Tertiary reforms spearhead a new way of thinking about quality

The tertiary education reforms could be described as funding quality rather than quantity – and measuring this to inform good investment decisions.

NZQA has a role in developing a quality assurance system to support the tertiary education reforms, with an emphasis on accountability for learner achievements and outcomes.

The tertiary reforms group at NZQA, working with the Tertiary Education Commission, will build on the best practice in the sector and has embarked on an important stakeholder engagement process. It involves consulting on the principles of a new system of selfassessment and external evaluation and review – and getting input and feedback to develop the way the system will work in practice.

"We need the sector to tell us what's working well and not so well at the moment in terms of quality assurance. We want to know how Tertiary Education Organisations (TEOs) self-assess their impact on learning outcomes, the nature and effectiveness of their needs assessment and quality management practices," Mike Willing, NZQA's Deputy Chief Executive Quality Assurance, said.

The first phase of the consultation involves the TEOs (non-university) and their representative groups. Given that the reforms are all about the quality of the learning experience, and meeting student and community needs – as well as national development goals – the second phase of consultation will also involve learners, employers, and the regions.

There's also the bigger picture of what's happening elsewhere in the tertiary sector.

DCE, Quality Assurance, Mike Willing

Speaking to a group of heads of polytechnics and institutes of technology, Mike said: "In international practice there's a move away from a ‘tick-the-box' quality assurance model to providers managing their own quality and showing how their processes impact on learning.

"We're looking forward to progressing self-assessment," Mike said, "while being mindful of the sector's concerns which are emerging with questions like, ‘how do we best structure ourselves to do this?'

"In self-assessment of outcomes, which many institutions are doing already, the difference is looking at how what we do makes an impact," Mike said. "For example, ‘how could we use student surveys differently?', ‘What do we actually do with these findings to improve outcomes?'

"Then, with the external review to validate the self-assessment, the question might arise: ‘should we refine the processes to produce the outcomes we want?' ‘Are we actually improving?'"

Mike went on to explain: "Rather than an audit or compliance model, we're looking at an evaluative approach. Nor is it a one-size-fits-all approach. While there may be a general framework, we will recognise distinctive contributions, with the institutions asking what's important for their students to achieve – what are quality outcomes for them? Then there's the question: how do we recognise this and measure it from a quality perspective?"

An expert advisory group drawn from the sector, including experts in evaluation and quality assurance, is also providing guidance in designing the system.

"These are experts in their fields, both in providing quality assurance services but also people affected by quality assurance who can take a fresh look at it, " Mike said.

"Essentially, it's balancing a systems approach with the needs of stakeholders, and looking for continuous improvement. The design has to be done with the sector, and that's the focus for this year", Mike said.

Trialling the new system starts next year, with implementation in all institutions beginning in 2009.

For queries relating to the quality assurance work see NZQA'S website.

For further details relating to the tertiary education reforms as a whole, see the Tertiary Education Commission.