Tertiary Education Management Conference 2006

1. Can the tertiary sector achieve excellence in an accountability environment? Implications of NZ govt education policy A Weir

2. Tertiary Education Management Conference 2006 Annie Weir Education Quality Manager St John New Zealand

3. Can the tertiary sector achieve excellence in an environment of accountability? …an investigation into the implications of government education policy in the New Zealand setting

4. Overview of presentation • The New Zealand tertiary sector • Demand for quality • Quality assurance authorities and their associated bodies • Quality assurance processes • Providers’ responses to external quality assurance

5. Tertiary Sector • Universities • Institutes of Technology/Polytechnics • Wananga • Colleges of Education • Private Training Establishments (PTEs) • Government Training Establishments (GTEs) and other tertiary education organisations

6. External quality assurance: Education Providers’ perspective • 22 tertiary education providers from across the tertiary sector • Stated institutional goals and objectives relating to attaining excellence in the delivery of their education programmes and activities

7. Demand for Quality • Changes in public sector management since the late 1980s • Pressure by the Government on tertiary education providers to contribute to national economic and social development goals • Focus on governance, accountability and quality of tertiary education providers • Government’s desire to ensure that providers are financially and educationally accountable to their stakeholders

8. Rationale underpinning the establishment of external quality assurance • Becoming internationally competitive • Increasing participation in tertiary education

9. Influences on education policy • Public choice theory • Agency theory • New public management

10. Accountability • Government education policies • Legislative and regulatory requirements • Government funding systems • Developments in technology Impact significantly on an institution’s development and its quality management system

11. Quality Assurance Authorities • New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) • New Zealand Vice-Chancellors Committee (NZVCC)

12. NZQA and associated bodies • Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics of New Zealand (ITPNZ) Formerly called APNZ • Institutes of Technology and Polytechnics Quality (ITP Quality) Formerly called NZPPC • Up until 2006 – ACENZ and CEAC (Colleges of Education)

13. NZQA quality assurance activities • Private Training Establishments: registration, accreditation, course approval and quality audit • Wananga: accreditation, course approval and academic audit

14. Quality assurance activities • Polytechnics and institutes of technology: accreditation, programme approval and academic audit • Colleges of Education:accreditation, programme approval (at the time of the research they were not involved in academic audit)

15. New Zealand Vice Chancellors Committee (NZVCC) • Committee on University Academic Programmes (CUAP) 1962 • New Zealand Universities Academic Audit Unit (NZUAAU) 1993

16. Academic/Quality Audit • Key accountability mechanism • Primarily audit once was a financial activity and now… “We need time to feed the beast”

17. Making auditees auditable • All tertiary providers have become auditees of external quality bodies • Provide an audit manual/guide • Expect providers to understand their processes and adopt the prescribed language • Comply with external standards/criteria

18. Key features of Academic/Quality Audit • Broad quality standards or criteria • Provision of manual/guidelines • Audit team visit • Audits ‘based’ on provider’s self-review (where it exits) • Audit report • Dissemination of good practice

19. Common audit themes • Treaty of Waitangi • Quality management systems • Facilities and resources • Developing and monitoring courses and programmes • Staff matters

20. Common audit themes • Student information and administration • Support for students • Teaching,learning and assessment • Research and teaching • Internal review • External review • Joint,franchised and external programmes

21. Providers’ approaches to quality • Some providers were influenced by theories and systems to emerge from the quality movement that include TQM and ISO 9000 • Reviewed their QMS in light of external quality standards/criteria requirements • Peer review and benchmarking

22. Providers’ views • Accountable to a range of stakeholders • Experienced additional costs and greater workloads • All providers (other than universities) accepted and complied with external quality assurance requirements – wanted to access Government funding

23. Universities’ views • Accepted the role and functions of CUAP • Varied in their views on NZUAAU – depending on their perceptions of the added value to their university

24. Providers’ concerns • ‘Quality’ of some of the audit panel members • Audit panels going beyond their brief • The depth and extent of the audits • The quality of the audit reports

25. Providers’ concerns • The resource implications associated with audit • The amount and type of monitoring activities between formal audits • Audit fatigue • Desire to have say in future audits

26. Influence of external monitoring • For universities and some polytechnics external monitoring was not a strong influence on their activities • For universities external monitoring improved their planning and codification

27. Influence of external monitoring • All providers created staff positions to meet ongoing quality assurance requirements • Providers (other than universities) aligned their QMS to fit with external quality assurance requirements

28. Advantages • External validation • Identify areas for improvement and provides leverage for action • Stimulus to document and codify quality systems • Accountability to stakeholders

29. Disadvantages • Increase in costs associated with external monitoring • Additional workload associated with external monitoring • Authorities’ ideas about how to run an institution are unrealistic • Diverts attention of staff from their routine activities • Lack of auditor competence • Audit fatigue

30. Conclusions • Education reforms led to the establishment of external quality assurance authorities and their associated bodies and this led to greater quality monitoring of tertiary providers • For providers there was a mismatch between their existing QMS and external quality assurance requirements

31. Conclusions (cont’d) • Providers responses’ to external quality monitoring has been one of compliance in order to maintain their accreditation and access to Government funding • Quality is an enigmatic notion that challenges both quality agencies and tertiary providers’ interpretation and implementation of what is needed to meet external requirements

32. Can the tertiary sector achieve excellence in an environment of accountability?

33. Tertiary Education Management Conference 2006 Thank you…

34. Lunch Please reconvene at 2pm on Level 3, Ballroom A/ Ante (adjacent to the Trade Exhibition)