A working model for collaborationbetween HEIs from diverse contexts

across the PacificTea Tepora A Wright

Director Academic Quality UnitNational University of Samoa

t.wright@nus.edu.ws

Higher Education Pacific Quality Project

3 supporting organisations

4 benchmarking partners

9 months (May 2016-Jan 2017)

3 KPIs, 11 Performance Measures

Project FocusProcesses that Support:

•Teacher quality•Reward & Recognition of Teacher Quality•Programme quality•Student Voice

Project Methodology in Phases• Phase 1: Establishment of benchmarking protocol

• Online meetings & informal discussions, Obtain executive endorsement, Signing of project agreement

• Phase 2: Self-Review• Review against KPIs & Measures, Data collection, Data collation through online Portal

(peerreviewportal.com)

• Phase 3: Self-Improvement Activity• Targeted improvement identified during Self-Review

• Phase 4: Peer Review Workshop• Sharing of findings, experiences and lessons learnt

• Final Phase: Final Report

An Experience in DiversityCase Study: National University of Samoa

MIT USP NUS WAIKATO

COUNTRY NZ 12 incl. Samoa,Fiji, Tonga, Kiribati,

Vanuatu

SAMOA NZ

YEAR ESTABLISHED 1970 1968 1987 1964

STUDENT & STAFFPOPULATION

15,619 Students

731 Staff

29,740 students

1,620 staff

3,500 students

377 Staff

12,016 students

1,498 staff (fulltime)

LEVEL OFPROGRAMMES

OFFERED

PathwaysUndergraduatePostgraduate

PathwaysUndergraduatePostgraduate

PathwaysUndergraduatePostgraduate

PathwaysUndergraduatePostgraduate

Phase 1 Experience(Why International Benchmarking???)

Measure how wecompare/ Pinpoint focusfor improvement/ Createenvironment for change/

Not ready/ We’ll look‘bad’/ Too costly/ Wedon’t understand the

process

Phase 2 Experience

• Structured approach• Roundtable sessions• Chose ‘more innovative’

staff• Involvement of DVC

Academic & Research

1

‘like filling an empty container’

2

‘Variable… depending onresources’

3

‘if it’s done like where I got myPhD’

4

‘it’s in the taste’

Phase 3 Experience (SelfImprovement Activity -Develop a framework forcourse quality)

Introductory Exercise:I asked staff: Draw a simplesketch to describe coursequality at the NUS. They werethen asked to explain theirsketches.

Result: Diverseconceptualisations

Phase 4 Experience (Peer ReviewWorkshop)• Sharing of findings and experiences• Very common to hear “that’s a really good

idea, it might work for us”• Collaborative and supportive• Appreciated differences as well as

similarities

Project Outcome

• Documented international external referencinginitiative

• Enhanced capacity of participants to undertakebenchmarking for quality enhancement

• Institutional Recommendations forimprovement

• General Recommendations• Model for HEI collaboration on quality initiatives in

the Pacific

The Proposed Model

Acknowledgements• University of Waikato• Manukau Institute of Technology• University of the South Pacific• National University of Samoa• University of Tasmania• Online Peer Solutions• Ako Aotearoa• Academic Quality Agency for NZ

Universities