University of Ghana institutional audit, the exercise was an expensive one.
Following this experience with institutional audits, COL decided to create a model that would yield similar benefits but at a much lower cost. Two lessons emerged from the institutional audits experience in Ghana and South Africa:
- Much of the value in quality assurance comes from self-assessment.
- It is essential to have some mechanism that encourages staff institution-wide to take quality assurance seriously.
A Cost-Effective, DIY Approach
Over the past three years, COL has worked with partners to develop a quality assurance model called COL Review and Improvement Model. COL RIM was designed to help institutions, particularly those which are not yet embedded in effective national quality assurance systems, to develop a quality culture without significant out-of-pocket costs.
COL RIM combines internal and external quality assurance in a low cost “do it yourself” approach that does not require a panel of external experts. It offers several significant benefits:
- It develops systemic thinking and organisational learning.
- The process offers the opportunity to build credibility without high stakes consequences for poor performance.
- Participating staff can build their skills and knowledge.
COL has been working with the Dominica State College, the National University of Lesotho, the Open University of Sri Lanka and the University of Calabar (Nigeria) to implement COL RIM. The model has been introduced to higher education institutions and accreditation and quality assurance agencies through workshops and meetings in several regions of the Commonwealth. Just as COL RIM encourages continuous improvement, COL is committed to improving the model as feedback emerges from institutions that use it.
By facilitating institutional audits, COL is helping developing countries to provide greater access to quality higher education without adding significant costs.
The COL Review and Improvement Model
Primarily intended for higher education institutions’ own use for improvement and capacity building, COL RIM can also be used to help meet external quality assurance requirements. It consists of five steps:
1) Initiation
Institutions determine if they are ready and able to implement COL RIM. The institution assesses whether they are prepared to change, have open discussions about what needs to improve and accept new ways of doing things. It also means that senior management must be committed to leading the process and allocating people and resources to it. This step concludes with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding with COL.
2) Internal staff survey
Administered to all staff electronically by COL in partnership with the institution, the survey asks staff to rate a set of quality indicators and share opinions about how they perceive practices in their own areas of work.
3) Self-review
The core of the COL RIM model, self review relies on a team of senior staff members to investigate outcomes of the institution, focussed both on good practice and areas for improvement. The team produces a report that answers key thematic questions dealing with issues such as communication with stakeholders, community engagement, capacity development and performance monitoring.
4) Verification
An external Lead Verifier, working with an internal team that has not been involved in the process so far, verifies the self-review. This team confirms the rigour of the methods, findings and recommendations of the self-review while also building quality assurance skills among staff involved in the team.
5) Follow-up
This final step is when the recommendations made in the self-review that have been verified, expanded or modified through the verification exercise are implemented. Institutions are invited to provide COL with feedback on the effectiveness of the model; COL reports to stakeholders periodically about the collective outcomes of institutions that have implemented COL RIM as well as refinements to it.
April 2011