共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 515 毫秒
1.
英国高等教育质量保障体系以内部质量保障为主体,外部质量保障为主导,前者主要是高校的自律机制和自适机制,后者主要以高等教育质量保障署的＂学术规范体系＂为主线,从而形成了其独立自主、以制度促规范、互动而平衡的鲜明特征。给我国的启示有：建立起法制化、制度化运作的高等教育质量保障体系和专业化的高等教育质量评估体系;完善以＂内部＂为主体、＂外部＂为主导的体系构成;加强内外有效沟通和协调发展的运行体系。 相似文献
2.
1997年英国成立了高等教育质量保证署（QAA）,向英国高等教育提供质量保障服务。QAA初期的工作主要是进行延续审查和学科评估,2002年改革后则采用院校审查的方式来进行评估。QAA的建立与发展过程正是英国高等教育外部质量保障机制不断完善的过程,也是其从注重外部质量保障到注重建立有效的内部质量保障的过程。 相似文献
3.
In this paper the current national legislations, the quality assurance approaches and the activities of impact analysis of three quality assurance agencies from Romania, Spain and Germany are described from a strategic perspective. The analysis shows that the general methodologies (comprising, for example, self-evaluation reports, peer reviews, on-site visits, assessment reports, follow-up measures) and main subjects of quality assurance in higher education (such as study programmes and institutional structures and processes) are very similar in the sample cases. However, up to now, impact evaluation of quality assurance has not been implemented systematically in the sample agencies (as in many others). This is the more relevant since the European standards of quality assurance in higher education oblige quality assurance agencies to analyse their general findings and observe the effects of their activities. Against that background, it is argued that methodologically sound impact analyses of quality assurance interventions in higher education institutions should be seen as an integral part of the agencies’ own quality assurance because it would make their work more transparent and easier to improve systematically. The paper identifies some professionalisation needs required for impact evaluation competences: staff and peers who are qualified by methodological knowledge but also by ‘soft’ skills such as project and conflict management. 相似文献
4.
ANNELIESE DODDS 《European Journal of Education》2005,40(2):155-172
In both Britain and France, evaluation has been seen as one element of national strategies to internationalise higher education (HE), with the spread of evaluation indicating policy convergence. However, there are dangers in describing the cross‐national adoption of evaluation as an instance of policy transfer in higher education. This article compares two evaluation agencies, the French Comité National de l’Évaluation des Établissements Publics à caractère scientifique, culturel et professionnel (CNE) and the British Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), which have both been seen as guarantors of the quality of domestic HE, and concomitantly as elements in international HE promotion. It indicates considerable differences in the evaluation reports produced by each agency, and links these to the context in which they were produced: the institutional relationships between each agency, higher education institutions, and the state; and the general context of ‘evaluation’ in each country's public sphere. The article thus challenges analyses which have seen the proliferation of evaluation across national contexts as evidence of ‘policy transfer’ or of ‘homogenisation’. Instead, it shows how differences in an ostensibly similar ‘product’, the ‘quality reports’ produced by each agency, reflect the institutional context of evaluation and its role in public policy writ large. 相似文献
5.
Fabrizio Trifiro 《Quality in Higher Education》2018,24(2):136-153
This paper presents the findings of a study undertaken by the United Kingdom Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), with support from the International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE), aimed at investigating the challenges and limits to cross-border cooperation in the quality assurance of transnational education. The study builds on the outcomes of the recently concluded Erasmus Mundus project Quality Assurance of Cross-Border Higher Education (QACHE) and in particular the QACHE Toolkit developed as part of the project to foster cooperation between quality assurance agencies in quality assuring transnational education. Based on the responses to a survey sent to QAA’s partner agencies in key sending and receiving countries of transnational education, the study extract recommendations to agencies to help them developing viable strategies for inter-agency cooperation, identifying concrete ways in which they might or might not cooperate across borders. 相似文献
6.
Jethro Newton 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》1999,24(2):215-235
With the establishment, in August 1997, of a new UK‐wide Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA), it is timely to reflect on the impact of the two principal forms of external quality monitoring which the QAA has replaced. First, the quality assessment by the funding councils, whose five‐year cycle of teaching quality assessment in universities and colleges in Scotland and Wales, which commenced in 1993, is now complete. Second, institutional quality audits of universities and colleges, conducted by the Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC) between 1993 and 1997. This paper reports the results of a five‐year action research study conducted at a college of higher education. The particular focus of the study was on issues arising from the development and implementation of a quality assurance system at the study institution, and attempts to reconcile requirements for accountability and efforts to encourage quality improvement. The paper reviews and evaluates the impact of each of the forms of external monitoring, teaching quality assessment and institutional audit, on the study institution. Results are presented using qualitative and quantitative data drawn from external performance measures, such as the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC) and HEQC quality assessment and audit reports, and internal measures of staff experience and perceptions. Lessons are drawn in relation to perceived benefits, or otherwise, of external quality assessment and quality audit, and consideration is given to the implications which the findings have beyond the study institution and the Scottish higher education sector, and in particular for the newly established Quality Assurance Agency. 相似文献
7.
Rogerr Brown 《Higher Education Quarterly》2000,54(4):323-342
In August 1997 the new Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) took over the quality assurance functions of the Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC) and the Higher Education Funding Councils (HEFC). Just over two years later the QAA has announced the final important details of the new ‘Quality Framework’ which will operate in England and Northern Ireland from 2002 (in Scotland it will operate from the start of the 2000/01 academic year, the present time scale in Wales is uncertain). This article first describes the historical background to the new framework. It then outlines its main features. The main part of the article assesses the new framework against a number of ‘quality criteria’ derived from study of various external quality assurance regimes. The article raises questions in particular about the complexity and feasibility of the new framework and its ability in practice to produce reliable and consistent outcomes and about the extent to which it will accommodate increasing diversity of institutional mission and practice. It concludes that the QAA will face very considerable challenges in making the new framework effective and suitable to the rapidly changing nature of the provision it seeks to regulate. 相似文献
8.
9.
本文介绍并分析英国高等教育质量保证体系的历史沿革,对当前实行的QAA（The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education）的主要职责、运行模式、框架设计和质量保证进行了分析和评述,对高等学校的内部质量监控做了介绍,并着重以约克大学为例介绍了高等学校的内部质量保障的制度、机构和措施,在此基础上分析了对我国高等教育质量保证的启示。 相似文献
10.
D. Royce Sadler 《Quality in Higher Education》2017,23(2):81-99
Quality assurance processes have been applied to many aspects of higher education, including teaching, learning and assessment. At least in the latter domain, quality assurance needs its fundamental tenets critically scrutinised. A common but inadequate approach has been to identify and promote learning environment changes ‘likely to improve’ learning outcomes. They are simply labelled ‘quality assurance’ without establishing their effectiveness. Part of the problem is that the case for quality assurance has been largely taken as self-evident. Originally, quality assurance principles were developed in domains outside higher education. In those, auditable product, service and other standards play a central role. Although external processes do not directly transfer to higher education, their underlying principles offer perspectives and pointers for reconceptualising quality assurance and improving assessment and grading. Quality assurance should be grounded in authoritative and properly formulated academic achievement standards applied to actual student works, performances and course grades. 相似文献
11.
Mahsood Shah 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2012,37(6):761-772
External quality audits are now being used in universities across the world to improve quality assurance, accountability for quality education and transparency of public funding of higher education. Some countries such as Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Sweden and Denmark have had external quality audits for more than a decade but there has been limited research as to their impact. This study analyses the extent to which external audits in Australia have improved quality assurance in universities over the past 10 years. The analysis is based on discussions with 40 participants in a workshop on the effectiveness of audits and the review of 60 external quality audit reports between 2001 and December 2010. The research found that while external audits have led to an improvement in systems and processes in Australian universities, they have not necessarily improved the student experience. This lack of impact on the student experience in Australia is similar to other countries, according to the literature review. This study is timely in its analysis on the effectiveness of the current improvement-led audits, as government in Australia is in the process of renewing quality assurance arrangements of higher education institutions with a focus on standards and outcomes. 相似文献
12.
Scenarios of quality assurance of stakeholder relationships in Finnish higher education institutions
Anu Lyytinen Vuokko Kohtamäki Jussi Kivistö Elias Pekkola Seppo Hölttä 《Quality in Higher Education》2017,23(1):35-49
Although the role and significance of the external stakeholders of higher education institutions has grown in recent years, quality assurance of stakeholder relationships remains a new phenomenon in the management practices of higher education institutions and in higher education research. Based on interviews and expert panel data, this article analyses the internal and external stakeholders’ perceptions of scenarios of the quality assurance of stakeholder relationships in Finnish higher education institutions. It especially focuses on exploring how institutions can balance internal and external stakeholders’ perspectives with regard to quality assurance. The results show that an essential challenge for Finnish higher education institutions is to develop flexible quality assurance practices capable of balancing the academic goals of the institutions and the needs of the external stakeholders. This also requires seeking balance between the centralised coordination and the differentiated practices of disciplines and academic units inside institutions. 相似文献
13.
Cathal de Paor 《Quality in Higher Education》2016,22(3):228-241
This article examines the extent to which the professional accreditation of professional higher education programmes can complement other quality assurance endeavours being carried out. An analysis of a sample of professional accreditation reports for pharmacy education programmes in Ireland provides insight into the priorities of the regulatory professional body with regard to preparation for the profession. The results show that the reports address issues that are of relevance for the higher education institutions’ provision of quality programmes and for their quality assurance. The article also considers the extent to which the reports hold institutions accountable against the professional standards, while also acknowledging the professional responsibility of institution staff. Catering for both of these logics is necessary so that professional accreditation can contribute effectively as a mechanism for quality assurance, including enhancement, in the institution. 相似文献
14.
介绍我国研究生教育外部质量保障体系的内涵、手段与特点;分析近十年欧洲研究生教育外部质量保障体系的建设目标、实施情况及全面质量保障理论在国外发达国家教育质量保障实践中的应用。文章认为：我国高等教育外部质量保障活动应促进高等教育与国际接轨;评价理论、工具、形式要和具体情境结合;高等质量保障活动应更具体、更有针对性;评价活动的科学性有待进一步分析与验证。 相似文献
15.
Leïla Youssef 《Open Learning》2013,28(2):100-115
Globalisation, the shift to a knowledge economy, and changing demographics are increasingly challenging higher education systems. The move from elite through mass to universal education, coupled with the internationalisation of higher education, has profoundly influenced the system, especially in terms of academic mobility. It has created new fields and challenges for policy-makers. New forms of international education have emerged, including cross-border education. Commercialised for-profit cross-border degree mills and rogue providers have gained new grounds and jeopardised the quality of higher education services and qualifications because of the worthless qualifications and shoddy service levels that they may provide. The focus of national quality assurance agencies, which was previously not related to the assessment of the quality of ‘imported’ and ‘exported’ programmes, has been challenged. This paper provides a theoretical overview of the main developments in the cross-border education level. It focuses on cross-border education opportunities and threats, and on the various international frameworks that regulate these new forms of higher education. 相似文献
16.
Emma Medland 《Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education》2019,44(4):565-580
The quality assurance ‘regime’ that spans the higher education sector internationally is underpinned by a number of unchallenged assumptions. Nowhere is this more apparent than within the external examiner system in the UK, an instrument for the professional self-regulation of higher education. One such assumption is that external examiners are assessment literate. Within higher education assessment literacy is a concept in its infancy, but one that has the capacity to reverse the deterioration of confidence in academic standards. Whilst the concept is becoming integrated into the sectorial vernacular, its fluid and negotiated nature is under-conceptualised. The primary aim of this article lies in investigating the extent of external examiners’ assessment literacy and to use this as a base to initiate a discussion surrounding the development of a shared discourse of assessment literacy, thereby providing a tool for greater conceptualisation. 相似文献
17.
Cross-border higher education (CBHE) has taken centre stage in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). There has been increased trade in higher education services among member states of the SADC. This has necessitated regional regulatory cooperation in quality assurance and accreditation. SADC has established the Southern African Quality Assurance Network as a regional network of external quality assurance agencies. This paper presents a framework that can be used to enhance regulatory cooperation within the Network on quality assurance in higher education with special focus on CBHE. The paper identifies the main areas of focus as people mobility, institutional and programme mobility, accreditation and registration and recognition of academic credentials. Proposed mechanisms for regulatory cooperation include regional credit accumulation and transfer system, regional qualifications framework, framework for accreditation and registration of foreign providers and framework for recognition of academic credentials. 相似文献
18.
David Gosling Vaneeta D'Andrea Richard Blackwell 《Tertiary Education and Management》2013,19(1):55-79
Abstract There has been a substantial and potentially significant shift in the UK approach to quality in higher education in the last few years. In England, Wales and Scotland there has been a growing interest in quality enhancement to supplement existing frameworks for quality assurance. In the words of the Chief Executive of the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA)1 Peter Williams, “We are now developing a more active strategy for our contribution to quality enhancement” [Williams (http://www.qaa.ac.ure/)]. In this paper, we consider the growing interest in, and attention to, ’quality enhancement’ in higher education at a national level in the UK. We trace the rise to prominence of the concept itself and briefly examine the landscape of agencies that have been funded to engage in quality enhancement activity. We then examine the trend towards greater collaboration between these agencies at a national level that led to the formal proposal to bring many of them together into a new national body, which is known as ‘The Higher Education Academy (Academy)’. We exemplify this collaborative trend by describing how, in the run up to establishing the Academy, the working relationship between two of these agencies the Learning and Teaching Support Network (LTSN) and the Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund (TQEF) National Co‐ordination Team (NCT) was facilitated. In the final part of this paper, we engage in a more speculative consideration of the nature of collaboration at a national policy level and relate this to the literature on change management. We look at the barriers to successful collaboration and the prospects for future collaborations in higher education policy agencies. 相似文献
19.
高校学生评价直接影响高校教育教学质量。全文较详细地比较了英国高等教育质量保证署发表的《高等教育学术质量和标准保证的实践准则》第六部分：学生评价的第一版和第二版,以为我国高校的学生评价的建设提供相应参考。 相似文献
20.
英国QAA的学科评估方法及其启示 总被引：1，自引：1，他引：1
提高高等教育质量的一个有效方法是对高等学校进行质量评估，远程高等教育也不例外。英国长期坚持对高校教育质量进行评估，并不断创新完善，建立了高等教育质量保障总署（QAA），既对传统高等教育也对远程高等教育进行评估，建立了一套系统的、有效的评估体系。本文重点对QAA的学科评估方法进行分析，希望能对我国当前正在组织实施的包括网络远程教育在内的高等教育评估提供一些启示。 相似文献