Post on 12-Jan-2016
transcript
Accreditation and quality assurance in Europe
Prof. Dr. Dirk Van Damme
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 2
Overview
The concept of accreditation
Accreditation as merging of recognition and quality assurance
Quality: shifting concepts and approaches
Accreditation: the context and functions
Accreditation: risks and questions
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 3
The concept of ‘accreditation’
‘ad-credere’: giving credit, trust to someone, a service, …
norms of quality, security, safeness, … ’standards’on the basis of independent and expert reviewpublic statementmarket access (trustworthiness) and transparency (standardisation)
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 4
The concept of ‘accreditation’
‘Accreditation is a formal and public statement by an independent agency and on the basis of an external quality review, that specific, previously agreed standards are met by a programme or institution of higher education’
consequences: ‘approval’, ‘recognition’, funding, state recognition of qualifications, …
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 5
The concept of ‘accreditation’
components:formal and public statementof binary natureby competent authorities‘ex post’ or ‘ex ante’previously agreed standards (basic or excellence)after independent and expert quality reviewof programme or institution (or intermediate)restricted time validity
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 6
Accreditation: recognition x QA
Recognition in (continental) Europestate recognition of institutions, programmes and qualifications‘a priori’ decision by Parliament or Governmentinput criteria: curriculum, qualified personnel, …state recognition of ‘effectus civilis’ of qualifications, also giving access to professions in public sector
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 7
Accreditation: recognition x QA
Quality assurancenew regulatory system emerging since the late eightiesseparate from recognitionfocus on improvement, but with increasing importance of accountability function
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 8
Accreditation: recognition x QA
Quality assuranceexternal drivers probably more powerful than internal ‘autonomous’ demand• massification and concerns for a potential
decline of standards• diminishing confidence of stake-holders in
traditional academic quality management• increasing demand for more accountability• public demand for transparency (ranking)• pressures to increase cost-effectiveness
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 9
Accreditation: recognition x QAre
gula
tion
time
accreditation
recognition
quality assurance
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 10
Accreditation: recognition x QA Discipline Programme Institution Theme
Evaluation 6 1 1 6
Accredi-tation
21 20 5 7
Audit 12 10 14 4
Bench-marking
10 0 1 4
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 11
Accreditation: recognition x QA
still other forms of QA than accreditationthere are still recognition systems that do not rely on QAbut there is a growing interconnection and even merging of both regulatory systemsin this process, also the concept of quality itself has changed
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 12
Quality: shifting concepts and approaches
two dimensions:low – highabsolute – externally/internally relative
four approachesexcellence standardsfitness for purposebasic standardsconsumer satisfaction
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 13
high
low
inte
rnal
ly
rela
tive
basicstandards
excellence standards
absolutefitness for purpose
consumer satisfaction
externally relative
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 14
Quality: shifting concepts and approaches
Quality is a multi-dimensional conceptChanging definitionsAny particular definition of quality at a given time-space configuration is function of interaction of those four componentsImportance of social context
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 15
Accreditation: the context and functions
Criticisms of first generation QA systemsexternally imposed, not embedded in real institutional ‘quality culture’; still high tolerance for low quality in institutions
bureaucratic overload, impact on autonomy, cost
methodological weaknesses: benchmarking, self-referential teams, window-dressing, insufficient critical nature, role of disciplines, etc.
conservatism, ‘canonisation’ vs innovation
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 16
Changing environment provokes shift …from egalitarian massification to a more competitive higher education marketfrom domestic focus to internationalisation and globalisationtowards differentiation in institutions and delivery modesfrom meritocracy to lifelong learning, eroding the only left monopoly, degrees
Accreditation: the context and functions
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 17
towards next generation of QA arrangementsproviding clear statements on an increasingly complex realityguaranteeing transparency and convergence in a more diversified and international environmentbroadening focus while keeping up same concept of ‘academic quality’emphasizing external functions while stressing autonomy, self-regulation and inclusiveness
Accreditation: the context and functions
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 18
accreditation is expected to address some of the needs and to fulfil following functions:
guaranteeing that agreed standards are metmore independent, clear, sharp, benchmarked quality statementsstrengthening international functions, transparent student information and accountabilitylinking QA to recognition and other regulatory systems
Accreditation: the context and functions
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 19
accreditation thus implies a shift in the triangle of power in HE towards market relationsbut, accreditation still may be seen as a regulatory system in the middle of the power triangle
Accreditation: the context and functions
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 20
Accreditation
(Intl) MarketAcademia
State
recognition
accreditation
quality assurance ranking
Bern, 29 April 2004 Dirk Van Damme 21
Accreditation: risks and questions
Still continuing debate on accreditationdo we need it in developed HE systems?fixed standards in a complex, diversifying, dynamic reality?rewarding mainstream and mediocrity; jeopardising improvement functions by stressing accountability?additional bureaucratic burden to institutions and academics, sign of distrust?