Accreditation and quality assurance in postBergen Europe

1
Accreditation and quality assurance in
post-Bergen Europe

• Prof. Dr. Dirk Van Damme
• Director of Cabinet of Flemish minister of
  education
• Ex-director of Flemish rectors conference VLIR
• Prof. in educational sciences at Ghent University

2
Overview

• Developments in higher education policy
• The concept of accreditation
• Accreditation as merging of recognition and
  quality assurance
• Quality shifting concepts and approaches
• Accreditation the context and functions
• QA in Bologna Process
• The outcomes of Bergen

3
Developments in HE policies

• Regional convergence, e.g. Bologna
• Broader process of internationalisation and
  globalisation in higher education
• Transnational borderless higher education
  diversification
• The global knowledge society
• Liberalisation, e.g. GATS

4
Developments in HE policies

• mixed public/private systems
• mixed national/international regulation
• contradictory developments between national
  protectionisms and international liberalisation
• risks for a divide between
• national ? public dimensions
• international ? private dimensions

5
Developments in HE policies
 
 
 
 
 
6
Developments in HE policies

• International quality assurance as element of
  international public regulation
• Risks in not developing this
• disintegrating effects of markets on quality and
  core value-system
• decreasing trust in qualifications and their
  substitution by competences
• unregulated HE markets and unbridled competition

7
Developments in HE policies

• QUALITY is thus expected to become the basic
  regulatory principle, but
• how should international quality assurance
  frameworks be further developed?
• respecting cultural sensitivities, diversity,
  national sovereignty, institutional autonomy,
• given already existing time-gap between rapid
  developments in transnational education and slow
  progress in the quality assurance field

8
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 review
• public statement
• market access (trustworthiness) and transparency
  (standardisation)

9
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,

10
The concept of accreditation

• components
• formal and public statement
• of binary nature
• by competent authorities
• ex post or ex ante
• previously agreed standards (basic or excellence)
• after independent and expert quality review
• of programme or institution (or intermediate)
• restricted time validity

11
Accreditation recognition x QA

• Recognition in (continental) Europe
• state recognition of institutions, programmes and
  qualifications
• a priori decision by Parliament or Government
• input criteria curriculum, qualified personnel,
  
• state recognition of effectus civilis of
  qualifications, also giving access to professions
  in public sector

12
Accreditation recognition x QA

• Quality assurance
• new regulatory system emerging since the late
  eighties
• separate from recognition
• focus on improvement, but with increasing
  importance of accountability function

13
Accreditation recognition x QA

• Quality assurance
• external 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

14
Accreditation recognition x QA
quality assurance
accreditation
regulation
recognition
time
15
Accreditation recognition x QA

• still other forms of QA than accreditation
• there are still recognition systems that do not
  rely on QA
• but there is a growing interconnection and even
  merging of both regulatory systems
• in this process, also the concept of quality
  itself has changed

16
Quality shifting concepts and approaches

• two dimensions
• low high
• absolute externally/internally relative
• four approaches
• excellence standards
• fitness for purpose
• basic standards
• consumer satisfaction

17
high
excellence standards
intern. relative
extern. relative
fitness for purpose
consumer satisfaction
absolute
basic standards
low
18
Quality shifting concepts and approaches

• Quality is a multi-dimensional concept
• Changing definitions
• Any particular definition of quality at a given
  time-space configuration is function of
  interaction of those four components
• Importance of social context

19
Levels of quality assurance

• Institutional internal QA arrangements
• National external QA agencies, variety, mixed
  ownership and legitimacy (state, academia,
  professions, )
• European developments towards meta-role
• Global European approach could influence global
  debate

20
???
European (meta)accreditation
National (meta)accreditation
External quality assurance
Internal quality culture
21
Accreditation the context and functions

• Criticisms of first generation QA systems
• externally 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

22
Accreditation the context and functions

• towards next generation of QA arrangements
• providing clear statements on an increasingly
  complex reality
• guaranteeing transparency and convergence in a
  more diversified and international environment
• broadening focus while keeping up same concept of
  academic quality
• emphasizing external functions while stressing
  autonomy, self-regulation and inclusiveness

23
Accreditation the context and functions

• accreditation is expected to address some of the
  needs and to fulfil following functions
• guaranteeing that agreed standards are met
• more independent, clear, sharp, benchmarked
  quality statements
• strengthening international functions,
  transparent student information and
  accountability
• linking QA to recognition and other regulatory
  systems

24
Accreditation
State
recognition
accreditation
quality assurance
ranking
(Intl) Market
Academia
25
Accreditation the context and functions

• Still continuing debate on accreditation
• do 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?

26
QA in Bologna Process

• Bologna Process
• unparalleled dynamic supported by governments,
  institutions, students and stakeholders
• uneven national awareness implementation
• common objectives and benchmarking
• Bologna now part of EU acquis communautaire
• more steps are necessary to integrate Bologna
  fully in Lisbon-Barcelona agenda

27
QA in Bologna Process

• History of QA in Europe
• Pilot projects of mid-nineties
• Council Recommendation 1998
• Bologna Declaration 1999
• promotion of European cooperation in quality
  assurance with a view to developing comparable
  criteria and methodologies
• Prague Communiqué 2001
• design scenarios for mutual acceptance of
  evaluation and accreditation/certification
  mechanisms

28
QA in Bologna Process

• The Berlin Agenda
• common standards, procedures and guidelines
• peer-review system step towards certification
  or registration (meta-accreditation) of
  agencies
• Role of ENQA as professional network in QA
• enormous national variety in qaa systems but
  also convergence in methodologies

29
QA in Bologna Process

• The Bergen agenda
• nearly all Bologna countries have a national QA
  system
• Developing internal and external QA
• Standards and guidelines
• Peer review of QA agencies
• Mutual recognition of QA
• Register

30
Bergen Communiqué

• "Almost all countries have made provision for a
  quality assurance system based on the criteria
  set out in the Berlin Communiqué and with a high
  degree of cooperation and networking.
• However, there is still progress to be made, in
  particular as regards student involvement and
  international cooperation. Furthermore, we urge
  higher education institutions to continue their
  efforts to enhance the quality of their
  activities through the systematic introduction of
  internal mechanisms and their direct correlation
  to external quality assurance.
• We adopt the standards and guidelines for quality
  assurance in the European Higher Education Area
  as proposed by ENQA."

31
Bergen Communiqué (2)

• "We commit ourselves to introducing the proposed
  model for peer review of quality assurance
  agencies on a national basis, while respecting
  the commonly accepted guidelines and criteria.
• We underline the importance of cooperation
  between nationally recognised agencies with a
  view to enhancing the mutual recognition of
  accreditation or quality assurance decisions....
• "We endorse the follow-up structure set up in
  Bergen, with the inclusion of...the European
  Association for Quality Assurance in Higher
  Education (ENQA)...as new consultative members
  of the Follow-Up Group.

32
Main points in Enqa report

• Basic premise This is the beginning, not the
  end, of a process, and one size does not fit all.
• Results and recommendations
• European standards for internal and external QA,
  and for external QA agencies
• European QA agencies expected to submit
  themselves to a cyclical review within five
  years
• Emphasis on subsidiarity with reviews taken
  nationally whenever possible
• European register for QA agencies will be
  produced
• European Consultative Forum will be established.

33
Intended outcomes

• Consistency of QA across the EHEA will be
  improved by the use of agreed standards and
  guidelines
• HEIs and QA agencies in EHEA able to use common
  reference points for QA
• European register makes it easier to identify
  professional and credible agencies
• Procedures for qualification recognitions are
  strengthened
• Move toward mutual recognition

34
Conclusions

• QA remains critical cornerstone of Bologna
• Progress is made in the past years, but
  resistance and reluctance remain towards European
  QA regulatory framework
• Strong European QA necessary in order to
  safeguard European HE policy framework in context
  of globalisation