CHEA International Quality Review - Summary Report

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by George Brown, Jun 9, 2001.

Loading...
  1. George Brown

    George Brown Active Member

    A summary of this seminar is available at:
    http://www.chea.org/international/inter_summary01.html

    Good to see Dr David Woodhouse present and leading some interesting topics. Dr Woodhouse is now Executive Director of the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) and is a leader in the field of QA and international accreditation. He was most helpful during the writing of my thesis and holds the issue of virtual accreditation dear to his heart.

    Also good to see the mention of bogus online universities, however, disappointing that no actions were listed in the summary.

    Cheers,

    George


    ------------------
    Virtual Universities of Australasia & the World
    www.virtualuniversities.net
    [email protected]
     
  2. Neil Hynd

    Neil Hynd New Member

    Yes, George,

    Always a bit of a give-away if there's no evidence of any actions/action list.

    I'm interested in the "Quality Assurance Glossary" mentioned - what happened to that ? Or is it somewhere on the CHEA web ? I couldn't find it when I looked.

    Plus, since CHEA is now majoring in "Quality Assurance", I wonder how they'll compare with the specialists and heavy hitters in the subject (Baldridge, Deming, ANSI, ASQ and ISO to name only a few) ?

    Regards,

    Neil

     
  3. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Hey George, thanks for posting that. This is a subject of great interest to me. It will move to the center of higher education discussion in the next ten years, as distance education expands and the trained workforce becomes more mobile internationally. I just skimmed the summary as it was longer and more detailed than I expected (that's good).

    I'm very heartened to see that the problem is being recognized. I'm less heartened to see that it is being addressed by people whose apparent interest is on-campus education and to whom distance education isn't primary. They need to organize a session that addresses distance education specifically, particularly degree programs offered internationally over the internet.

    But all in all, I think that this meeting ilustrates why somebody will have to start out by DOING SOMETHING, rather than talking endlessly about it. There are 200+ nations out there, and getting them all to agree, and all the various interest groups inside those nations to agree, is going to be like herding cats. You will have endless heated sessions on "hegemony" and "imperialism", and on how to make international standards "sensitive", while all the time everyone's citizens are buying degrees at the click of a mouse.

    I don't think that international accreditation is workable. There are ten thousand (or something) universities out there on the planet, and no single accreditor will be able to pay them all site visits. And trying would mean stepping on a lot of nations' toes and creating a lot of resentment. So I'd favor a US Department of Education type approach consisting of accrediting the accreditors. There are only about 200 or so national education systems, and not all of them present problems.

    The most effective approach from the DL standpoint would be to identify and follow the mills. If they try to claim GAAP status from an accreditation haven with low standards, let organizations with clout (America's AACRAO or Australia's NOOSR for example) say "prove it". Show us both your standards on paper and how suspect schools actually met them. Either we find the process credible, or we will recommend that those who are influenced by our evaluations reject your schools.

    A lot of loopholes could be plugged that way, pretty easily, without waiting for any international committees to decide on any joint policy.

    Unilateral action will be more effective, and ultimately less intrusive and "imperialist". That's because a number of different organizations could take action simultaneously, according to subtly different national priorities and concerns. If China doesn't like the Americans passing judgement on the rest of the world's education systems, they can get off their butts and publish Chinese assessments of them as well. I can imagine one body rejecting Caribbean Island X's accreditation standards, while another body, with different priorities, likes them.

    Too much information about suspect schools is better than not enough, and universities and employers can make their own decisions, just as they wade through the regional accreditors, DETC, ACI, WAUC and all the rest of them in the US now. Probably a few of these lists of credible and incredible international QA systems will rise to the top and will become de-facto international standards like RA is in the US.

    Anyway, that's my immediate knee-jerk response to this. More later after I've read it in detail.
     
  4. Neil Hynd

    Neil Hynd New Member

    Hi Bill,

    I too am interested in this subject ... from several angles.

    I think you're wrong about the "international aspect" not being workable - it is very workable, but not on the model of eg. the US RA's.

    Check out how the ISO implements the 9000 Quality System and 14000 Environmental Standards around the world (and they do) and you might have an idea of how this could operate for DE/DL - and to the great benefit of DE/DL over and above other aspects of education (which would probably then be lagging behind).

    Cheers,

    Neil

     

Share This Page