Proteín quinasas activadas por p21 (PAKs)

In discussing the quality assurance policy, I reflect on the views of Psacharopoulos (2006:132) that education has value not only to the individual who invests in it, but to the nation as well, placing responsibility on government to generate policies that uphold educational quality, especially in a liberal democracy such as Zambia – policies that protect the individual and collective rights of the Zambian citizens who are consumers of university education. As in any democratic government, the Zambian government is expected to protect the plight of the citizens it represents by formulating policies that govern the provision of university education in the higher education sector.

4.2.1 The concept of policy

There are several explanations of what constitutes a policy. Howlett, Ramesh and Perl (2009) describe policy in three dimensions: as an outcome of a reconciliatory process, as an initiative

94

sanctioned by government and as decisions that cumulatively contribute to an outcome. The facets as described by Howlett et al. illustrate the elusiveness of the concept and the difficulty writers have in agreeing on what the term ‘policy’ ought to be.

By definition, Howlett et al. (2009:4) describe a policy as an intended government action containing articulated goal(s), however articulately or poorly the goals may have been identified, justified and formulated and the means to achieve them, and notwithstanding how well or poorly the means have been connected to the goal(s). In this view, a policy consists of interrelated elements such as intentions, actions and means, constituted to achieve a goal. A policy is a formal plan by government intended at pursuing a specific purpose through a specified means in a given environment. Despite a policy being an intentional government action, sometimes a policy does not produce only intended outcomes, because the environment that a policy is seeking to manipulate is sometimes complex.

Easton (1953, cited in Hill, 2013:15) defines policy as consisting of a web of decisions and actions that allocate values. Lingard (2013:116, 118) seemingly expanded Easton’s definition by explaining that the allocation of values is authoritative, linked to politics and ideology, and framed by political intentions of government. In this vein, the policy is seen as the re- articulation of political intentions, suggesting that policy making is a political activity mediated by state structures through the logic of the practice of the state and policy makers (Lingard, 2013:118). Therefore, a policy can be impacted upon by a political system because the values ingrained in the policies, through the policy process, the policy implementation and the outcomes, may be crafted towards the political intentions of the state.

Dye (1972, cited in Howlett, 2011:15) defines policy as “what government chooses to do or not to do”. As a policy in Dye’s definition is viewed as a choice of a course of action, it indicates that policies are conscious decisive actions made by government to meet a purpose. This policy view is shared by Smith (1976, cited in Hill, 2013:15), who suggests that policy is a deliberate action or inaction. Both definitions bear a remainder that attention to policy should not focus exclusively on decisions that produce change, but also on those decisions that resist change and are difficult to observe because they are not represented in the policy-making process by legislative enactment (Hill, 2013:15). Said differently, chosen courses of action made by government are policies, whether they result in negative decisions that consciously avoid changing a status quo or a positive decision that alters some aspect of the current circumstances (Howlett, 2011:15). In this regard, a policy is an action-oriented decision focused on attaining tangible or less tangible outputs that result from a choice made by government.

95

As observed by Howlett et al. (2009), the scholarly definitions articulated above in general are in agreement with the dimensions outlined earlier (in the introduction of this sub-section). In addition, the above definitions suggest that government occupies an important position in policy making. Howlett et al. (2009:5) observed that government enjoys a special position in policy making because of its unique ability to make authoritative decisions on behalf of citizens, which are backed up by sanctions for transgressors in the event of non-compliance.

In the context of education, just as generally articulated, policies are intended to provide guidance, goals and means of improving the quality of the outcomes of the education system. Although the higher education system in Zambia has been one of the areas in which public provision of educational services has been dominant, the higher education landscape in Zambia is slowly changing because of the emergence of private providers. Bearing in mind that education is a policy area where the actual characteristics of policy are likely to be considerably influenced at the points of delivery (Hill, 2013:136), the Zambian government has formulated the quality assurance policy to influence university education through policy regulation of services provided.

4.2.2 Policy making: The quality assurance policy

As suggested by the conceptual analysis of policy, policy making is a conscious activity of attempting to match formulated policy goals to the means of policy implementation. Policy goals are aims and expectations government has in deciding to pursue or not to pursue some course of action, while policy means are the techniques designed or suggested to attain the goals (Howlett, 2011:16). Howlett (2011:16) further elaborates that the means to achieve the policy goals exist at different levels, such as abstract, for specific forms of policy implementation, for example the use of government or non-governmental organisations to implement policy goals; concrete, for use of specific governing mechanisms, such as regulation, information campaigns or government subsidies to alter actor behaviour; and a most specific level, of deciding exactly how tools should be calibrated to achieve policy targets. Despite the means of achieving policy goals being at different levels, the Zambian situation demands a combination of the stated levels to meet the quality assurance goal. The HEA as quasi-government authority through regulation assures the quality of universities using specified criteria to achieve quality intentions. Therefore, the existence of means at different levels helps to understand the techniques available to attain the intended goals.

96

Policy making is not a one-off activity, but a process. Lasswell (1956, cited in Howlett, 2011:16), describes policy making as a process involving a set of interrelated stages through which policy issues and deliberations flow in a sequential fashion from ‘input’ problems to ‘output’ policies. As cited in Howlett et al. (2009:10) and Howlett (2011:18), Lasswell (1971) suggests that the policy process be divided into seven stages: intelligence, promotion, prescription, invocation, application, termination and appraisal; while Brewer (1974, cited in Howlett et al. (2009:11) views the policy process as being composed of only six stages: initiation, estimation, selection, implementation, evaluation and termination. The stages suggested in policy making, besides confirming that policy making is a process, also help to understand how the distinct stages result in a policy and provide an understanding of activities involved in the production of public policies.

With the awareness of policy development, the 1996 National Policy on Education in its preamble indicates that it was a product of broad-based consultation and research (MoE, 1996:vii), suggesting the existence of the sequence of inseparable activities that guided policy making, but possibly emphasising that consultation and research were key in the entire process of policy making. The 1996 National Policy on Education is the national policy guiding the entire education system in Zambia, and as a government initiative, it was greatly influenced by the political environment of liberal democracy, as it was premised on the democratic principles upholding the tenet of stakeholders participating in the development of the education policy. The 1996 National Policy on Education as the blueprint for educational provision in Zambia that addresses the needs and problems that the country has and is yet to encounter (MoE, 1996:vii) emerged out of a concerted effort in light of the democratic values.