Quality Assurance Practices in Higher Education in Africa

1

QUALITY ASSURANCE PRACTICES

IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN AFRICA

Selected case studies of African countries with higher education quality assurance agencies

December 2008

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Higher education institutions have over the generations played

pivotal roles in the development of nations. In the twenty first

century, higher education has assumed even greater importance as

it generates knowledge – the key driver of global economy and

development. Many countries have recognized the critical

importance of higher education and therefore invest great attention

2

and resources in it. One way to guarantee that higher education is

sensitive to national situations and offers value-for-money

education is to constantly and efficiently assure high standards in

the provisions of the institutions that deliver higher education. To

formally achieve this, a number of institutions have set up internal

systems that ensure comprehensive training and best practices.

Countries have set up national quality assurance agencies to

coordinate the proper development of such institutions, to ensure

high standards in the provision of higher education so that

programmes are offered in conducive environments, using the best

human and physical resources.

Over time, these issues have become central to higher education,

and quality assurance has assumed prominence nationally and

globally, in higher education. Different quality assurance practices

have attracted attention all over the world. As students and staff

move from one country and continent to another, the issues of

transferability of grades and comparability of certificates have

become major poseurs on the comparability of provisions and

standards. Consequently, many countries have set up quality

assurance agencies to ensure that quality is a key consideration in

the offerings of higher education institutions. Out of fifty-three

African countries, only seventeen have set up national quality

assurance agencies, to date, and many depend on different levels

of internal institutional quality assurance practices. As there is

great emphasis in the 21st century on qualitative higher education,

3

African countries should not be indifferent to the issues of quality

and quality assurance.

Taking account of the fundamental and vital nature of quality

assurance, it is pertinent that countries without national quality

assurance agencies should have the opportunity to learn from

others with such agencies. This publication documents the quality

assurance model in three African countries - Nigeria, Ghana, and

Tanzania. These countries have national quality assurance

agencies with statutory responsibilities to coordinate the delivery of

quality provisions in the higher education institutions in each of

the countries. A description of these national models will be

preceded by a review and definition of concepts of quality, types of

quality assurance practices, the quality culture in African

universities, harmonization of higher education in Africa, and

quality assurance in cross-border education.

2.0 Concepts of Quality and Quality Assurance

Quality, as a concept, has been defined differently by different

stakeholders. This is because it is multi-dimensional and mean

different thing to different stakeholders. Also, different countries

may tend to define these terms differently. This document adopts

the following definitions of quality, quality assurance,

accreditation, and licensing from Materu (2007):

4

“Quality technically refers to ―fitness for purpose‖. It encapsulates

the concept of meeting commonly agreed precepts or standards.

Such standards may be defined by law, an institution, a

coordinating body or a professional society. In the diverse arena of

higher education, fitness for purpose varies tremendously by field

and programme. A broad range of factors affect quality in tertiary

institutions including their vision and goals, the talent and

expertise of the teaching staff, admission and assessment

standards, the teaching and learning environment, the

employability of its graduates (relevance to the labor market), the

quality of the library and laboratories, management effectiveness,

governance and leadership.

“Quality assurance is a planned and systematic review process of

an institution or programme to determine whether or not

acceptable standards of education, scholarship, and infrastructure

are being met, maintained and enhanced. A tertiary institution is

only as good as the quality of its teaching staff—they are the heart

of the institution that produces its graduates, its research

products, and its service to the institution, community, and

nation.

―Accreditation is a process of self-study and external quality review

used in higher education to scrutinize an institution and/or its

programmes for quality standards and need for quality

improvement. The process is designed to determine whether or not

5

an institution has met or exceeded the published standards (set by

an external body such as a government, national quality assurance

agency, or a professional association) for accreditation, and

whether it is achieving its mission and stated purpose. The process

usually includes a self-evaluation, peer review and a site visit.

Success results in the accreditation of a programme or an

institution.

―Audit is a process of review of an institution or programme to

determine if its curriculum, staff, and infrastructure meet its

stated aims and objectives. It is an evaluation of an institution or

its programmes in relation to its own mission, goals, and stated

standards. The assessors are looking primarily at the success of

the institution in achieving its own goals. An audit focuses on

accountability of institutions and programmes and usually involves

a self-study, peer review and a site visit. Such an evaluation can be

self-managed or conducted by external body. The key differences

between an audit and accreditation is that that the latter focuses

on standards external to the institution, usually national, and an

assessment of the institution in terms of those standards. Audits

focus on an institution‘s own standards and goals and its success

in attaining them.

―Licensing is a process for granting a new institution or programme

permission to launch its activities. It is sometimes a phased

process whereby an institution goes through various stages before

been granted a full license. In Tanzania, for example, applications

6

to set up new institutions go through four licensing stages, each

with specific requirements: letter of interim authority; certificate of

provisional registration; certificate of full registration; and finally,

certificate of accreditation‖.

2.1 Types of Quality Assurance

Quality is a multi-dimensional concept, with no commonly

accepted definition but generally measuring the level of realization

of set standards or targets. Quality has become an essential

intrinsic factor in institutional processes, including those of higher

education. The related concept of quality assurance has also

become globally important in higher education discussions. More

attention is being paid today to the issue of quality assurance in

higher education than ever before. This is not surprising as

stakeholders in higher education are now aware of the

fundamental and global importance of quality and quality

assurance in higher education. Stakeholders who are interested in

quality assurance include

a) the students, who are the primary recipients of higher

education and who the quality of training they get defines

their potential performance in later life;

b) parents, who often pay for the studies of their wards and

consequently demand vale-for-money education for them;

7

c) governments that demand accountability from their

higher education institutions,

d) the employer who demands well trained graduates with

competences to effectively operate in the 21st century,

e) the institutions themselves, cognizant of the keen

competitiveness in the global higher educational system,

and

f) the society that benefits or suffers the effect of good or

poor quality education. Therefore, quality issues have

taken the centre stage in global higher education.

Quality assurance can be either an external or internal process.

External quality assurance refers to the review by an external

agency (e.g. a national quality assurance agency) or body (e.g. a

professional body), which evaluates the operations of a university

(institutional) or of its programmes to ascertain the level of

compliance with set minimum standards. External quality

assurance is mainly carried out through the instrumentality of

accreditation and involves, as indicated earlier, a self-study, peer

review and a reporting system.

Internal quality assurance, on the other hand, refers to the internal

policies and mechanisms of a university or programme for

ensuring that it is fulfilling its purposes as well as the standards

that apply to higher education in general or to the profession or

discipline, in particular (IIEP, 2006).

8

Internal quality assurance is as old as higher education itself.

Indeed, most universities from inception design and implement

various internal activities to ensure that certain agreed standards

of performance are being met. One of such is the external

examination system. The system involves the assessment of

student examinations for compliance with curriculum content and

general professional or global standards. In very well established

institutions, the internal examiner may be from another

department in the university but in most cases is appointed from

another university. The external examiner must be a senior

academic staff, usually of the rank of professor and is appointed by

academic Senate of the university on the recommendation of the

Vice-Chancellor following advice from the Head of the affected

Department and the relevant Dean of Faculty. Most institutions in

Nigeria as well as in Sub-Sahara Africa with United Kingdom links

at initial stages carry out external examinations. However, this

system is facing some challenges. In many African universities, the

student population in most programmes has increased

tremendously, so that an external examiner is unable to cope with

assessing all students‘ scripts and projects. Secondly, some

universities are unable to fund the external examination system as

the numbers of academic programmes and the required external

examiners have increased significantly.

There is also the self-assessment system in which the institution

carries out an internal appraisal of its programmes to ascertain the

level of achievement of its internally set objectives and standards.

This system is distinct from the required pre-accreditation self-

9

assessment, which is externally mandated. Self assessment can

be conducted at two levels, the programme and institutional levels,

and is advisory to the administration of the level of permeation of

quality in the operations and activities of the institution.

There is the practice, further in the process, in which a professor

or a senior academic colleague will sit in classes to listen to a

young lecturer and subsequently advise the young lecturer on style

and demeanor in the classroom. This may also involve the

professor designing, conducting and reporting research with a

young academic with the objective of improving the capacity of the

young academic to conduct and report research. This practice is

referred to as mentoring. Mentoring may be at the individual or

institutional level. At the individual level, the young academic staff

or a newly appointed vice-chancellor may opt to be mentored by a

senior academic or vice-chancellor, respectively who serves as a

role model to the mentored. At the institutional level, a new

university may elect to be mentored by an older and more

experienced university in the development and operation of its

structures. This is highly recommended for all new universities, to

ensure they develop the form and essence of university culture and

practice.

Student-lecturer assessment is another form of internal quality

assurance in which students assess their course lecturers. While

this is not often popular among lecturers, it has been used in

many institutions to give the students a say in the quality of

10

curriculum delivery and to limit truancy and possible excesses of

lecturers.

The quality of the students in a programme is an important basic

determinant of programme or institutional quality. Consequently,

universities are keen to admit the best quality of students. In most

countries, student admission is conducted by individual

universities using their internal systems. In Nigeria, as in some

other countries, a Joint Admission and Matriculation Board

conducts a general qualifying examination annually for all

students wishing to be admitted into Nigerian universities in the

year. Using the scores of the students, individual universities

select and further conduct screening exercises to finally determine

the students who are eventually admitted as freshmen. While the

Nigerian case seems cumbersome, it largely settles the question of

probity in the admission process recognizing the pressure on the

university system which annually can only admit about 20 percent

of the demand for placement.

3.0 DEVELOPING QUALITY ASSURANCE CULTURE IN AFRICAN

UNIVERSITIES

Quality has been part of the university culture since the

establishment of modern universities, even though quality

assurance has only recently assumed greater importance

worldwide. Universities had for long been distinguished by the

quality of their products. With the establishment of quality

11

assurance agencies in many countries, universities began to feel

that quality assurance was a kind of imposition from the

government, even though the institutions had inherent systems of

maintaining quality. In the effort to deepen and achieve the

objectives of quality assurance, there is a need for the

synchronization of the internal and the external quality assurance

activities in the universities. This therefore calls for the evolution

and institutionalization of the quality assurance culture in the

universities. Quality culture is more than ―a mere set of rules and

procedures which can be ‗mechanically‘ negotiated, agreed upon

and implemented. Quality culture encompasses a more implicit

consensus on what quality is and how it should be maintained and

promoted‖ (Hunger and Skalbergs, 2007).

The development of a quality assurance culture requires that

students are placed at the centre of the quality assurance

activities. This requires partnership and cooperation, sharing of

experiences and team work with the aim to support the individual

student as an autonomous scholar (Rizk and Al-Alusi, 2009).

Okafor (2009) identified the following as requirements for

developing a quality assurance culture in a university:

Self awareness/purpose

Self Criticism

In-built/internalised quality system

Quality ethos

Sense of ownership

Quality culture and internal quality process

12

Shift from episodic to continuous quality system

Shift from input to an alignment of processes to learning

outcome

Building recognition through research and selectivity

Shift from being judgemental to developmental

Since quality has historically been part of the university culture,

members of the university community need to change their

perception of quality assurance as an externally imposed process.

When fully accepted, Rizk and Al-Alui (2009) surmise that

institutional quality culture will:

create a positive environment leading to continuous

improvement;

increase cooperation and competitiveness;

facilitate change and ensure positive staff development;

encourage staff to take academic risks in enquiry and admit

failure, when necessary;

engender student input and participation as equal partners;

provide a comprehensive approach for institutional

development;

involve multiple internal and external stakeholders; and

quality assurance will not need to be implemented from above.

More explicitly, Harvey (2007) had identified the following

characteristics as indicative of a quality culture in a higher

education institution:

There is academic ownership of quality.

13

There is a recognition by academics and administrators of the

need for a system of quality monitoring to ensure accountability

(and compliance where required) and to facilitate improvement.

However, this should not be a ‗bureaucratic‘ system.

Quality culture is primarily about the behaviour of stakeholders

rather than the operation of a quality system.

The quality system needs to have a clear purpose, which

articulates with the quality culture.

A quality culture places students at the centre.

A quality culture is about partnership and co-operation, sharing

of experiences and team working.

A quality culture is about supporting the individual as an

autonomous scholar but not at the expense of the learning

community; there is a symbiotic relationship between individual

and community.

Leadership in a quality culture is inspirational rather than

dictatorial. Leadership is at all levels in the institution and does

not refer to just senior managers.

A quality culture welcomes external critical evaluation from a

variety of sources including formal external evaluations,

external peers acting as critical friends, and internal peer review

and support.

At heart, a quality culture is about facilitating and encouraging

reflexivity and praxis; self-reflection, developing improvement

initiatives and implementing them.

14

Harvey (2007) and Gordon and Owen (2009) had identified the

different cultures known in institutions as follows:

Responsive quality culture: This is governed primarily by

external demands, takes a positive approach to opportunities

and seeks and shares good practice. However, it tends to

view quality-related activities and strategies as a solution to

externally-driven problems or challenges and consequently

lacks the sense of ownership or control

Reactive quality culture: This reacts to external demands

and is driven primarily by compliance and accountability,

seeks opportunities for reward, tends to delegate ‗quality‘ to

a delineated space (e.g. quality office)

Regenerative quality culture: This is focused on internal

development and has co-ordinated internal plans which

include clear goals. External initiatives are recognised but

are secondary to a taken-for-granted commitment to

continual improvement and organisational learning. It

embodies the potential for the subversion of externally-

driven initiatives.

Reproductive quality culture: This is focused on the

reproducing the status quo, manipulates situations to

minimize disruption from externally-driven quality initiatives

in order to maintain the status quo. It has established

norms, good internal practices and quality is an encoded and

15

unremarkable part of daily practice and professional

conduct. It is resistant to reflections or re-conceptualisation

of goals.

4.0 HARMONIZATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE

MECHANISMS IN AFRICA

African countries have adopted various quality assurance

mechanisms depending on their history and the evolution of

the higher education system in each country. Of the fifty

two countries in Africa, only seventeen have quality

assurance agencies. In fact there could be fifty two national

quality assurance agencies. With globalization and the

experience from other regions of the world, there is a tacit

need to harmonize the different quality assurance practices.

Harmonization has been referred to as the synchronization

and coordination of higher education provision in Africa

(Woldetensae, 2009).

4.1 Goals of Harmonization

In a meeting of the Bureau of the Conference of Ministers of

Education of the African Union in May, 2007, the goals of

the harmonization process were set as follows:

1. Advocate and raise awareness of the potential and value

of harmonization of higher education programmes;

16

2. Bridge the gap between disparate educational systems

that exist as a result of colonial legacies by coordinating

efforts of national accreditation bodies, and regional

bodies to discuss and resolve their successes and

challenges;

3. Provide an integrating platform for dialogue and action to

develop strong regional harmonization initiatives that

cohere into a continental process of harmonization;

4. Facilitate and promote mobility of African students,

graduates, and academic staff across the continent;

5. Facilitate the development of effective quality assurance

mechanisms; and

6. Ensure that African higher education institutions become

an increasingly dynamic force in the international higher

education arena (African Union 2007).

One of the goals, as indicated above, is to facilitate the

development of effective quality mechanisms.

5.0 CROSS BORDER EDUCATION IN AFRICA

17

The recent transformational developments in information

and communication technology (ICT) have aided the

―shrinking‖ of the world into a global village through its

impact on all aspect of life, including the higher education

systems. The advancements in ICT have made it possible for

higher education institutions to reach out to various

clienteles in other countries and cities without leaving their

basic location. Information and Communication Technology

(ICT) has facilitated globalization by diminishing the

limitations imposed by physical national boundaries. It has

made the exchange of information less tedious across

countries and the world has truly become a global village.

Education, particularly higher education, has become one of

the beneficiaries of globalization which enables academic

exchange across borders without much restriction. Cross-

border education is therefore education that is offered across

national boundaries without much hindrance. Given these

developments in the world, education is not restricted to the

institutional campus in the country of its origin but can also

be offered to prospective students in other countries either

virtually or through the establishment of a campus of the

institution in another country.

Definition Of Cross Border Education

Cross-border education refers to the movement of people,

programmes, providers, curricula, projects, research and

18

services across national or regional jurisdictional borders.

Cross-border education is a subset of internationalisation and

can be part of development cooperation projects, academic

exchange programmes and commercial initiatives (Knight,

2007). Cross-border education is characterized by the

movement across national border of (a) students and

teachers, (b) providing institutions, and (c) a wide range of

curricula and programmes using variety of modes of delivery

(Magagula, 2005). The type of providers ranges from the

traditional universities, the corporate universities as well as

the private providers.

5.1 Drivers of Cross Border Education

Universities, from their origin, have had international

dimensions. Students and their teachers have always sought

to exchange knowledge and ideas. Distinctively, the great

interest in cross border education has been fueled by

a) Developments in technology. The development of

technology, including information and communication

technology (ICT) and the internet, has greatly

influenced the development of cross-border education.

Technology has been regarded as ‗the greatest force for

change in higher education‘ (Green, Eckel and

Barblan, 2002).

b) Globalization

19

Globalization is the major driving force in the cross-

border education. ‘For some, globalization is a fairly

neutral description of unstoppable reality; its definition

points to the flow of ideas, capital, people, and goods

around the world in the context of diminishing relevance

of natural borders. For others, it implies the hegemony

of the capitalist system, the domination of rich nations

and corporations over poor and the loss of national

identity and culture. Applied to higher education,

globalization connotes similar possibilities and elicits

comparable fears’ (Green, Eckel and Barblan, 2002)

Whatever view one holds, globalization is fact today

and has come to stay. Globalization has been viewed

as ‗the transfer, adaptation, and development of

values, knowledge, technology and behavioural norms

across countries and societies in different part of the

world‘ (Cheng, 2002). The role of globalization in the

facilitation of cross-border education is elicited

through the exchange of ideas and the movement of

staff and students. The implication for globalization to

education includes ‗maximizing education relevance to

global development and pooling up the best

intellectual resources, support and initiatives from

different parts of the world for teaching and research‘

(Cheng, 2002)

20

c. Limited National Access to Higher education

Most African countries have limited access to higher

education while in fact, there is an overwhelming

demand for student placements in higher education

institutions. For instance, in Nigeria, not more than

twenty percent of candidates seeking placements in

universities in Nigeria actually get admitted in any

given year. This has given room for the interest in

cross-border education as well as the mushrooming of

dubious and illegal universities in the country. The

limitation in access and high demand for places has

also often led to over-enrolments in these institutions

with concomitant implication for resources and

quality. Cross border education is therefore a veritable

source of relief to the problem of access.

5.2 Monitoring Cross Border Education for Quality.

As would be expected, guaranteeing the quality of cross

border education is a major challenge for African nations.

Some countries have in fact given up and are therefore

havens for low quality cross border education providers.

UNESCO and OECD have developed adaptable guidelines for

cross-border education which apportion responsibilities to

various stakeholders. African nations, and in particular the

national quality assurance agencies, must devise effective

mechanisms to protect their students and other stakeholders

21

from disreputable providers and from low-quality provision.

These measures must include ensuring that all providers are

accredited in their home countries to offer the programmes

they intend to mount; all providers must provide in the

importing country facilities and resources similar to the

provisions in their home country; all providers must be

approved by the national quality assurance agency of the

importing nation. While this may be possible to achieve, it is

noted that monitoring and quality assuring e-learning is

more complicated and may in fact require the collective effort

of African countries through the Africa Union and the

Association of African Universities.

Chapter 2

Case Studies of Quality Assurance Models in African Countries

In this section, we consider the models of quality assurance

in five specific countries. Each of these countries has a

national quality assurance agency with the responsibility to

coordinate quality assurance activities in their respective

countries. Nigeria has the National Universities Commission;

22

South Africa, the Higher Education Quality Committee of the

Council of Higher Education (CHE); Kenya, the Commission

for Higher Education (CHE); Tanzania, the Tanzania

Commission for Universities; and Ghana, the National

Accreditation Board. Each of these agencies is set up by law

and they are fully functional. A review of the characteristics

and modalities for action for each Agency firms the

subsequent portion of this chapter.

6.0 Nigeria

Quality assurance activities in Nigeria are multi-

dimensional. It includes formal recognition of state

universities; the approval of individual university

programmes; development of minimum academic standards

for programmes taught in Nigerian universities and the

accreditation of same; ensuring that private universities are

established following laid down guidelines; resource

verification and the enforcement of carrying capacity for

individual university programmes.

6.1 The recognition of state universities:

The laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (LFN) Act No. 1 of 1974 established the National Universities Commission (NUC) as a statutory body. The law conferred on the

Commission the responsibility of coordinating the development of universities in Nigeria, advising government

on the establishment of new universities and financing of

23

federal universities as well as coordinating foreign assistance to all universities

By the 1979 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, tertiary education was included in the concurrent legislative list. In effect therefore, both Federal and state governments

could establish tertiary institutions. This stimulated the establishment of the first set of seven state universities between1979 and 1982.

Furthermore, by LFN Act No. 16 of 1985, the responsibility

for setting minimum standards and quality assurance of tertiary institutions and their awards was ceded to the National Universities Commission. Consequently, the

Commission was de facto given the responsibility to recognize the programme of institutions and by implication

the institutions that run the programmes. In consonance with the above, state governments have the

powers to establish universities through the enactment of appropriate state laws. However, for the universities to be recognized to initiate academic activities and to eventually

award degrees, diplomas and certificates, a state must formally deposit with the NUC the legal instrument of

establishment as well as the specific documents defining the master plan and academic brief of the new university. Such documents, which must meet the standards stipulated by

the Commission, are required to enable the Commission have base documents essential for effective monitoring. In this way, the Commission ensures that state universities

meet quality imperatives in their establishment.

6.2 The development of minimum academic standards for programmes in Nigerian universities

As earlier indicated, the NUC was by LFN Act No 16 of 1985

given the specific quality assurance responsibilities of

defining minimum standards for all academic programmes

24

taught and also of the accreditation of such programmes.

Consequently, the law empowered the Commission to carry

out two interrelated quality assurance functions. This

development gave rise to the development of minimum

academic standards (MAS) for all programmes in the thirteen

(13) undergraduate disciplines taught in Nigerian

universities in 1989. These were in Administration,

Agriculture and Forestry, Arts, Education, Engineering and

Technology, Environmental Sciences, Law, Management

Sciences, Medicine and Dentistry, Pharmaceutical Sciences,

Sciences, Social Sciences, and Veterinary Medicine. While

the Commission coordinated the process, the specific

standards were drawn up by senior university academic staff

in relevant individual disciplines. Subsequently, the

documents were sent to all universities for comments and

inputs before being finalized. In effect, the academic

standards were produced in a collaborative effort rather than

as an imposition on the universities.

The MAS documents prescribes minimum floor space for

lectures; minimum laboratory/studio space and facilities per

student; minimum floor, sitting and required equipment for

the library, minimum number and quality of staff; as well as

acceptable staff/student ratios for individual disciplines.

Also, the documents set minimum entry and graduation

requirements for each discipline/programme, as well as

prescribed appropriate curriculum for each of them. The

25

minimum academic standards equally defined and

prescribed the course credit system and the Grade Point

Average for all academic discipline taught in Nigerian

universities. It also defined general academic issues in

Nigerian universities such as course unit, grade point

average, length of academic year, minimum number of

actual teaching weeks per semester, external examination

system, re-sitting of failed courses, implementation of

continuous assessment as required by the National Policy

on Education (NPE) and the implementation of the minimum

of four year degree programme in Nigerian universities as

well as the determination of minimum number of credits

required to graduate from a degree programme.

In 2004, the Commission initiated a process of reviewing the

MAS which had been in use from 1989 to eliminate obsolete

information and to incorporate new developments in

technology and knowledge. Subsequently, the revised

document, which also defined benchmarks and renamed

―Benchmark Minimum Academic Standards‖, was submitted

to the Federal Government for approval through the Federal

Ministry of Education. Also, Benchmark Minimum Academic

Standards have been developed for the postgraduate

programmes in Nigerian universities. The documents have

been sent to the universities for their comments and inputs.

Their submissions are expected to be incorporated into the

final document before its submission for approval to the

26

Federal Government. Specifically, the BMAS for Master of

Business Administration (MBA) was used in 2006 to conduct

accreditation of the programme in the face of seeming

proliferation of the MBA programme in Nigeria Universities

and as a test case for the accreditation of post graduate

programmes.

The MAS document has been criticized as an imposition of

the NUC and for enforcing uniform curriculum on the

universities. As earlier indicated, the standards are defined

by experts in respective academic disciplines and NUC

coordinated the process of development, validation and

approval. Also, the document only prescribes minimum

curriculum content as enunciated by the experts cognizant

of the threshold level of knowledge exposure required of a

graduate in a specific discipline/programme. In fact, the

universities are free to go beyond the minimum prescription

and many currently do. The minimum standards document

is a excellent quality assurance/accreditation tool as it

defines the minimum level of offering required of individual

programmes in Nigerian universities and explicitly exposes

same to the international academic community.

6.3 Accreditation in Nigerian Universities

The accreditation exercise in Nigerian universities is usually

programme accreditation and is preceded by the setting up

27

of minimum academic standards. The first system wide

accreditation exercise for undergraduate programmes was

conducted between 1989 and 1991. Since then, several

accreditation exercises have been conducted in 1999/2000,

2002, 2005 (February) and 2005 (November), and 2007.

Accreditation in Nigeria is a system of evaluating academic

programmes in Nigerian universities on their level of

compliance with the provisions of the minimum academic

standards (National Universities Commission, 1999).

The main objectives of accreditation in Nigeria are;

a) ensuring that at least the provisions of the minimum

academic standards documents are attained, maintained

and enhanced;

b) assuring employers and other members of the community

that Nigerian graduates of all academic programmes have

attained an acceptable level of competency in their areas

of specialization, and;

c) certifying to the international community that the

programmes in Nigerian Universities are of high

standards and that their graduates are adequately

prepared for employment and for further studies.

28

The accreditation exercise is conducted to ensure that the

Universities meet the provisions of minimum academic

standards. The exercise involves three distinct steps:

a) Self- study,

b) Site visit and Peer review, and

c) Reporting of outcome.

The process of accreditation involves the NUC, as the

national accreditation agency, sending the self-study forms

to the Universities hosting programmes that are to be

accredited. The university is required to complete the Forms

and to return them to the NUC before the site/accreditation

visit. The self study forms are central to the whole process of

accreditation in Nigeria as it gives the affected programme in

the university the opportunity to self assess itself and to list

its strengths and weaknesses.

Peer review is an important component both programme and

institutional accreditation. In Nigeria, the NUC constitutes

peer review panels/teams that will visit the institution for

the accreditation exercise. Membership of the panels is

composed of very senior academics, usually professors, one

of who is a chairman. The Commission also appoints a

secretary from among its staff who does not participate in

the scoring of programmes but is responsible for the

administration of the panel. For professional programmes

29

(such as medicine, pharmacy, accountancy, veterinary

medicine, animal science), NUC usually includes

representatives of the statutory regulatory professional body.

Before engaging on the site visit, the panels are formally

briefed by the Commission on the assignment, the essence,

the procedure, their responsibilities and required

confidentiality. They are also exposed to simulations of

situations and advised on scoring patterns. The reason for

the simulation exercise is to reduce to a minimum such

variations in scoring that may arise among panel members.

The major objectives of site visit include:

a) Determining the extent to which the particular

programme or discipline to be accredited has in all

respects met the provisions of the approved Minimum

Academic Standards;

b) Verifying the Statements of Fact claims supplied by

the university in the completed Self-Study Form

(NUC/SSF);

c) Holding discussions with officials of the university

that would enable each member of the panel objectively

complete the Programme Evaluation Form (NUC/PEF).

d) Completion of the Accreditation Panel Report Form (APRF)

and the Awarding of an appropriate accreditation grades:

30

After each member of the panel has completed the PEF,

they meet as a panel/team to complete the APRF. The

meeting is presided over by the chairman of the team.

Based on the average score derived from the individual

PEFs for a programme, the Panel will derive an average

total score and enter a recommended grade on the APRF

in conformity with the provisions of the Manual.

6.2.1 Accreditation Criteria

The accreditation of a programme is based on pre-determined

criteria. This is to ensure the objectivity of the accreditation

exercise. The criteria is made up of six broad areas of academic

content, staffing, physical facilities, library facilities funding of the

programme, and employers‘ rating of the graduates. The criteria

are enumerated below;

A. Academic Content

i) The philosophy and objectives of the programme;

ii) The curriculum content of the programme;

iii) The admission requirements into the programme,

iv) Academic regulation governing the programme;

v) Course evaluation (examinations and continuous

assessment);

vi) Standard of students' practical/project work;

vii) Students course evaluation;

viii) External examination system;

31

B. Staffing

i) Administration of the Faculty /Department - that is the

Head of the Department or the Dean of the Faculty.

ii) Academic Staff:

- Number of staff

- Staff/Student ratio

- Staff mix by ranks

- The competence of teaching staff

- Qualification of teaching staff

iii) Non-teaching staff

iv) Staff Development Programme

C. Physical Facilities

- Laboratories/studio/clinic/farm and equipment

- Classrooms – equipment and facilities

- Office Accommodation

- Safety of the environment

D. Funding for the programme

E. Library Facilities – Seating capacity, Books, Journals,

ICT installation,

F. Employers’ Rating

6.2.2 Evaluation and report

The panel evaluates the programme and writes a report

which is discussed with the university officials at the exit

meeting. At the meeting, the panel‘s qualitative not

quantitative findings are discussed with the university

officials. At the end of the meeting, the Vice Chancellor or

32

his representative, the dean of the faculty and the head of

department where the programme accredited is domiciled

are expected to endorse the report. If there is any area of

disagreement, this is stated in the report. The quantitative

aspect which contains the scores of the exercise is not made

known to the university at this time.

The evaluation of the programme leads to award of an

accreditation status. If the programme obtains an overall

score of 70% as well as scores 70% in the four major criteria

of academic content, staffing, physical facilities and library

facilities the Programme earns FULL accreditation status. If

the programme scores 60% to 69%, it earns INTERIM

accreditation status. Also, if it has an overall score of 70%

but scores less than 70% in any of the four major criteria it

earns an interim accreditation status. A programme that

scores less than 60% earns DENIED accreditation status.

The implication of the above is that the programme that

earns Full accreditation status has met the essential

requirements to offer appropriate degrees and certificates.

Full accreditation status has a five-year tenure and so such

a programme will not be visited again for accreditation for

five years. Interim Accreditation is an indication that the

programme needs to rectify some deficiencies and must

therefore be revisited after two years. As a matter of principle

in the NUC, if a programme scores Interim a second time,

33

the programme is given the status of Denied accreditation

Denied accreditation status means that the programme has

failed to meet the minimum set standards and ought to be

closed down until the deficiencies are rectified. The current

practice in Nigeria is that the NUC insists that such a

programme is denied the opportunity to admit new students

from the next academic session and until the observed

deficiencies is remedied. When the deficiencies have been

done, the University is required to invite the National

Universities Commission to visit the programme for

accreditation. If the programme scores a Denied status a

second time in a row, the Commission will demand that the

programme is shut down permanently.

Submission of Report

At the end of the accreditation exercise, the panel submits its

report to the NUC representative on the panel who will submit it to

the Commission for analysis. In addition, the panel also submits

the completed PEF and APRF. The latter contains the final result of

the accreditation in a qualitative and quantitative form.

Release of results and reporting.

Following an analysis of the submitted/ recommended grades, the

Commission confirms the grades or modifies them if inconsistent

with the guidelines in the Manual. Subsequently, the results of the

accreditation are presented to the Board of the Commission which

on approval authorizes release. The Commission subsequently

34

conveys the result of the exercise to individual universities and

issues a certificate and a technical report for each assessed

programme. The technical report details the strengths and

weaknesses of the assessed programme and the reason for the

approved status. The overall report of the exercise is released to

the press and copied to the Minister of Education for information.

6.3 Other External Quality Assurance Measures

The Nigerian experience in external quality assurance is not

restricted to the development of minimum academic

standards and accreditation of academic programmes which

involve all universities. There are other quality assurance

activities that are put in place to ensure that institutional

development is quality driven. These include the strict

process involved in the establishment of private universities

and the monitoring of the same, resource verification before

the commencement of new programmes in universities and

ensuring that universities maintain optimum carrying

capacity.

a. Ensuring Quality in Private Universities

The establishment of private universities is coordinated also

by the National Universities Commission. However, the final

approval of any private university lies with the Federal

Executive Council on the recommendation of the Minister of

Education. By Act Number 9 of 1993, the Federal

Government prescribed the requirements for the

establishment of private universities and gave the NUC the

35

responsibility to monitor their development. The Commission

was required to recommend those that had met set

guidelines to the Federal Government for approval. The law

expanded the proprietorship of universities to include

companies incorporated in Nigeria, individuals or association

of individuals in Nigeria. The first three private universities

were approved in 1999. Ten years later, there are thirty four

(34) approved private universities in the country.

Specifically, the Private universities Act, 1993 provides that

each proposed private university in the country must meet

the following requirements:

a) Provide an approved master plan

b) Provide an academic brief

c) Have 100 hectares of land

d) Provide a bank bond to the value of N200 million

Naira.

To accomplish its responsibility as prescribed by the law, the

Commission set up the Standing Committee on Private

Universities (SCOPU) to guide the prospective universities in

meeting the basic statutory requirements and ensuring that

NUC standards and quality requirements are incorporated

into their development process. In fact, the Committee has

the following 13-step process for evaluating prospective

private universities (Okojie, 2008)

1. Application in writing stating the intent for the

establishment of the university;

36

2. Collection of Application Forms;

3. Submission of Application Forms and relevant

documents;

4. Intensive review/analysis of documents by experts in

relevant NUC Departments;

5. Revision of documentation by proprietor(s) based on

report by SCOPU;

6. Interactive Meeting of SCOPU with the proposed

universities;

7. First Site Assessment visit;

8. Finalization of documentation;

9. Second (final) Site Assessment visit;

10. Security Screening of Proprietors and Board of

Trustees;

11. Approval by NUC Management;

12. Approval by NUC Board;

13. Approval by Federal Executive Council (Composition of

the Council includes, the President, the Vice President

and the Ministers);

On meeting the said requirements, the new university is

granted provisional approval for three years.

The proposed university is required among other things to

submit a set of documents including the academic brief, the

university law and the master plan. The academic brief of

the university articulates the academic structure and

37

purpose of the institution including its vision and mission

statements, its philosophy, objectives, academic pattern of

the institution including academic programmes, research

policy, academic support units, service units, patterns of

growth, cost estimates and performance audit system. The

master plan of the university shows the pattern and

structure of the physical development of the university. The

university law defines the modes of engagement in the

ownership and administration of the private university.

These documents are to be submitted to the Commission,

through SCOPU, which reviews them thoroughly and makes

necessary comments until the proposed university complies

with all the guidelines in developing such documents.

The proposed university must therefore meet such

requirements as stipulated in the law in terms of

documentation, physical facilities, human and financial

resources. The Standing Committee (SCOPU) ensures this

institutional resource verification is carried out and that only

such prospective institutions that have met all the

requirements can be recommended for approval.

On approval and licensing, the new university is required to

admit student commensurate with its facilities and only into

programmes where it has adequate human and material

resources. Also, the university is instructed not to start a

post-graduate programme until it graduates its first set of

38

students. These measures are intrinsically put in place to

ensure that the new university adopts quality practices from

inception.

b. Monitoring of Private Universities

There is in place a Committee on Monitoring of Private

Universities (COMPU), a committee of the National

Universities Commission which is to ensure that the private

universities are constantly monitored and kept on their toes

with regards to the maintenance of quality and standards

(Monday Memo, 2003). The Committee is required:

To conduct annual monitoring of all licensed private

universities in Nigeria with a focus on such areas as

academic brief and master plan implementation;

management and governance of the institution; quality of

students, staff and infrastructural input, and other issues

pertinent to the delivery of quality university education;

To advise Management, Senate, Council, and proprietor(s)

of the institution of the areas needing immediate

remediation;

To prepare an annual report to Government through the

National Universities Commission Management and

Board on the State of Private Universities in Nigeria

c. Programme Resource Verification

39

In establishing a new academic programme at the

undergraduate or post graduate level, a Nigerian university,

irrespective of the ownership, is required to request the NUC

to conduct a resource verification assessment for the

programme. This involves a affirmation that the curriculum

is in conformity with the minimum academic standards as

well as an assessment of the available resources in space

(including office space, classrooms, properly equipped

laboratories/studios, farm/teaching hospital facilities)

academic and non-academic staff, library with books and

journals, other essential materials and funding. In principle,

an approval is required before the university can start the

programme. The university must attain a certain high

standard in the provision of these requirements before it can

be allowed to mount the programme. As in accreditation,

the NUC involves other senior academic staff from other

universities to assess the university‘s readiness to mount the

programme.

d. Carrying capacity

Carrying capacity is the maximum number of students that

the available resources in a programme can support in the

production of quality graduates (Okebukola, 2008). A

university is not therefore expected to enroll more students

than its available resources can carry. Such important

resources include classrooms – number and size; staff –

teaching and non-teaching; library - space, books, journals

40

and computer facilities; and laboratories - number and

available equipment. For some programmes like agriculture

and medicine, size and structure of farms as well as teaching

hospital facilities respectively, must be taken into

consideration. This is an important quality issue as most

universities in Nigeria face serious pressures with demand

for placements.

e. Advisory Visits

An advisory visit is made by the NUC in the effort to

institutionalize quality assurance in universities. The

objective is to offer advice to the institution on best practices

in the running of the institution. Issues discussed during the

visit include quality in governance; curriculum content,

delivery and schedule; carrying capacity and student

admissions; internal quality activities; optimal utilization of

resources; incentives, welfare and discipline of staff and

students. By bringing the issues for exhaustive discussion,

the university is made to institutionalize practices which

promote internalization of quality assurance. With time and

regular advisory visits, quality assurance will become a

routine issue in universities and demystify the anxiety prior

to accreditation or external peer reviews or assessments.

The National Universities Commission has mainstreamed quality

assurance in the Nigerian university system and the universities

have responded very responsibly. The overall result is a clear and

41

continuing improvement in the quality of academic delivery in the

nation‘s universities.

6.2 GHANA

Ghana, a west African country with a population of 18 million, has

29 universities composed of 7 public and 22 private universities.

Ghana has two agencies responsible for higher education, the

National Council for Tertiary Education and the National

Accreditation Board. The latter has the vision ―ensuring high

standards in higher education‖ and was established following the

enactment of National Accreditation Board Law, 1993 (PNDL 317)

as a public service institution with the responsibility for the

accreditation of programmes and institutions in the country. It was

established ―to contribute to the furtherance of the better

management of tertiary education as the Quality Assurance Body‖.

Its principal functions include:

Accrediting both public and private (tertiary) institutions

with regard to the contents and standards of their

programmes.

Determining in consultation with the appropriate

institution or body, the programme and requirements for

the proper operation of that institution and the

maintenance of acceptable levels of academic or

professional standards;

42

Determining the equivalences of diplomas, certificates

and other qualifications awarded by institutions in Ghana

or elsewhere.

The Board defines accreditation as a system of according

recognition to an educational institution for meeting satisfactory

standards in performance, integrity and quality. The institution

among other things, must have well-qualified staff in adequate

numbers, a well-equipped and well-stocked library, adequate

number of classrooms, lecture theatres, laboratories, workshops,

with the requisite equipment, and adequate and reliable sources of

funding.

The board is mandated to accredit all post-secondary institutions

of higher or further learning, or professional studies that provide

advanced academic and/or professional instruction and conduct

research in the sciences, social sciences, humanities and career-

focused programmes. The institutions include universities,

university colleges, polytechnics, colleges, schools, institutions,

academies, or tutorial colleges. Such institutions may be public or

private. The Institutions to be accredited by NAB are those that

have demonstrated their commitment to the maintenance of

acceptable standards and have benefited from advice offered by

assessors selected by NAB.

The Board is empowered to set up committees and sub-committees

with respect to;

43

a) Institutional accreditation b) Programmes accreditation

c) Monitoring and supervisory roles to ensure the maintenance of accepted standards and available of

facilities.

The board assesses the institutions through the administration of

questionnaires at the two levels of institutional and programme

accreditation. The information derived from the questionnaires is

used as basis for the assessment of an institution and its

programmes. As part of the initial preparation for institutional

accreditation, a sub-committee of the Board visits the institution

for initial assessment. In case of programme assessment, a panel

of assessors in specified areas is commissioned to assess the

programmes. These experts are chosen from the academia (peers),

professional association/bodies and individuals in practice.

Assessment criteria

The panel assesses the programmes based on the following criteria;

programme philosophy, admission policy, curriculum, staffing,

examinations, and external moderation, and academic regulation,

provisions for student assessment of course content and teaching

and for peer review and professional assessment of content

teaching, physical facilities (lecture halls, library, workshops etc,

and affiliation.

Confirming and reporting of accreditation results

44

After the accreditation, the Board analyses the recommendation of

the assessors and issues a specific letter or certificate to an

institution indicating its accreditation status and the period for

which the status is valid. The letter also specifies the various

programmes and levels at which each accredited institution should

offer them. The Board also publishes information about accredited

institutions from time to time in the national newspapers and the

Gazette.

Sanctions for not meeting the required standards

For institutions that are unable to ensure the required quality

standards, the following sanctions are used;

Suspension of the activities of the institution until a time the

identified deficiencies are remedied together with verifiable

evidence. The board will normally visit the institution to

ascertain the proof of the remedies undertaken

Denial accreditation

A revocation of the certificate of accreditation

Closure of the institution

Accreditation is granted for periods of up to five years to institutions, depending on the state of facilities and resources –

human and material - available to them – and the degrees of deficiencies identified by assessors.

Accreditation Status

45

A specific letter or certificate is issued to an institution indicating

its accreditation status and the period for which the status is

valid. The letter also specifies the various programmes and levels

at which each accredited institution should offer them.

Evaluation of certificates

Another responsibility of the Board is the evaluation of certificates

and qualifications awarded by institutions in Ghana or any other

country to establish comparability. It also determines the

authenticity and comparability of both local and foreign

educational certificates.

6.3 TANZANIA

In Tanzania, the Higher Education Accreditation Council (HEAC)

was established under the Education Act of 1995 as a government

agency responsible for the promotion and quality assurance of

higher education institutions, programs, staff, students and

awards. Ten years later the Tanzania Commission for Universities

46

(TCU) was established under the Universities Act of 2005

substituting HEAC. The Commission is mandated to recognize and

accredit the country‘s university institutions and their

programmes; to approve relevant examinations regulations and

determine the equivalence and recognize awards given by higher

education institutions inside and outside Tanzania. The TUC is a

government agency responsible to the Ministry of Higher

Education, Science and Technology.

6.3.1 Accreditation Committee

The Commission for Universities has an Accreditation Committee

that has the following functions (TUC, 2006)

a) Setting general standards of quality and quantity of contents of

programmes and mode of their execution by universities at their

respective levels;

b) Promotion of quality assurance standards in universities;

c) Auditing of the quality assurance mechanisms of universities;

d) Accreditation of universities and programs;

e) Evaluation of qualifications of staff of universities;

f) Coordination and harmonization of courses and programmes in

universities;

g) Standardization, recognition and equation of awards of

universities; and

h) Visitation and inspection of universities.

6.3.2 Stages of Accreditation of Private Higher Institution

In Tanzania, there are four stages towards accreditation of private

higher education institutions. These include letter of interim

47

authority, certificate of provisional registration, certificate of full

registration and certificate of registration.

i) Letter of Interim Authority (LIA)

This letter is issued to persons or organizations that have

expressed their desire, commitment and intention to set up a

higher education institution in the country. The Letter of Interim

Authority authorizes the founders of an institution to proceed to

implement their plans as provided in their write up and as

approved by the Council.

ii) Certificate of Provisional Registration

This is issued to persons or organizations that have commenced

the process of setting up permanent premises for their institution

in accordance with the institution‘s Master Plan and time frame for

accomplishing the different tasks. Such an institution will have a

full-time chief executive and core staff especially those involved

with the courses to be offered under the initial faculties or

programs.

iii) Certificate of Full Registration

This is issued to owners or founders of institutions that have most

of the initial requirements in place that is, essential physical

structures, operational procedures, course programs, qualified

lecturers, appropriate teaching and learning environment,

materials and student support structures and services. An

institution qualifying for full registration will be in full operation.

48

iv) Certificate of Accreditation

An institution which is in operation with all the essential courses

in the initial faculties in progress can apply for accreditation. The

institution will be technically evaluated with particular focus on

the content and organization of courses, adequacy of instructional

and learning environment, materials and support services, and

qualification and experience of the academic staff.

Professional associations in Tanzania participate in accreditation

panels and are involved in curriculum review exercises.

6.3.3 Guidelines for Internal Quality Assurance

According to Sabaya (2004) the Higher Education Accreditation

Council has put in place regulations and guidelines as part of the

country‘s mechanism for internal quality assurance for higher

education to ensure:

Appropriateness of institutional development plans, facilities for

academic, administrative and technical support services;

Appropriateness of the mission and objectives of the institution,

the matching standard facilities and services and governance

systems;

The relevance, adequacy and scope of courses for planned

qualifications;

49

Adequacy in the numbers, qualifications, competencies and

experience of academic, administrative and technical support

staff;

Appropriateness and adequacy of teaching, research and

learning resources;

Institutional quality assurance and periodic academic audit

systems as pre- requisites for institutional and course re-

accreditation.

The Tanzania Commission for Universities in future aims, among others,

to (TUC-IIEP, 2006):

Stimulate a culture of continuous improvement of higher

education in relevant institutions through periodic review of their

quality assurance system, accreditation status and issuance of

regulatory guidelines

Establish mechanisms for monitoring quality of academic staff in

universities

Establish and facilitate quality assurance mechanisms for

programs and courses imported into Tanzania under cross-border

provision

In its attempt to regulate cross-boarder higher education, the TCU insists on

having a copy of the memorandum of understanding between the

foreign provider and local institution to safeguard the interests of the

local client.

7.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

50

Three countries with quality assurance agencies have been

examined. The three models examined reveal that the quality

assurance agencies were statutorily set up by their respective

governments. They coordinate quality assurance activities in the

country and such activities involve both the public and private

higher education institutions. Among the quality assurance

agencies considered, only Nigeria NUC is not involved in the

evaluation of foreign certificates. While Ghana NAB accredits all

higher education institutions in the country, NUC and TCU are

specifically for universities.

From these models, it pertinent to note that;

Quality assurance is very important for higher education

institutions in the 21st century,

Accreditation is a process,

Harmonization of quality assurance practices is essential for

the growth of quality assurance in African universities,

Building of human capacities in the area of quality

assurance is crucial both in ensuring quality and achieving

harmonization of quality assurance practices.

Little or no attention is paid to quality in cross-border

education.

REFERENCES

African Union (2007) Harmonization of Higher Education Programmes in Africa: A Strategy for the African Union. Summary Report of the Meeting of the Conference of Minister of education of African Union (COMEDAF

11t 29-31 May, 2007, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (sourced online, www.africa-union.org)

51

Cheng, Yin Cheong (2002) New Paradigm of Borderless education: Challenges, Strategies, and Implications for effective Education through

Localization and Internationalization. Invited keynote Speech presented at the International Conference on Learning and Teaching held in Hatyai,

Thailand from 14 -16 October, 2002

Daniel, John, Asha Kanwar Stamenka Uvalić-Trumbić (2005) Who‘s Afraid of Cross-border Higher Education? A Developing World

Perspective International Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) Presented at: Annual Conference 2005 - Wellington, New Zealand Final Plenary Session: Quality Assurance in Transnational Issues http://www.col.org/resources/speeches/2005presentations/Pages/2005-04-01.aspx

Gordon, G. and Owen, Catherine (n.d) Cultures of quality Enhancement: a short overview of the literature of higher education policy makers and

practitioners. http://www.enchancementthemes.ac.uk/documents/Quality-cultures-literature-review.doc (sourced August 25, 2009)

Harvey, L., 2009a, ‗A critical analysis of quality culture‘, paper presented at the International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher

Education (INQAAHE) Conference, New Approaches to Quality Assurance in the Changing World of Higher Education, 30th March–2nd April 2009, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, available at,

http://www.caa.ae/conference/DesktopModules/presentations.aspx)

Harvey, Lee (2007) Quality Culture, Quality assurance and Impact:

Overview of discussions; in Embedding Quality Culture In Higher Education. A Selection Of Papers From The 1st European Forum For Quality Assurance; Lucien Bollaert, Sanja Brus, Bruno Curvale, Lee

Harvey, Emmi Helle, Henrik Toft Jensen, Janja Komljenovič, Andreas Orphanides and Andrée Sursock (editors) Belgium: European University

Association ( www.eua.be/fileadmin/user_upload/files/Publications/EUA_QA_Forum_publication.pdf)

52

Hunger, Axel and Skalbergs, Ina (eds.) (2007) Promotion of quality culture in international cooperation with special focus on joint

programmes in Embedding Quality Culture In Higher Education. A Selection Of Papers From The 1st European Forum For Quality

Assurance; Lucien Bollaert, Sanja Brus, Bruno Curvale, Lee Harvey, Emmi Helle, Henrik Toft Jensen, Janja Komljenovič, Andreas Orphanides and Andrée Sursock;(editors) Belgium: European university association

(available online at: www.eua.be/fileadmin/user_upload/files/Publications/EUA_QA_Forum_publication.pdf)

International Institute for Educational Planning (2006), Making Basic

Choices for External Quality Assurance: Module 1, External Quality Assurance; Options for higher Education Managers. Paris: UNESCO

Knight, Jane (2007); Cross-Border Tertiary Education: An Introduction, Cross-Border Tertiary Education: The Way Forward: Washington: DC.

World Bank and OCED.

Magagula, C. M. (2005); The Benefits and Challenges of Cross-Border Higher Education in Developing Countries. JHEA/RESA Vol.3, No.1

pp.29-49

Materu, P (2007) Higher Education Quality Assurance in Sub-Sahara

Africa: Status Challenges, Opportunities and Promising Practices. Washington, D.C.: World Bank: African Region Human Development

Middlehurst, R. (2002); The Developing World of Borderless Education: Markets, Providers, Quality Assurance and Qualifications. In the

Proceedings of First Global Forum on International Quality Assurance, Accreditation and the Recognition of Qualifications in Higher Education.

UNESCO: Paris Njoku, P. C. (2005) GATS and Virtual Higher Education in Africa: Quality Concerns. A paper presented at conference ―UNESCO between Two

Phases of the World Summit on the Information Society‖ St -Petersburg, Russsia, 17-19 May 2005

National Accreditation Board; (n.d) National Accreditation Board (Ministry of education, science and Sports), Ghana. (Sourced Online)

53

National Universities Commission (2008)Private Universities (COMPU) Submits Report. Monday Memo December, 22; Vol. 2; No.22

National Universities Commission (2008) Results of November 2007

Accreditation Exercise. Monday Bulletin, 21st April, 2008, Vol. 3 No. 16

Okafor, Theresa (2009) Culture of quality Assurance. A paper presented

at a capacity building workshop to emerging and Existing Quality assurance agencies. Accra, Ghana. April, 2009

Okojie, J A, (2008). Licensing, accreditation and quality assurance in Nigerian universities: Achievements and challenges. CHEA Summer

Workshop (sourced online http://www.chea.org/pdf/2008_SW_Julius_Okojie_paper.pdf

Rizk, S. and Al-Alusi, A. S (2009) Promoting Quality assurance Culture in Higher Education (sourced online)

Tanzania Commission for Universities (n.d) Recognition, Registration and Accreditation Conditions and procedure for Higher education Institutions (sourced online, http://www.tcu.org.tz)

Woldetensae, Y (2009) the AU Harmonization Strategy and Quality Rating

Mechanism: General Overview. A paper presented at a capacity building workshop to emerging and Existing Quality assurance agencies. Accra, Ghana. April, 2009