META – SEGURIDAD

With regards to quality assurance, Neave (1991, in Billing, 2004: 114) concluded that its purpose is elusive, and that “there is no agreement on the purpose of quality assurance, save only as a resource allocation device or perhaps as a resource withdrawal device”.

56

Campbell and Rozsnyai (2002: 26), on the other hand, argue that the higher education institutions’ creation of more refined and efficient internal QA mechanisms is the catalyst that will shift the balance “from compliance to improvement”, despite Morley’s (2003) and Neave’s (1991, in Billing, 2004) scepticism. Furthermore, Ng (2008: 112) states that the introduction of QA mechanisms in higher education will alleviate the concerns that accompany the education sector, such as funding, accountability, quality and managerial efficiency.

Westerheijden, Stensaker and Rosa (2007: 81) argue that “a basic distinction in quality assessment approaches is between mission-based and standards-based evaluation”, thus delineating between internal and external quality assurance, two separate QA methods that have different objectives and that employ distinct procedures. However, internal and external QA are related, as external quality assessment “almost always drives internal quality assurance” (Westerheijden, Stensaker and Rosa, 2007: 81). Furthermore, Pennington and O’Neil (1994: 13) argue that in order to improve the quality of teaching and learning in higher education, and thus to advance the principle of education, both internal and external components need to be involved. Lastly, Campbell and Rozsnyai (2002: 26, 28-29) state that managing internal quality control and external quality assurance are the two important aspects of providing quality services.

This being said, internal quality assurance is based on monitoring all the activities performed, focusing on improvement and their relation with the quality aspect (Ngwira, 2016), while external quality assurance is based on either accreditation or visitations from an expert team, in order to fulfil legal obligations (Harvey and Askling, 2003).

Jeliazkova and Westerheijden (2001: 3) offer a model for QA which divides the system into five distinct phases that may occur chronologically and defines the role of QA according to each phase, by highlighting the problems that appear during each phase and describing the means through which both internal and external QA are achieved. The details of this model are presented below:

Table 3: Phases and Role of Quality Assurance

Phase Problems Role of QA Internal Quality Review

External Quality Review

57 doubts regarding educational standards standard educational programmes measuring performance standards and analysing descriptive reports summative reports, accreditation, and the checking of national standards

2 There are doubts regarding the efficiency of a higher education institution or system To create quality awareness and maintain public accountability Based on strategic reporting regarding procedures and performance Based on ranking of HEIs, identifying good practices

3 There are doubts over the aspects of innovation capacity and QA capacity of institutions To focus on self- regulation and stimulate public accountability Based on self- evaluation reports regarding procedures and performance It is based on audit reports (to the institution and the state)

4 The educational institution wants to stimulate a sustainable quality culture in HEIs To improve through self- regulation and public accountability It is based on self- evaluative reports that employ SWOT analyses, benchmarking performance standards It verifies and incorporates the data in public databanks Upcoming challenges Transparency in the higher education system is decreasing Focused on market regulations Performance indicators about products (knowledge and skills of graduates) It is based on the publication of performance indicators and standardised testing of graduates

Source: Jeliazkova and Westerheijden (2001).

Furthermore, the figure below illustrates the connection between internal and external QA, quality standards and purpose of QA:

58

Figure 3: Internal and External Quality Assurance

Source: Van Damme (2004: 133).

The figure presented above shows that internal quality assurance depends on fitness for purpose, while external quality assurance centres around consumer satisfaction (Van Damme, 2004).

2.3.2.1 Internal Quality Assurance

According to Cheng (2003: 203), internal QA is crucial in HEIs, as it is concerned with “improving the internal environment and processes such that the effectiveness of learning and teaching can be ensured to achieve the planned goals”; therefore, internal QA is employed to ensure that the main goal of higher education, to provide quality knowledge with efficiency, is maintained. At the same time, Fourie (2000: 51) addresses the issue of HEIs to develop and maintain an internal quality control practice, in order to compensate for higher education’s “shift from quality control to quality assurance”.

Stumbrys (2004: 161-162) divides the objectives of internal QA into four crucial categories:

- assisting with the enhancement of high quality services and with the attainment of perfect standards;

59

- providing stakeholders with reliable and exhaustive information regarding the quality of learning, the scientific achievements and management of a HEI;

- ensuring that the areas of performance that lack in quality are identified, and providing advantageous measures to improve the quality of the determined areas; - guaranteeing the accountability of the HEI for the allocated state financial

resources.

There are several procedures that are associated to internal QA, yet internal quality audits and self-evaluations are the most efficient. On the one hand, internal quality audits are employed to determine and ensure the personnel’s dedication and consistency with implementing the necessary QA processes (Mail et al., 2014: 177). On the other hand, Ritchie’s (2007: 86) assessment is that self-evaluations are utilised with the purpose of determining the manner in which “such self-critical questioning of practice and outcomes can inform decisions about how the situation can be improved for the benefit of pupils”, or in the case of higher education, students.

2.3.2.2 External Quality Assurance

Morley (2003: 162) argues that standardisation aims to create excellence, yet delivers mediocrity, but Doherty (1997: 240) also asserts that while standards-based evaluations are vulnerable to the subjective nature of standards, a positive aspect of such an evaluation is the continuously shifting standardisation, which is influenced and raised by competition.

External QA is a process that emphasizes either accountability or continuous quality improvement (Campbell and Rozsnyai, 2002: 26) and is commonly implemented by independent agencies or organisations that “function as professional buffer organisations between public authorities and higher education institutions” (Martin and Stella, 2007: 20).

The procedures specific to external QA vary from country to country, and among HEIs. There are several procedures associated with external QA, such as quality control, external quality audits, external evaluation, accreditation and peer review.

To exemplify, external quality assurance can be based on external accreditation and visitations that aim to assess the quality of the programs and the product offered (Ngwira, 2016). In this situation, the visits are made by external specialists, who offer advice and

60

critique with regards a multitude of subjects, such as institutional policies, course design or teaching and learning evaluations (Wilger, 1997: 10), all of these issues being part of a single specialised branch. After the evaluation framework is accepted, the experts write their report, which is based on both oral and written assessments. The oral report is presented at the end of the visit and the written report is presented within a few months (Westerheijden, et al., 2007). Alternatively, external accreditation in the United States is performed by either non-governmental organisations or through specialised programmes (Campbell and Rozsnyai, 2002: 25). The process is undergone to assess whether HEIs or programmes have adequate objectives and conditions, and whether they are attaining said aspects (Wilger, 1997: 4).

Another process specific to external QA is external evaluation, which is utilised to examine the practices, policies and programmes of a HEI, in order to appraise the development and competence of said features (Le Menestrel, Walahoski and Mielke, 2014). This approach is favoured by HEIs as an alternative to internal evaluation due to the external evaluator’s detached perspective, impartiality and commitment to efficiently performing the evaluation, which also implies a higher degree of credibility (Le Menestrel, Walahoski and Mielke, 2014: 64).