UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

Discussion in 'General Distance Learning Discussions' started by Ian Anderson, Apr 2, 2002.

Loading...
  1. Ian Anderson

    Ian Anderson Active Member

    Much has been discussed on this site about regional accreditation for US schools. What
    appears (without too much research by me) to be an analogous approach for UK schools
    is provided through The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education
    http://www.qaa.ac.uk
    Their web site includes most of the schools mentioned in this forum in recent years (such
    as Herriot Watt and Open University) and includes subject* review reports for these
    schools. Anyone contemplating the acquisition of a UK degree might want to check out this site.
    * i.e. Mechanical Engineering

    Ian Anderson
    BS USNY
    MS CSUDH
     
  2. Neil Hynd

    Neil Hynd New Member

    Hi,

    I would agree that researching QAA figures for British universities is worthwhile - the figures are used by eg. the Sunday Times for its yearly ranking of UK universities.

    However, the QAA should not be confused with the US RA situation.

    British universities exist in their own right as of right when correctly established under law (charter of one sort or another). Their ability to award degrees is not based on any third-party organisation.

    There is a quality approach based on comparative review and consultation - I have been on such panels for four degrees and on professional engineering oversight boards.

    New British universities formed out of the polytechincs which had similar origins to US state-licensed universities are an equal part of the same degree-awarding system as the rest of UK higher education. Heriot-Watt is such an example.

    The same certainly cannot be said of the US approach - thanks largely to what the RA outfits get up to.

    Regards,

    Neil Hynd

     
  3. Lawrie Miller

    Lawrie Miller New Member

    Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    What an exceptionally interesting way with words, Neil. The truth is, of course, that the old UK polytechnics and their precursors would bear as much similarity to the vast majority of today's US state licensed universities as Century University does to UCLA. That is to say, none at all.

    .
     
  4. Neil Hynd

    Neil Hynd New Member

    Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Hi Lawrie,

    I've no particular urge to argue the toss with you.

    However, polys such as Sunderland and Teesside (both of which I know well) were founded by local business people, supported by local government - usually in the latter period chaired by council leaders or nominees and definitely targetted at the local community. As another example, look at the history of Heriot-Watt.

    That certainly matches the approach found eg. in California and other states that regard arranging for in-state provision as a priority - and I would include New Mexico in that, be it licensed career schools or similar that are authorised to award baccalaureate and graduate degrees.

    Of course, the UK polys had the advantage of CNAA (Council for National Academic Awards) authorising the degrees they offered which enabled a national-level of degree qualification to be maintained (bachelor through to doctorate) equivalent to "traditional universities" .... something that no US state-licensed university can claim.

    Dare I say that were a CNAA-equivalent to be floated in the USA, one would expect the RA outfits to try to strangle it at birth ?

    I don't think I'd be wrong.

    Regards,

    Neil

     
  5. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    What is it, specifically, about RA schools that doesn't measure up to UK standards? Specifics please, with supporting evidence.

    And....if RA standards don't measure up to UK standards in your world, where does that leave your alma mater.....Century University?

    Century can't obtain any sort of recognized accreditation. Where do they fall in your scheme of things????


    Bruce
     
  6. Neil Hynd

    Neil Hynd New Member

    Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Hi Bruce,

    The point about UK CNAA vis-a-vis USA RA, is that CNAA and its operations / regulations allowed each of the UK polys to offer and sustain degrees that were recognised throughout the country by employers and by traditional universities for faculty, graduate work etc. etc. - even though the source of the degree was not the "normal" university route, and was not the methods of that "normal" route either.

    In fact, the degrees owed more to the "vocational education" approach to further and higher education than the "academic" approach - which I certainly recognise in US SA/SL qualifications, that are also highly vocational.

    Of course, it didn't go down well with "academe", and the degrees were less regarded.

    I did read recently, however, that the History Department of Oxford Brookes Univ. (formerly Oxford Poly) got a better QAA score than the Oxford U. History Department.

    An equivalent concept in the USA would be a mechanism that catered for qualifications from legitimately state-approved or state-licensed American universities to enjoy the same measure of acceptability and recognition nationally.

    I don't doubt that some measure of adjustment would be necessary, given the variation from state to state in the USA - but the processs itself would recognise precisely what the SA / SL subject is all about.

    My other point, however, was that the RA's would be bound to resist such a development if that development sought to legitimise another route for degree recognition that was not their own.

    Cheers,

    Neil

     
  7. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Neil won't answer this directly, so I will. If RA is the center of the radar screen, Century isn't even a blip on the horizon.

    As for the RAs tolerating some sort of governmentally controlled QA standard, it will never happen. In fact, the US DOE has moved steadily in the opposite direction. (The same US DOE Ronald Reagan threatened/promised to close, but failed to do so.)

    In the 1950's, the USDOE put out a list of degree mills. Gone.

    In the 1970's, the USDOE had a process where unaccredited schools could still get qualified to participate in federal financial aid. Gone.

    Until the 1990's, the USDOE was active in the approval of accrediting agencies, concerned about the quality of colleges and universities. Now it seems to be focused on just using accreditors to determine which schools can participate in financial aid.

    If the USDOE ever changed direction and started trying to develop a set of standards to be uniformly applied, well....it would be dark. There would be many of them. They would be large. They would be carrying clubs. It would not be pretty. :eek:

    Higher education in the U.S. is largely self-regulated. This also is true for many professions, including law, medicine, accountancy, etc. As physicians, through the AMA, determine what is and is not a medical school (and who is and is not a physician), the regional associations determine what is and is not a university. This very simple and elegant concept has produced the best university system in the world (an opinion shared by The Economist). And it clearly excludes state-approved, -licensed, and -tolerated schools like Century.

    The percentage of 25-64-year olds who've complete college:

    UK: 13%
    US: 26%
    Canada: 17%
    France: 10%
    Germany: 13%
    Italy: 8%
    Japan: 14%

    SOURCE: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, INES Project, International Indicators Project, 1996.


    The UK can hobble down the road of exclusion and privilege in its universities, under-serving its population and yet maintaining very high quality. We'll zip up the road of inclusion on our Segways, laughing (in an educated manner) all the way. :p

    Rich Douglas
     
  8. Neil Hynd

    Neil Hynd New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Not for the first time, Rich,

    Your post totally misses the point I've been making in this thread.

    Plus I'm sure you'll correct me if need be, but wasn't the US DOE formed by Jimmy Carter when he was President ?

    If so, what was it doing in the 1950's ?

    Or was there one then as well ?

    Also, as a regular reader of "The Economist", I know it makes mistakes, too.

    In fact, I pointed some out to the editor recently regarding their special on the Arabian Gulf States.

    Mind you, I'd be interested to read your exact source for The Economist's "best education" quote.

    Of course, self-regulation is nothing new - I think the US may even have learned it from Britain .... since the same list of professions (much longer established in England, Scotland etc. than the USA) is largely self-governing, except for legal enforcement, eg. of financial audit requirements !!!

    The figures you give remind me of Winston Churchill's quote about statistics .....

    But it's a pity that so many DL'ers in the USA are prevented from benefitting fully from their learning and qualifications earned via DETC or whatever other legitimate, alternative, non-traditional route they have taken thanks to RA practices that I thought the Anti-Trust (Sherman) principles were designed to prevent.

    But then I think those laws were meant for oil and railroads, not universities.

    Maybe some day, someone will get round to the similar exploitation of the monopoly practised in US Higher Education.

    Cheers,

    Neil

     
  9. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Rich Douglas, wondering how someone can suppose the superiority of the British university system when one's doctorate comes from a school that fails to meet the U.S.'s presumably lower standard of RA, as school that assiduously avoids(ed) any possible oversight--public or private--by relocating to a state that provides none.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 5, 2002
  10. Neil Hynd

    Neil Hynd New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Thanks Rich,

    I do remember the editorial reference as below - and indeed it was rather oblique, instead of one of their lengthy analyses ..... did you read the Gulf one ?

    I think I'm right in saying that the US secondary school system also follows a "regional accreditation" process - I'm sure I've seen one or two international secondary schools here in the UAE sporting American accreditations that you would recognise (Middle States or some such).

    Does that mean the RA's can bear some responsibility for the US secondary education situation ?

    On your footnote below, I don't think I've ever made a statement claiming superiority of the British system - although I have pointed out examples where "no-one has a monopoly of common sense" ... and I think use of the CNAA approach to introduce new methods of establishing and recognising degrees was one such instance.

    Sometimes legislation is necessary when "normal" self-governing approaches don't appear to be working and may be too self-serving.

    In fact, before undertaking my American SL program I tried to set up a DL program with two of my own UK universities plus two others in Britain without success (14+ years ago) and got nowhere. They just weren't up to it then and some are not much better now.

    Having been sponsored through bachelor and master's degree programs in the UK by an American multi-national and worked for them for seven years, I am much inclined to American concepts and approaches. Which is one reason I found the study-dissertation SL program with no residency so appealing when working full-time in the Middle East.

    I just think it's rather sad that an approach that gives so much world-wide accessibility at such affordable prices finds itself suffering from what appear to be immovable vested interests - and downright discrimination if the truth be known.

    But hey, that's life !!!

    Cheers,

    Neil

    PS. Sorry you just had to warm over some of the old hackneyed stuff - read any Tom Head lately ? Do you really hold your own state legislatures and governance in such low regard ?

    In fact, I seem to remember from somewhere that you have a military background.

    My copy of the current US Officer Handbook has it as an offence against the Code of Military Justice to disparage a state legislature .... and I presume that includes a state legislature that legislates and manages its own state higher educational system - including "state licensed" degrees !!!

    The exact phrase is "uses contemptuous words against" ...... Mmmmmm

    But then it only applies to ther state where the officer is on duty or present - and so you may be in another state !!!

     
  11. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    The same thing is true here in the United States. American universities acquire their degree granting authority under state law. That authority is not dependent on accreditation. The existence of hundreds of legal but non-accredited institutions illustrates that.

    Same as here. The regional accreditors are associations of universities that recognize each other's degrees and credits in transfer, and which enforce a quality assurance mechanism to see to it that each member maintains some degree of equivalence.

    So I'd say that there is a lot of similarity between the QAA and the regional accreditors.

    The biggest difference that I can see is that the QAA was imposed from the top down, European-style, while the regional accreditors evolved from the bottom up, American-style. The QAA was recently created in order to bring together and rationalize the educational QA functions exercised by a whole variety of different agencies like the Higher Education Funding Council. The regional accreditors gradually evolved out of associations created by the universities themselves. In that sense, they resemble some of the professional accreditors in the UK which grew out of professional associations.
     
  12. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    I don't follow your analogy. In the United States, ALL public universities (with a few federal exceptions like the service academies) are state or local. They all were created to educate the people of their state or locality. And ALL of these universities are RA.

    I can't think of ANY non-accredited but state licensed school that was sponsored by a state or local government.

    No.

    I have posted repeatedly on this subject, though to steal David Hume's phrase, my posts have always fallen still-born from the press, receiving no response.

    As I understand it, the former Polytechnics in the UK lacked their own degree granting authority. Instead, their degrees were actually granted by the CNAA.

    Well, here in the United States we already have assessment universities that will grant RA degrees upon passing examinations and/or showing portfolios of previous work. Thomas Edison State College in New Jersey is discussed here every day. Western Governor's University is in the process of rolling out America's first RA masters degrees by examination.

    So I've repeatedly suggested that the stronger non-accredited universities position themselves as institutions offering tuition leading towards these kind of assessment degrees. (They could do the same with the University of London external examinations, I guess.) The non-accredited schools could offer their instruction as they see fit, completely free of any strictures enforced by the regional accreditors (real or imagined). But the actual degrees would come out of TESC or someplace similar, as the Polytechnics' degrees came out of the CNAA, and they would be fully RA. In this case the function of the regional accreditors would be to maintain the integrity of the assessment process.

    As I see it, that would be a win-win situation.
     
  13. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    I'm curious to know if your same criticism extends to European nations as well. Most of those countries only allow universities to operate that are authorized by the appropriate national government. Those countries only have one national government apiece. That's kinda restrictive, don't you think?

    In the United States we have fifty state governments, each with its own authority to license universities. We have a whole collection of different alternative accreditors.

    In the US we offer people a wider variety of educational options than you can find in any European nation. If we can be criticised at all, it is because our system is too diverse, laissez faire and "old west", with not enough marshals to keep order and prevent confusion.

    Isn't it a little bit strange to criticize us on anti-trust grounds because our system is so diverse and fragmentary that not all of its offerings receive the same recognition?

    Bottom line: Those universities that you say are being disrespected by RA would not even be allowed to exist in the UK.
     
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Neil, you should stick to whatever it is you know well. The U.S. military certainly isn't one of them.

    I am a retired U.S. Air Force officer. I have sat on courts-martial, as well as convened them. The last several years of my career was as a commander. And I cannot ever recall anyone ever being convicted of such a thing, nor even charged--or even accused, for that matter! Your source is unofficial and certainly incorrect. Now, if you can show me language to that effect in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, I would concede that such a thing is theoretically possible. It doesn't happen, no matter what.

    Military officers are appointed by the President of the United States. We're sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. Nowhere in that oath does it mention giving up our First Amendment right to free speech. Making disparaging remarks about any level of government is certainly within those rights. In the U.S., we can defend and criticize our government at the same time.

    Freedom is cool.

    Rich Douglas
     
  15. Kane

    Kane New Member

    MY OPINION

    First let me start off by saying I am no expert on the issues of accreditation. I may be going off topic by bringing it up...sorry.

    But I do find that the idea of a "qualifications authority" (I.E. New Zealand) which is one government body accrediting everything educational.

    I think this is a great defence against diploma mills as there is no "private" accrediting firms nor unaccredited state licences to issue degrees. In NZ (as far as I know) you want to issue degrees you must become accredited by the QA...no other agency or department matters.

    I may be simplifying but I think such "QA" systems have a good working premise.

    In respect: Kane
     
  16. Kane

    Kane New Member

    I have to agree

    Neil wrote "British universities exist in their own right as of right when correctly established under law (charter of one sort or another). Their ability to award degrees is not based on any third-party organisation."

    I think Neil has a point. with this sort of a system a newcomer does not have to worry about the difference between "RA" or "NA" and the hassles (NA degrees being rejected by RA school)of having to know the difference between "private" and "recognized" accreditation. Simply one charter vs: hundreds of private accreditors, RA, NA, etc. I admit, the way Neil puts it, sounds like a less confusing accrediting system.

    There are advantages (It seems) to the U.K. system.
     
  17. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Re: I have to agree

    Let's see....there are six regional associations. If your school is accredited by the one that covers its geographical area, your school is "in." If not, it is "out." That really doesn't seem too hard.

    The only fly in the ointment is the national accreditors, like DETC. But even still, that's not too hard to figure out, either.

    The rest, the unaccredited schools, are out. There's nothing to figure out. It's all one list of schools, and that list is published in a guide.

    The private nature of accreditation allows for some really innovative schools to get going, then get accredited. In other countries, this is left to the government, and governments aren't normally too innovative. I feel that's why you see some innovations in British schools, but no new innovative British schools. Most of the really different, free-standing DL schools that have appeared in the last two decades are right in the good ol' U.S. of A.

    Rich Douglas
     
  18. Kane

    Kane New Member

    I agree

    The actual quality of learning of an institution is varied. I think we can agree that the University of Phoenix and Harvard are on different levels just as Oxford and Heriot-Watt are on different levels.

    In my personal experience I have found British schools more able to meet my needs while others have chosen U.S., Australian, South African or Canadian schools. Again quality of education is subjective not nation based.

    My point is if the six RA associations became one. I believe it would be easier.

    Even an easier method would be to scrap the associations, scrap the DETC (and other NA groups) and place all accreditation under the US department of Education.

    I admit the cost would be too high to implement but I think we can agree that the one accreditor system would be a safer defense against diploma mills and newbie confusion?
     
  19. Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

    Article 88 of the UCMJ. But it punishes the use of "contemptuous words" AGAINST a laundry list of officials, not ABOUT them. They'd have to be present to be offended.

    In any event, it's probably seen the light of day on fewer occasions than the article dealing with duels. Next argument, Neil?
     
  20. Kane

    Kane New Member

    ???

    I am still trying to figure out what U.S. military codes have to do with U.K. and U.S. accreditation issues?
     

Share This Page