Capacity Building in Quality Assurance in Higher Education in the Asia-Pacific Region Dr. Antony Stella Adviser, NAAC.

Capacity Building in Quality Assurance in Higher Education in the Asia-Pacific Region

Dr. Antony StellaAdviser, NAAC

Asia-Pacific Region

Complex and diverseLinguistic, political, economic and cultural diversities

Quality Assurance Mechanisms

About 22 major national level effortsOperating in 15 countries Relatively recent origins Two-thirds of them established in the last decadeVariance in practicesDiffering developmental stages

Varying Policies on

Agency role in assessmentNature of the assessment processFocus of assessment Unit of assessment Assessment outcomePolicy on disclosure of outcomeLinking outcome to fundingPeriod of validity of outcome

Agreement on the Essentials

Autonomy of QAAsPre-determined criteriaTransparent processCombination of self-study and peer reviewPublic disclosure of the outcomeValidity of the outcome for a specific period

Fertile Ground for

Experimentation on debatable issuesPooling the expertise developed in these systemsFacilitating the sharing of the lessons learntAddressing the emerging issues of concern collectively

Scope for Capacity Building

Variance in developmental stagesRethinking QA strategies Transnational educationPotential for mutual recognitions

Variance in the Developmental Stages of QA

Japan and Philippines – relatively long history China – decentralized and exercised by many agenciesIndia – over and above the built-in quality control systems

Sri Lanka, Cambodia and Vietnam – evolving systems

Rethinking QA Strategies

NAAC – re-accreditation and impact of first assessment on policy makingAUQA – reflecting on mandates other than auditJUAA – international competitiveness of HEIsLAN – including public institutionsHKCAA – on the verge of a major reorganization

Developments in Transnational Education

Quality assurance of the export – Australia, India, Malaysia and New ZealandQuality assurance of the import – Australia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mongolia, New Zealand and PhilippinesRole of QAAs - ???Ambiguity in national policy frameworks

Mutual Recognition (MR) among QAAs

Comparability has to be ensured in Criteria Policies Procedures Quality assurance outcomes of QAAs

Mutual monitoring and information exchangeParticipation in each other’s quality assurance activities Pilot projects

Potential for MR Agreements

Initial interest by AUQA (Australia), AAU (New Zealand), BAN (Indonesia), LAN (Malaysia) and NAAC (India)

Bottleneck – involving the policy makers and finding resources for the implementation

Ongoing Capacity Building Activities

Three major approaches: Capacity building activities of the well

established QA systems Capacity building of the emerging QA

systems Capacity building activities of the

networks and regional efforts

Type 1: In-Country Capacity Building Exercises of the QAAs

Skill enhancement or professional development approach for the personnel who would be involved in quality assurance activitiesTraining programmes and orientations for the auditors/assessors/peers Workshops for HEIs on preparing the self-study report Case studies, role-plays and panel discussions Varies from brief discussions to rigorous residential programmes ….contd

Type 1: In-Country Capacity Building Exercises of the QAAs

Focus: to ensure a thorough understanding of the quality assurance framework and orient the HEIsNot much scope for learning from each other New developments in QA are not addressedResources come from the QAAs and the participantsExpertise is within the systemDone periodically

Type 2: Capacity Building of the Emerging QAAs

Study visits and professional visits to other QAAs Participation in international conferences and workshopsAmple scope for learning from each other Emerging areas of concern are discussedNeed to go beyond national bodiesSupported by inter-governmental bodies Support for such efforts - limited and un-coordinated

Type 3: Regional Network Efforts

Asia Pacific Quality Network (AQPN)Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)ASEAN University Network (AUN) UNESCOOECD World Bank

Need for Capacity Building Activities at Three Levels

National levelRegional levelTrans-regional level

National Level

Emerging quality assurance systemsInvolving various stakeholders of the nation

Policy makers HEIs Academia Students The public

Bringing experienced staff of QAAs from other systems Providing a platform for sharing of experiences Facilitating reflection on lessons learnt

Regional Level

Cross-border education Those in key positions Policy makers Educational administrators

Mentoring activities Collaborative research and trainingRequires funding

Cross-border educationPolicy framework on emerging areas of concernClearinghouse functions Portals or databases of quality institutions

Requires a forum for coordination

Trans-Regional Level

Priorities in Capacity Building

Ensuring that quality assurance becomes an integral part of reforms in countries where the higher education system is being restructured Harnessing the support of governments for national quality assurance mechanisms where quality assurance is yet to be given a due place Promoting the capacity of various stakeholders, especially the governments and students, to make informed decisions using the outcomes related to quality assurance

….contd

Priorities in Capacity Building

Supporting mentoring programmes for the staff of emerging quality assurance systems Facilitating transparency and openness in the fairly stabilized quality assurance systems by supporting the presence of international members in national quality assurance exercises Conducting training programmes and workshops for quality assurance personnel at the regional level Facilitating Mutual Recognition arrangements between QAAs through pilot studies

….contd

Priorities in Capacity BuildingSupporting joint research and publication programmes on QA issues such as indicators of quality, best practices of QAAs, etc. Supporting more discussions on the policy frameworks and quality assurance of cross-border education Strengthening the role of the existing networks in contributing to the above-mentioned activitiesStrengthening a regional forum that can act as a clearinghouse for information, nodal point for research and development, registry for regional expertise, gateway for trainees, negotiating table for issues of contention and an advisory body for making informed choices