IMPACT OF GLOBALIZATION ON QUALITY ASSURANCE AND THE ROLE OF INQAAHE

Ton Vroeijenstijn
Seret!r" o# t$e INQAAHE
During the proceeding panel session of the representatives of Higher Education, their view
on the impact of globalisation on quality assurance, quality assessment and accreditation. is
expressed. In the contributions is expressed the need of validation of external assessment
(s !ursoc", E#$%, the need for trustworthy quality assessment agencies (r &an der 'erre,
I$#'% and the need for an international forum on accreditation (s (ones. )#*#+%.
,he International -etwor" for .uality $ssurance $gencies in Higher Education (I-.$$HE%,
in fact may help in some way to find an answer. I-.$$HE is already an international forum
of quality assurance, quality assessment and accreditation. ,he activities of the I-.$$HE
are, among others, aiming at the development of standards for reliable quality assessment
agencies.
,he I-.$$HE has been set up in /00/ as an international platform of quality assurance
agencies, in one way or another involved in external quality assessment and1or accreditation.
$lthough most agencies are wor"ing in a national context and inside national frontiers, the
interest of the I-.$$HE always has been international oriented. ,he main aim is the
exchange of experiences and good practices and the promotion of international co*operation
and the discussion of global developments. ,his becomes clear, loo"ing at the conference
papers of the 2th 3iennial conference, held this year in 3angalore. ,he main theme was
4.uality $ssurance in Higher Education5 .uality, !tandards and 6ecognition7. 8ou will find
the papers on www.inqaahe.nl.
,he interest in global and international aspects is also reflected in the themes of the wor"ing
groups of the I-.$$HE5
!tandards for HE institutions and programmes
.uality hallmar"s for .$ agencies
utual recognition and its practical aspects
.$ for technical and vocational degrees.
Especially the wor"ing groups on the quality label and on mutual recognition of .uality
$ssessment agencies cover the wishes expressed here to day.
I-.$$HE is developing from a loose -etwor" as started in /00/ towards an association li"e
forum of bona fide .uality $ssurance agencies. I-.$$HE hopes that being a full member of
the I-.$$HE is a sign for the outside world that it has to do with a reliable agency.
$n important step the I-.$$HE has ta"en (together with the I$#'% is to collect reliable
information about the .uality $ssessment $gencies. ,herefore a questionnaire was
developed together with a glossary of the most important terms (also on www.inqaahe.nl).
,he collection of information is not an easy tas". )ne of the reasons is the gap between
national or regional operating agencies and the professional accreditation bodies. ,he
information concerns5
organisation and ownership of the agency
scope of activities
who is setting the standards9
:ho is setting the criteria for assessment9
,he quality criteria used
,he methods of assessment
13-9-01 1
,he composition of the expert teams
,he report and outcomes.
,he second step will be, among others based on the collected information, the formulation of
standards to be expected from a bona fide $gency.
$s you see, the I-.$$HE is investing a lot of efforts to provide answers for the questions as
expressed by the participants in this expert meeting.
,he "eynote paper of Dir" van Damme raised a lot of questions and as"s for a thoroughly
discussion. I li"e to ma"e some remar"s in the light of the activities and goals of the -etwor"
(although they reflect at this moment more my personal view%.
,he impact of globalisation on quality assurance, quality assessment and accreditation,
ma"es the following topics important issues for the near future5
,he formulation of a qualification framewor"
&alid methods for assessing the quality
&alid ways to provide a quality label to HE (;$ccreditation%.
,he discussion about globalisation includes the discussion about trans*national education, e*
learning, new ways of delivering, beside the old traditional way of learning. !ome time there
is a feeling that all new ways of delivering are as"ing for its own specific quality assessment.
However, I believe, we should not only loo" at the process of learning, but also to the output.
,he 4final product7 of both old and new ways of learning is a 3achelor or aster degree. :e
may expect that an old traditional 3achelor or aster is more or less equivalent to a 3achelor
of aster through the new ways of learning. ,his mean we have to go for the assessment of
the outcomes. :e might learn from the I!)*certificate how to develop a quality label for HE.
<or the recognition of the degrees, it is necessary to develop a benchmar" qualification
framewor", including benchmar" descriptors for 3achelor and aster and benchmar"
descriptors for disciplinary based standards.
,his brings us also to the question if we should regulate all qualifications. If we ta"e the three
important landmar"s of Higher Education (3achelor, aster and 'h.D%, and if we are able to
catch this in a good framewor", we are already very successful.
$ quality framewor" is not enough. If we li"e to come to recognition of degrees and to
promote transparency, mobility and competition, there is a need for a valid way to assess the
quality of the degrees. ,herefore there is a need to develop standards and criteria for the
assessment of quality. <urthermore, it is important to agree about the way the quality label is
provided. It will be good to loo" again to the way the I!)*certificate is provided.
,here is a lot do. .uality assessment and accreditation need to be internationalised.
However, I believe globalisation at this moment, is a bridge too far. ,he above mentioned
problems should first be solved at a smaller, regional scale. ,herefore it is important the
I-.$$HE has regional sub networ"s. ,he I-.$$HE it self will play a role as the global
platform for discussing regional and international developments.
13-9-01 2