Transcript Re-moralising Quality Assurance in Private Tertiary Education

Re-moralising Quality Assurance in
Private Tertiary Education
Mahsood Shah
Presentation at Glance









Rationale of the topic
Brief about private tertiary education
QA practices in private tertiary education
Current dilemma
Multiple QA frameworks and challenges
Does QA matter?
Summary
Research on private tertiary education: what is known?
Questions and discussion
2
Rationale of the topic
 What is the moral purpose of tertiary education?
 Help build a fairer, more just society
 Fulfilling the social responsibility of education
 Economic responsibility and productivity
 Tackling contemporary issues facing society
 Graduates are able to do their job effectively
 Knowledge is used to improve the human condition e.t.c.
3
Rationale of the topic….
 Defining quality: excellence (high standards); perfection
(zero defects); value for money (return on investment);
transformation (process of change), (Harvey and Green,
1993)
 Is quality a moral purpose of tertiary providers?
 Social responsibility
 Economic responsibility
 Tertiary education productivity
 Stakeholder needs and expectations
 Guarding against declined standards: intellectual, ethical
and moral McWilliam (2004)
4
Brief about private tertiary education










Ongoing growth e.g. private higher education (20%)
Significant investment in online learning
Innovative marketing strategies
Mergers and acquisitions
Competitive
Engagement with industry
Collaboration with public universities
Student choice is clearly informed
Different student experience
Unclear future: government policy directions
5
QA practices in private tertiary education
 Internal QA driven by external requirements
 In some cases compliance driven QA inherited by AQTF
and move from VET > HE
 Compliance vs improvement led approach
 Conflict between Academic Quality and Growth/Profit
 Growth has in some cases compromised Quality
 Concerns raised in AUQA audit reports (Winchester, 2010;
Shah and Lewis, 2010; and Shah and Nair, 2011)
 QA concerns in international literature
6
Questioning QA in Tertiary Education >
Public and Private






Student assessments, soft marking and grading
Student complaints about the quality of education
Declining student experience
Closure of various providers without notifying students
Employer complaints about the quality of graduates
Quality assurance practices in offshore international
education
 Academic and non-academic support for students
 Staff engagement with quality and improvement;
 How about social inclusion agenda and issues around
access and participation of disadvantaged student???
7
Current dilemma
 Use of different framework




TEQSA (provider standards, AQF, ESOS, CRICOS, other???)
ASQA (VET quality framework)
NEAS
ISO
 Mostly driven by compliance culture
 Process driven > good processes are easy to achieve then
good outcomes
 Absence of a single framework in institutions to meet VET,
HE and English language requirement
 Excessive focus on paperwork and documentation
8
Current dilemma…..
 Reactive to government policy changes rather then building
internal capacity
 Compliance driven QA raises important questions on the
extent to which quality is tracked and improved in a
systematic manner in important areas such as:






course design
course reviews
teaching quality
quality and standard of student assessments
student attainment of learning outcomes
comparability in academic outcomes and the student experience with
courses taught at different locations and modes of delivery.
9
Current dilemma…..
ISO 9001 - 2008 Certification
10
18
Private providers
TAFE Institutes
Universities
28
Note: the data used in figure 1 is from JAS-ANZ online database http://cab.jasanz.org/CABPublic/Pages/PublicSearch.aspx as of August 2012.
10
Current dilemma…..
 Cost of managing quality and accreditations
Quality Assurance Framework
Approximate cost
TEQSA registration and reaccreditation
ASQA registration and reaccreditation
NEAS registration and reaccreditation
ISO registration and reaccreditation
Total cost
$70,000
$10,800*
$12,000
$77,000
$169,000
* Initial registration as an RTO and CRICOS registration application of up to 10 qualification and 2 delivery sites
11
Recurring themes > AUQA and others











Academic governance
Compliance led QA
Academic leadership
Huge reliance on sessional teachers – coordination of courses
Research culture
Access for disadvantaged students
Reliance on international student income
Staff professional development
Academic support structures
Alignment between growth and resourcing (e.g. library)
Data and performance monitoring
12
Multiple QA frameworks and challenges
Higher Education
 Problem identified in Bradley review – inconsistent
implementation of National Protocols
 Performance monitoring and reporting
 AUQA’s failure to monitor standards and compliance with
external reference points.
13
Multiple QA frameworks and challenges..
AQTF
 Lack of consistent implementation
 Lack of compliance to AQTF standards by providers (Abola
and Lambert, 2010; Gallagher and Anderson, 2005; Myer
and Blom, 2004)
 AQTF quality indicators: compliance and national findings?
 Lack of risk based audits resulted in the collapse of more
than 10 private VET colleges
14
Multiple QA frameworks and challenges..
ISO 9000
 Marketing tool use to improve brand/image - used in education
institutions who subscribe to the image of university as business
(Houston, 2007)
 Less than 25% US Colleges used ISO in Learning and Teaching
(Vazzana et al, 2000)
 More focus on processes and documentation (Bevans-Gonzales
and Nair, 2004; Waks and Moti, 1999)
 Confusion among staff on how ISO is applied in tertiary
education(Bevans-Gonzales and Nair, 2004)
 A survey of 647 companies in UK shows only 15% benefited
from ISO (Vanguard consulting Ltd, 1994)
15
Multiple QA frameworks and challenges..
ISO 9000
According to Alderman (1999), ‘quality in tertiary education is
not about satisfying the customer (i.e. the student), but is
rather about transforming learners, which is not the same
thing at all ... an ISO 9000 approach will not and cannot lead,
by itself, to the achievement of quality: the most it can lead to
is short-to medium, to mid-term bureaucratic procedural
compliance’ (p.262).
16
Does QA matter?
 Reputation of Australian tertiary education
 Increased regulation of tertiary education
 Use of ranking and leagues tables to assess institutional
performance
 Marketisation and student choice
 Competition
 Tertiary education productivity: from success to excellence
 MyPrivateCollege??
 Governments political agenda: social inclusion,
performance funding, quality and productivity
17
Moral dilemma
 Higher education institutions are losing sight of their ethical
functions in their desire to turn a profit (Schwartz (2011)
 Moral imperative on an institution to do most it can to
facilitate the learning of its students and the external
clients (York, 2000)
 Failure of students and declined standards -intellectual,
ethical and moral (McWilliams, 2004)
 Low access and participation of disadvantaged students
raises questions on the moral purpose of tertiary education
(Shah and Nair, forthcoming)
18
Summary
 Growth of the sector
 Student experience>
 Student choice
 Practical education
 Size
 Relationship with industry
 Student experience
 Industry based teaching staff
 Ease of entry
 Location
 Profile of students
 Flexibility (online, distance, part time, fast track)
19
Summary





Sustainable QA
Single framework to meet VET and HE
Internal QA and capacity building
AQF challenge
Growth should not compromise quality outcomes and the
student experience
 Time to revisit QA arrangements - shift from compliance
to an improve led approach
 High risk providers and TEQSA > watch dog, sniffer dog
or a guide dog??
 Reputation of Australian tertiary education
20
Research on private tertiary education
Bennett, L., Nair, S., & Shah, M. (2012). The Emergence of Private Higher Education in Australia: The Silent Provider.
European Journal of Higher Education, forthcoming
Shah, M., Nair, S., & Bennett, L. (2012). Factors Influencing Student Choice to Study at Private for-profit Higher Education
Institutions. Quality Assurance in Education, forthcoming
Nair, S., Bennett, L., and Shah, M. (2012). Student Experience: A Private Provider Perspective. The ACPET Journal for
Private Higher Education, forthcoming
Shah, M., & Nair, S. (2012). A New Dynamic in Australian Higher Education: The Emergence of Private for-profit Higher
Education. European Journal of Higher Education, available in late 2012
Shah, M., & Nair, S. (2012). Private for–profit higher education in Australia: Widening Access and Participation and
Opportunities for Public-Private Collaboration. Higher Education Research and Development Society (HERDSA), available
in late 2012 or early 2013
Shah, M., Nair, S. (2011). Building the plane while it's flying: enhancing the missed opportunity for quality assurance and
capacity-building in Australian private higher education. European Journal of Higher Education, 1 (2-3), 261-273.
Shah, M., & Nair, S. (2011). Engaging with Quality: Quality Assurance and Capacity Building in Private Higher Education.
Australian Quality Forum 2011, 138-144. Melbourne: Australian University Quality Agency.
Shah, M., & Lewis, l. (2010). Private Higher Education in Australia: Growth, Quality and Standards. Journal of Institutional
Research (South East Asia), 8 (2), 80-95.
Shah, M., & Brown, G. (2009). The Rise of Private Higher Education in Australia: Maintaining Quality Outcomes and Future
Challenges. Proceedings of the Australian Universities Quality Forum (AUQF), 138-143. Melbourne: Australian Universities
Quality Agency.
21
[email protected]
22