Tertiary Education Management Conference 2006

Can the tertiary sector achieve excellence in an

accountability environment? Implications of NZ govt

education policy

A Weir

Tertiary Education Management Conference 2006

Annie WeirEducation Quality ManagerSt John New Zealand

Can the tertiary sector achieve excellence in an environment of accountability?

…an investigation into the implications of government education policy in the New

Zealand setting

Overview of presentation

The New Zealand tertiary sector

Demand for quality

Quality assurance authorities and their associated bodies

Quality assurance processes

Providers’ responses to external quality assurance

Tertiary Sector

Universities Institutes of Technology/Polytechnics Wananga Colleges of Education Private Training Establishments (PTEs) Government Training Establishments (GTEs)

and other tertiary education organisations

External quality assurance: Education Providers’ perspective

22 tertiary education providers from across the tertiary sector

Stated institutional goals and objectives relating to attaining excellence in the delivery of their education programmes and activities

Demand for Quality

Changes in public sector management since the late 1980s

Pressure by the Government on tertiary education providers to contribute to national economic and social development goals

Focus on governance, accountability and quality of tertiary education providers

Government’s desire to ensure that providers are financially and educationally accountable to their stakeholders

Rationale underpinning the establishment of external quality assurance

Becoming internationally competitive

Increasing participation in tertiary education

Influences on education policy Public choice theory

Agency theory

New public management

Accountability

Government education policies

Legislative and regulatory requirements

Government funding systems

Developments in technology

Impact significantly on an institution’s development and its quality management system

Quality Assurance Authorities

New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA)

New Zealand Vice-Chancellors Committee (NZVCC)

NZQA and associated bodies

Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics of New Zealand (ITPNZ) Formerly called APNZ

Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics Quality (ITP Quality) Formerly called NZPPC

Up until 2006 – ACENZ and CEAC (Colleges of Education)

NZQA quality assurance activities

Private Training Establishments: registration, accreditation, course approval and quality audit

Wananga: accreditation, course approval and academic audit

Quality assurance activities

Polytechnics and institutes of technology: accreditation, programme approval and academic audit

Colleges of Education:accreditation, programme approval (at the time of the research they were not involved in academic audit)

New Zealand Vice Chancellors Committee (NZVCC)

Committee on University Academic Programmes (CUAP) 1962

New Zealand Universities Academic Audit Unit (NZUAAU) 1993

Academic/Quality Audit

Key accountability mechanism

Primarily audit once was a financial activity and now…

“We need time to feed the beast”

Making auditees auditable

All tertiary providers have become auditees of external quality bodies

Provide an audit manual/guide

Expect providers to understand their processes and adopt the prescribed language

Comply with external standards/criteria

Key features of Academic/Quality Audit

Broad quality standards or criteria

Provision of manual/guidelines

Audit team visit

Audits ‘based’ on provider’s self-review (where it exits)

Audit report

Dissemination of good practice

Common audit themes

Treaty of Waitangi

Quality management systems

Facilities and resources

Developing and monitoring courses and programmes

Staff matters

Common audit themes

Student information and administration

Support for students

Teaching,learning and assessment

Research and teaching

Internal review

External review

Joint,franchised and external programmes

Providers’ approaches to quality

Some providers were influenced by theories and systems to emerge from the quality movement that include TQM and ISO 9000

Reviewed their QMS in light of external quality standards/criteria requirements

Peer review and benchmarking

Providers’ views

Accountable to a range of stakeholders

Experienced additional costs and greater workloads

All providers (other than universities) accepted and complied with external quality assurance requirements – wanted to access Government funding

Universities’ views

Accepted the role and functions of CUAP

Varied in their views on NZUAAU – depending on their perceptions of the added value to their university

Providers’ concerns

‘Quality’ of some of the audit panel members

Audit panels going beyond their brief

The depth and extent of the audits

The quality of the audit reports

Providers’ concerns

The resource implications associated with audit

The amount and type of monitoring activities between formal audits

Audit fatigue

Desire to have say in future audits

Influence of external monitoring For universities and some polytechnics

external monitoring was not a strong influence on their activities

For universities external monitoring improved their planning and codification

Influence of external monitoring All providers created staff positions to meet

ongoing quality assurance requirements

Providers (other than universities) aligned their QMS to fit with external quality assurance requirements

Advantages

External validation

Identify areas for improvement and provides leverage for action

Stimulus to document and codify quality systems

Accountability to stakeholders

Disadvantages Increase in costs associated with external

monitoring

Additional workload associated with external monitoring

Authorities’ ideas about how to run an institution are unrealistic

Diverts attention of staff from their routine activities

Lack of auditor competence

Audit fatigue

Conclusions

Education reforms led to the establishment of external quality assurance authorities and their associated bodies and this led to greater quality monitoring of tertiary providers

For providers there was a mismatch between their existing QMS and external quality assurance requirements

Conclusions (cont’d)

Providers responses’ to external quality monitoring has been one of compliance in order to maintain their accreditation and access to Government funding

Quality is an enigmatic notion that challenges both quality agencies and tertiary providers’ interpretation and implementation of what is needed to meet external requirements

Can the tertiary sector achieve excellence in an environment of accountability?

Tertiary Education Management Conference 2006

Thank you…

Tertiary Education Management Conference 2006

Lunch

Please reconvene at 2pm on Level 3, Ballroom A/ Ante (adjacent to the Trade Exhibition)