Contrasts in Current Approaches to Quality Assurance of Universities in Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand Presentation to Australian International Education Conference, 9 October 2008 by Greg Holmes, Quality Assurance Division, & Janine McCardle, International Policy Unit, New Zealand Qualifications Authority Overview United Kingdom/Australia/New Zealand Quality Assurance bodies Structuring Funding Approaches Transnational Education Quality Assurance systems New Zealand Quality Assurance in Higher Education Tertiary Education Reforms in New Zealand www.aiec.idp.com 1
Agencies Involved in QA of Universities How are universities established? Australia State-specific legislation, with authority to accredit own programmes United Kingdom Royal Charter or Act of Parliament. Decision made by Privy Council with advice New Zealand Act of Parliament www.aiec.idp.com 2
Structure and Funding Independent, not for profit Private company Statutory entity. CUAP: standing committee AAU: independent audit unit Funding from Commonwealth State and Territory Ministers Funding from contracts, subscriptions and selffunding activities CUAP: Funded by AAU: Funded by and universities Solely quality assurance Quality assurance and other roles CUAP: interuniversity course approval AAU: academic audit SYSTEMS OF UNIVERSITY QUALITY ASSURANCE who carries out the quality assurance? State and territory accrediting authorities and is the national QA organisation for higher education (but different emphases in the four countries of the UK) is the university sector programme approval and accreditation body (exercised by NZQA in other higher education sectors) www.aiec.idp.com 3
SYSTEMS OF HIGHER EDUCATION QUALITY ASSURANCE who is quality assured? HE providers seeking Federal Government Funding, NZQA (ITPs, PTEs) Publicly funded HEIs, private HEIs with degree-awarding powers and some voluntary private HEIs All universities, registered ITPs and PTEs. Transnational Education Academic audit the same as in Australia. Scope includes all academic activities carried out in HEI s name and normally includes a visit from audit panel. Audit of collaborative links. Management of academic standards and quality of education. Included as part of onshore audit. Responsibility on provider. Protocol for delivery of qualifications with a significant contributions from overseas HEIs. www.aiec.idp.com 4
Victoria University in Vietnam 2008 Education NZ Excellence Award Partnership with University of Economics Ho Chi Minh City English language and BCA courses Pathway for students to transfer to study in New Zealand Weltec in Tonga Partnership with Tupou Tertiary Institute Tonga Diploma in Construction Management and Technology Site visit by ITPQuality, Industry Rep, and Tongan Officials Face-to-face delivery by both Weltec and local teaching staff www.aiec.idp.com 5
Quality Assurance Bodies in the New Zealand Education System Minister for Tertiary Education New Zealand Qualifications Authority NZ Vice Chancellors Committee Delegates authority for approval & accreditation Provider Registration and Accreditation Post-graduate programmes Degree level and below Institutes of Technology & Polytechnics C/ttee on University Academic Programmes NZ Universities Academic Audit Unit Private Training Establishments, Wānanga Institutes of Technology & Polytechnics Universities SYSTEMS OF UNIVERSITY QUALITY ASSURANCE how long is the audit cycle? 5-6 years with a provision to do more often 6 years with mid-term engagement after 3 years and a provision to do more often 4 years with a follow-up report on recommendations after 12-18 months and a provision to followup more often www.aiec.idp.com 6
Quality Assurance Reform Government initiative to review the tertiary education sector. Reforms are the responsibility of the Tertiary Education Commission. NZQA has responsibility to lead the Quality Assurance and Monitoring Work stream. NZQA is responsible for the design of the self assessment and independent external evaluation and review. Conclusion While the principles for the quality assurance of universities are the same for the three countries, the contrasts are to be found in the differences in structures, funding and approaches to external quality assurance. All three countries provide an example of different ways of delivering quality assurance successfully within and across higher education and in sync with the type of higher education systems running in each country. www.aiec.idp.com 7
For Further Information Greg Holmes Team Leader Provider Registration and Accreditation Quality Assurance Division Janine McCardle Policy Analyst International Policy Unit Strategic & Corporate Division New Zealand Qualifications Authority P O Box 160 Wellington New Zealand E-mail greg.holmes@nzqa.govt.nz janine.mccardle@nzqa.govt.nz Website www.nzqa.govt.nz www.aiec.idp.com 8