CURRENT SITUATION IN EXTERNAL QUALITY CURRENT SITUATION IN EXTERNAL QUALITY ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION ASSURANCE IN HIGHER EDUCATION

IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGION

presented at the ASEM Conference

Quality Assurance and Recognition in Higher Education: Challenges and Prospects

Lymassol, Cyprus, 6-7 December 2010

Kamanto SunartoBoard Member, Asia Pacific Quality NetworkBoard Member, Asia Pacific Quality Network

Founded in Hong Kong in January 2003 2004: Legal Entity: incorporated as a non-profit

association in Victoria, Australia

2003 – March 2009: Hosted by Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA)

2009: Legal Entity in the Philippines 2009 handover: hosted by Shanghai Educational

Evaluation Institute (SEEI)

The Asia Pacific Quality Network(APQN)

To be a self-sustaining Network, a first point of reference for advice or support, efficient in operation and open in information sharing.

Vision

To enhance the quality of higher education in Asia and the Pacific region through strengthening the work of quality assurance agencies and extending the cooperation between them.

Mission

• To promote good practice in the maintenance and improvement of quality in higher education in the Asia-Pacific region

• To facilitate research in the region into the practice of quality management in higher education and its effectiveness in improving the quality of higher education in the region

• To provide advice anf expertise to assist in the development of new quality assurance agencies in the region

• To facilitate links between quality assurance agencies and acceptance of each other’s decisions and judgments

• To assist members of APQN to determine standards of institutions operating across national borders

Purposes

PURPOSES (continued)

• To permit better-informed international recognition of qualifications throughout the region

• To assist in the development and use of credit transfer schemes to enhance the mobility of students between institutions both within and across national borders

• To enable members of APQN to be alert to dubious accrediting practices and organizations

• Where appropriate, represent the region and promote the interests of the region, e.g. vis-à-vis other networks and international organizations

• dissemination of information through newsletters, documents, journals and books, whether in paper-based or electronic form

• Training and development through seminars, workshops, conferences and staff movement

Methods

Bhutan

Brunei

Maldives

Russia

..

Membership: 75 members from 28 countries/territories and 5 observers from 5 countries

APQN MEMBAPQN MEMBERSHIPERSHIP

1. 28 Full members2. 13 Intermediate members3. 6 Associate members4. 28 Institutional members

• 5 Observers

APQN MEMBERSAustralia (4)Bangladesh (3)Brunei DarussalamCambodia (2)China (3)Chinese Taipei Fiji (2)Hong Kong, China (5)IndiaIndonesiaJapanKazakhstanKorea, South (2)Laos

Macau, China Malaysia (2)MaldivesMongolia (4)NepalNew Zealand (3)Pakistan (14)Philippines (2)Russia (3)SamoaSingaporeSri Lanka (2)Thailand (2)Timor LesteVietnam (6)

Other Other Countries/TerritoriesCountries/Territories

Afghanistan, Bhutan, Cook Islands,French Polynesia, Iran, Kiribati, Korea, NorthKyrgyzstan, Maldives, Marshall Islands,Micronesia, Myanmar, Nauru, New Caledonia,Niue, Palau, Solomon Islands,Tajikistan, Tokela, Tonga, Turkmenistan,Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu.

APQN APQN Organisational StructureOrganisational Structure

CURRENT APQN BOARD 2008-2010CURRENT APQN BOARD 2008-2010

APQN BOARD

• President• Vice-President• Secretary/Treasurer• Elected (4) • Co-opted (max. 4) • Appointed

COUNTRIES OF REPRESENTATION ON APQN BOARD

Australia New ZealandChina PhilippinesIndia SamoaIndonesia Sri LankaKazakhstan ThailandMalaysia

APQN CONFERENCES AND ANNUAL GENERAL MEETINGS

• 2005 Hong Kong (First APQN Board Meeting)

CONFERENCES AND ANNUAL GENERAL MEETINGS

1. 2005 Wellington (in conjunction with INQAAHE Annual Conference)

2. 2006 Shanghai3. 2007 Kuala Lumpur4. 2008 Chiba5. 2009 Hanoi6. 2010 Bangkok7. 2011 Bangalore

DIVERSITY IN THE REGIONDIVERSITY IN THE REGION1. Stages of development

2. Quantity of HEIs and programs in the country/territory

3. Quantity of QAA

1. QAA system:1. Absent2. Emerging3. Established

2. From 1 to > 1.000

3. Single, multiple

DIVERSITYDIVERSITY(DEEWR Report 2006)

Variations in QAA arrangements in the region:• Establishment• Ownership• Legal basis• Governance• Funding• Level of independence

DIVERSITYDIVERSITY(DEEWR Report 2006)

Variations in:• Level of QA (institution, program, QAA)• Nature of QA process (mandatory, voluntary)• Aspects considered for QA• Role of HEI in constituting review team• Role of QAA staff in on-site visit• Extent of public disclosure of QA outcomes• Implications of QA outcome• Appeals mechanisms• Post-QA follow-up

BUILDING ON COMMONALITIES AND BUILDING ON COMMONALITIES AND STRENGTHSSTRENGTHS (Australian DEEWR Report)

Diversities in QA practices to suit the national contexts but agreement on common core principles of QA

Promotion of policies and practices that are strong points of the region

Regional approach to build on commonalities and strengths which do not contradict international developments but help the region to move forward in the international QA scenario

COLLABORATION WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS

UNESCO-OECD TOOLKIT: UNESCO-APQN Regulation the Quality of Cross-Border Education, 2005

Australian DEEWR-APQN Study: Quality Assurance Arrangements in Higher Education in the Broader Asia-Pacific Region, 2008.

Framework for Higher Education Quality Framework for Higher Education Quality Assurance Principles in the Asia Pacific RegionAssurance Principles in the Asia Pacific Region

A: Internal Quality

Assurance

B:Quality

Assessment

C:Quality

AssuranceAgencies

(Chiba Principles)

COLLABORATION WITH MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS: COLLABORATION WITH MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS: NIAD-UE INFORMATION PACKAGENIAD-UE INFORMATION PACKAGE

• NIAD-UE Information Package providing basic and specific information on the QA systems of higher education in Japan, China, and the United Kingdom (launched in Bangkok, back-to-back with the 2010 APQN Conference and Annual General Meeting)

COLLABORATION BETWEEN MEMBER COLLABORATION BETWEEN MEMBER ORGANIZATIONSORGANIZATIONS

• MoC: SEEI-HKCAA (2006)• MoC: AUQA-NAAC (2006)• Consultancy: PAASCU-ACC (2006)• MoA: NAAHE-MQA (2010) • Japan-ASEAN Information Package Seminar n Tokyo

(2010): QA Systems of GDETA (Vietnam), MQA (Malaysia), NAAHE (Indonesia), -NIAD-UE (Japan), ONESQA - (Thailand) and PAASCU (Philippines)

COLLABORATION BETWEEN MEMBER COLLABORATION BETWEEN MEMBER ORGANIZATIONSORGANIZATIONS

MoU, MoC between QAAs in the region:• Australia• New Zealand• Malaysia• China• India• Hong Kong

GOOD PRACTICES IN QA IN THE ASIA-GOOD PRACTICES IN QA IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC REGIONPACIFIC REGION

(Australian DEEWR Report)(Australian DEEWR Report)

Some major influences:INQAAHE Guidelines of Good Practice (GPP), 2007Membership criteria of APQNUNESCO-OECD Guidelines on Quality Provision in

Cross-Border Higher Education, 2005

SWOT Analysis of Quality SWOT Analysis of Quality Assurance in the Asia-Pacific Assurance in the Asia-Pacific

Region linked toRegion linked tointernational standards: analysis international standards: analysis

of common issues and of common issues and opportunities for collaborationopportunities for collaboration

• Australian DEEWR Study

StrengthsStrengths• Strong commitment and interest in QA at Ministerial

level• Broad similarity in underlying approaches in QA

between countries• Presence of regional QA body in APQN• UNESCO-OECD Guidelines on CBHE• INQAAHE Guidelines of Good Practice• Lessons from Bologna Process• High degree of cross-border provision and

collaboration

Weaknesses

• Considerable diversity between actual QA practices

• Considerable differences in capacity of QA agencies

• Weaknesses in dealing with QA of distance and CBHE

• Lack of a strong Asia-Pacific regional identity.

Opportunities• Reach agreement on principles for QA• Build capacity of QA agencies• Share best practice and learning• Raise awareness of benefits and relevance• of QA to education systems• Economies of scale and enhanced• effectiveness and efficiency through a• regional QA approach

Threats

• Insufficient commitment and resources to• resolving QA issues• A focus on national approaches• A developing understanding of the benefits of• QA and regional cooperation in QA

EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF APQN :EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF APQN :2008 Evaluation review of the APQN2008 Evaluation review of the APQN

(BY BATEMAN & BATEMAN) as recipient of World Bank Development Grant Facility (DGF)

2004-2007

Criteria used:1. Efficacy2. Initial outcomes3. Governance and management4. Efficient financing5. Sustainability

Evaluation review of the APQNEvaluation review of the APQN(Bateman & Bateman, 2008)

“The APQN has demonstrated that it has delivered capacity building outcomes across the region within many of the countries/territories that have less developed QA systems. However, the task is not complete and recommendations are framed with view of further developments and reaching out to all nations within the region.”

ThThank Youank You