Quality assurance for public higher education: context,strategies and challenges in Kenya

Quality assurance (QA) mechanisms used to be highly dependent on national administrative traditions but nowadays there is a convergence of mechanisms. Compared to more developed higher education (HE) systems in the world, QA systems in Africa are still at an infant stage and thus confronted by many challenges. The purpose of this article is to present some of the findings derived from a study analysing the crucial issues and unique challenges facing Kenya's public HE as it struggles to develop QA mechanisms. Using purposive sampling, the researcher chose two public universities who indicated their willingness to participate and a national QA Agency (QAA). The study was done through in-depth interviews and a review of historical materials and records. Overall, respondents strongly emphasised the need for Kenyan universities to have compulsory and effective external and internal QA mechanisms. They indicated that the trends facing HE make it necessary for HE in Kenya to review their traditional QA structures and to create new systems of external QA. The numerous comments in this research indicate deficiency not only in the QAA focus and work but also in the internal QA frameworks within public universities.     

A strategic quality assurance framework in an African higher education context

This study is based on a pragmatist analysis of selected international accounts on quality assurance in higher education. A pragmatist perspective was used to conceptualise a logical internal quality assurance model to embed and support the alignment of graduate competencies in curriculum and assessment of Ghanaian polytechnics. Through focus group and in-depth interviews, the framework was evaluated by internal stakeholders including lecturers, students and administrators of the polytechnics. It was found that from a pragmatist perspective, quality assurance concepts and practices in higher education reported in the international literature could be used to design a context-specific quality assurance framework for higher education systems in Africa but there will be challenges with implementation of such a framework. The challenges found include quality culture and financial resources. Nonetheless, it was noted that effective planning and stakeholder commitment can surmount the challenges to ensure effective implementation of the framework to enhance quality.     

加拿大高校学生学习成果评估的内容、方法及启示

作为全球第二个实现高等教育普及化的高等教育强国,加拿大高校学生学习成果评估体系富有特色:在评估内容方面,构建起了高等教育系统、院校以及学科(专业)等不同层面的学生学习成果体系;在评估方法方面,形成了由标准化测试、评价量规、表现性评估以及问卷调查等四种类型构成的多元化学生学习成果评估方法体系。其对我国的启示是:构建和完善高校学生学习成果评估的内容体系,为学生学习成果评估奠定共识基础;开发多元化的学生学习成果评估方法与工具,提高评估活动的科学性;加强以结果为导向的评估制度建设,促使学习成果评估常态化。     

高等教育评估中几个值得探讨的问题

我国高等教育评估已经开展20年,经验值得总结,有必要在下列几个问题上从理论上进行反思:高等教育评估的目的和功能问题;高等教育评估与高等教育质量保障体系问题;高等教育评估与人文精神问题;高等教育评估的再评估问题等。     

Identifying discourses of moderation in higher education

Moderation of student assessment is a critical component of teaching and learning in contemporary universities. Yet, despite this, it tends to be marked by idiosyncratic and sporadic processes informed by liminal understanding. This paper, in the light of forthcoming radical national requirements for the declaration of moderation processes in tertiary curricula in Australia, will present four discourses of moderation we identified in a recent study in a Faculty of Education in a large metropolitan university. The discourses are equity, justification, community building and accountability. Together, they will act as a starting point for academics to review their beliefs and attitudes towards the moderation of student assessment.     

The Australian higher education quality assurance framework

The Australian government initiated a review of higher education in 2008. One of the outcomes of the review was the formation of a national regulator, the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), with responsibilities to: register all higher education providers, accredit the courses of the non self-accrediting providers, assure quality against externally set standards and reduce risk by monitoring institutional performance on various measures. One of the key changes in Australian higher education quality assurance is the shift from a ‘fitness-for-purpose’ approach to quality assurance to a compliance-driven approach using an externally developed set of standards monitored by the national regulator, which has legislated powers to place sanctions on universities and other providers for non-compliance. This article outlines the new framework introduced by the government and analyses its limitations in assuring and improving quality in core and support areas. It cautions universities against being dominated by TEQSA's compliance agenda. Rather, it encourages the development and maintenance of shared governance principles and strong internal quality improvement processes along with the establishment of an outcomes focus, which will stand the test of external compliance auditing while allowing the institution to pursue its own educational objectives. The article is based on the authors’ experience and reflection on external, improvement-led quality audits in Australia over the past decade compared with the present compliance-oriented audits now required for institutional registration and ongoing accreditation.     

全球化背景下的高等教育责任制

高等教育责任制是一个与效率、效果和绩效评估相关的概念,它要求通过有效的方式证明高等教育取得了预定的结果和绩效。关注效率、效果,注重结果、产出是高等教育责任制的基本特征。高等教育评估是责任制的实施形式,也是质量保障的一个基本途径。通过评估加强质量保障,反映了全球化背景下高等教育管理中一种新的责任制文化。高等教育过程的内在复杂性决定了责任制及绩效测量的难度,我国高等教育评估要实现保障和提高高等教育质量的目的,同时避免对高校办学自主权造成不利影响,需要总结已有评估经验并借鉴国外有益经验,进行创造性的探索。     

Rigour in moderation processes is more important than the choice of method

Processes for moderating assessments are much debated in higher education. The myriad approaches to the task vary in their demands on staff time and expertise, and also in how valid, reliable and fair to students they appear. Medical education, with its diverse range of assessments and assessors across clinical and academic domains presents additional challenges to moderation. The current review focuses on medical education, considering double-marking and benchmarking as two broad classes of moderation procedure, and argues that it is the process more than the type of procedure which is crucial for successful moderation. The advantages and disadvantages of each class of procedure are discussed in the light of our medical school’s current practices, and with respect to the limited empirical evidence within medical education assessment. Consideration of implementation is central to ensuring valid and reliable moderation. The reliability of assessor judgements depends more on the consistency of assessment formats and the application of clear and agreed assessment criteria than on the moderation process itself. This article considers these factors in relation to their impact on the reliability of moderation, and aims to help assessors and students appreciate the diversity of these factors by facilitating their consideration in the assessment process.     

专业认证:高等教育质量保障的重要方法

专业认证是一种在国际上行之多年、得到广泛采纳的保证和提高专业教育质量的手段,通过严格的高校专业认证可以确保各级专业人才的水准和质量.目前,我国高等教育发展面临诸多挑战:如实践应用型专业人才的培养,专业人才配置机制的市场化和国际化等.这些问题的交汇,进一步凸显出作为专业人才培养的质量保障措施的专业认证制度的必要性.本文将首先对世界范围内高等教育专业认证制度的性质与作用予以阐述,进而对该制度在我国的初步实践和未来发展进行分析.     

专业评估体制:专业认证和同行评价双轨运行

专业质量的保障是高等教育质量提升的基础。通过分析英、美等世界高等教育发达国家的专业质量保障模式可以看出,外部行业协会介入的专业认证和同行学术评价的专业保障相结合模式对高等教育专业质量保障起了重大作用。我国的专业评估自20世纪80年代开始实施以来,在实践方面取得了重要成效,对我国高等教育质量的保障与提高起了重要作用,尤其是工程教育类专业认证的成功经验也为我国专业评估的改革开辟了道路。但是我国的专业评估体制仍存在许多问题,举步维艰。借鉴英、美的经验及我国工程教育专业认证实践成功的范例,应建立我国的专业认证与同行学术评价相结合双轨并存的专业评估制度。     

Quality assurance in Australian higher education: Globalisation and `steering at a distance'

The complex and contested phenomenon of globalisation presents a fundamental challenge to higher education. Arguably, the development of quality assurance mechanisms during the 1990s and into the 2000s is one of the key globalising practices evident in many higher education sectors – in both developed and developing countries. However, there are still too few studies on the implications of globalisation processes grounded in detailed examinations of particular historical times and geographical spaces. It is important to investigate context-specific differences in potentially globalising policies and practices, rather than simply assuming global homogenisation. This paper offers an analysis of policy on quality assurance in Australian higher education over the last decade. It points to the changing discourses on `quality' over the period from a management device to a marketing device. It suggests that, in essence, quality assurance mechanisms have provided the government with an avenue for `steering at a distance', where the controls over universities and academics have not lessened but have changed form. The specific mechanisms used are both similar to, and different from, those evident in quality assurance policies in other higher education systems.     

澳大利亚高等教育质量保证体制综述

文章首先考察了20世纪90年代澳大利亚高等教育质量保证的发展，然后总括了澳大利亚目前多层面质量保证体制，论及了两个联合政府机构：澳大利亚学历资格评定框架署和澳大利亚大学质量保证总暑，联邦、州和地区政府以及高等教育部门的各种职能。     

中英高等教育评估项目比较

英国高等学校科研评估(RAE)与中国一级学科整体水平评估(CDR)同为评估项目,均以学科为评估对象,针对高校的科研质量进行评估。但这两种评估活动在实施主体、指标体系、运行程序等方面均有很大差异。英国的高等教育质量评估工作在国际上享有盛誉,将其与我国的学科评估进行对比,探寻差异,可以为我国高等教育学科评估工作的完善提供借鉴。     

The emergence of contesting motives for student feedback-based evaluation in Australian higher education

Student feedback-based evaluation performs a significant social role in framing perceptions of the quality of teaching in contemporary Australian higher education. Yet its emergence is a relatively recent phenomenon, having only been in widespread application since the mid-1980s. The early manifestations of student feedback-based evaluation came with newly emerging academic development units with a motive to enhance the quality of local teaching and to afford student retention. However, new motives for assailing student feedback evolved with the rapid growth in student numbers, the introduction of student fees and heightened levels of inter-institutional competition for students. As a result, student feedback-based evaluation progressively became also a powerful proxy measure of teaching and curricula quality assurance at an individual, institutional and sectoral level [Blackmore, J. (2009). Academic pedagogies, quality logics and performative universities: Evaluating teaching and what students want. Studies in Higher Education, 34(8), 857–872. doi:10.1080/03075070902898664]. This generated critical tensions between the seminal motive of student feedback around quality improvement, and the rising quality assurances discourses, academic performance management demands and institutional marketing. In this paper, the complex social origins of these competing motives for student feedback-based evaluation in Australian higher education will be explored and analysed. It is argued this provides an important means of understanding the polarising effects of student feedback-based evaluation in Australian universities.     

The quality of peer assessment in a wiki-based online context: a qualitative study

Peer assessment (PA) provides opportunities for authentic assessment, autonomy and collaboration. Several authors advocate that students can benefit from PA and put forward the effects of PA on the students’ learning outcomes. Questions concerning the validity and reliability of PA and PA competences are also addressed by different researchers. This qualitative study is part of a wider project that seeks to develop and test evaluation and assessment strategies in online contexts. In a doctoral module, PA was used for summative and formative purposes. Formative PA aimed to give feedback about the ongoing group work, but also to increase online interaction between the different groups of students. The main module task was to write a literature review, about a selected topic, using a wiki. Criteria and indicators to assess the literature review were negotiated with the students. Different criteria were used to assess the quality of PA, such as, the use of the negotiated criteria, the adequacy of the chosen vocabulary or the provision of constructive feedback. The results show that overall the quality of PA can be improved. Groups did not provide sufficient criticism, questions and suggestions for improvement.     

Quality assurance in the political context: in the midst of different expectations and conflicting goals

Higher education quality assurance systems develop within a complex political environment where national level goals and priorities interact with European and global developments. Furthermore, quality assurance is influenced by broader processes in the public sector that set expectations with respect to accountability, legitimacy and regulatory quality. As a result, quality assurance systems often face different and even conflicting goals from different parts of society. The traditional goals of securing minimum standards and facilitating improvement within universities are augmented with such goals as providing information to the public, supporting inter-institutional competition and positioning institutions or higher education systems in the global competition. The relative priority of these goals is in a constant change over time. This paper aims to map the main tensions that emerge from the conflicting demands and discusses the extent to which impact evaluation can address some of the difficulties.     

澳大利亚高等教育国家质量保证框架概述

澳大利亚高校为迎接目前高等教育所面临的各种挑战采取了质量保证框架,这对我国的高等教育健康发展有所裨益.中国高等教育发展一定要强化质量意识,加强教育教学评估.     

高职英语开放性教学评价的探索与实践

针对目前高职英语教学的现状,呼吁教师应转变教育教学理念,"以教师为主导,以学生为主体",把终结性评价与形成性评价结合起来,通过师评、自评与互评等开放性的多元评价策略来提高高职英语教学水平。     

我国高等教育质量保障研究:现状、问题与新趋势

对当前我国高等教育质量保障研究的基本情况和主要内容进行梳理,指出研究中存在的主要问题,并结合国内外高等教育发展的新形势,分析我国高等教育质量保障研究的新趋势。     

高等教育质量与标准:变革与完善——澳大利亚大学质量署2008论坛概述

通过对澳大利亚国家级质量保障机构举办的澳大利亚大学质量论坛的历史、论坛的主题及2008年论坛情况的介绍,提供有关当今澳大利亚大学实施质量保障的各种模式、方法以及所取得的显著成就等方面的信息,从一个不同的角度揭示澳大利亚高等教育质量保障运动的发展过程与趋势.