Upload
johnda
View
30
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Possible changes to the Accreditation Process. Quality Assurance Forum August 2011. Why necessary?. Broad level: Existing framework sound in terms of principles but relates to programmes only – candidacy and accreditation phases. Overambitious? Currently not implementing accreditation phase. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Possible changes to the Accreditation Process
Quality Assurance Forum
August 2011
Why necessary?
Broad level:
•Existing framework sound in terms of principles but relates to programmes only – candidacy and accreditation phases. Overambitious? Currently not implementing accreditation phase.
•No real link with institutional quality capacity – audit/institutional review/site visits …. Self-accreditation?
Regulatory issues:
•Some principles need amendment or foregrounding e.g. blind peer review
•Spell out re-accreditation in relation to registration with DHET
•Better provisions for complaints, withdrawing of accreditation and appeals
Context changes:
•2nd cycle – institutions at different stages of “quality maturity”
•Mergers, growth in private sector, established institutions now developing new sites/changing sites
•HEQF – new framework for all qualifications, not just new
•Changing roles of CHE/SAQA
Purposes of accreditation
• Assure and enhance quality in higher education programmes and the institutions that offer them – grant recognition status for meeting minimum standards
• Protect students…
• Support providers to institutionalise a culture of self-managed evaluation
• Increase public confidence…
What do we want to do with new framework?
• Integrate institutional accreditation with programme accreditation and with other HEQC processes (institutional audits/reviews, national reviews), and deal with promised self-accreditation
• Therefore, build a system of institutional accreditation
Some context factors• 23 publics (22 audited in 1st cycle), 116
privates (a handful audited, some site-visited)
• HEQF – need to get over first before implementing big new parts of framework (2014/15)
• New and existing programmes – diff acc statuses
• Regulatory changes urgent
Institutional accreditation
• Purpose – to determine institutional capacity to offer HE programmes
• Outcome: – provisional accreditation (if new)– conditional accreditation– on notice of withdrawal of accreditation– accreditation (self-accreditation status)– not accredited
Processes• New institutions – application, SER, site
visit, (3yrs)
• Existing institutions –– Those audited with no serious
recommendations, plus good accreditation history – simple process, application, a reviewer, AC, HEQC
– Those eligible for audit but not audited need audit first
– Those not audited – self-evaluation, site visit.
Institutional accreditation
New institutions
Audited institutions
Unaudited institutions
Programme accreditation
Institutions not eligible for
auditSite visit
Audit
Site visit
Programme accreditation
New programmes
Candidacy programmes
Resubmitted programmes
Conditions
Programmes accredited prior to first
cycle
Overview of programme and institutional accreditation
Submit ONLINE application for institutional accreditation along with application for
programme accreditation
Directorate assesses for
completeness
Institutional application
Programme application (parallel with institutional application)
Reviewer appointed by Directorate
Review reports on site visit and programme, recommendations and application documents submitted to
Accreditation Committee with the recommendation from the Directorate
Recommendation made to HEQC which makes decisions,
Institution accepts outcome and
proceeds accordingly
Institution does not accept outcome and
submits representation
Site visit panel appointed by Directorate
Site visit conducted and
report submitted to Directorate
Provisional accreditation of the institution is
decided
Programme accreditation process goes ahead, decision is made and
Directorate communicates it
Provisional accreditation of the institution is
not decided
Programme accreditation process deferred, institution
given time to attend to institutional issue.
Directorate communicates this
Institution accepts outcome and
proceeds accordingly
Institution does not accept outcome and
submits representation
Accreditation of new institutions
Institutions with programmes
accredited in 2011 or before
Audited institutions
Institutions that were not audited
Public institutions Private institutions
Institutional review arranged by the
Review Directorate
Process followed as for new institutions
Application submitted any
time before December 2014
Self review and report on progress report from the IAC
which includes recommendation on whether site visit is needed and what
focus should be
Directorate appoints reviewer,
IAC recommends site visit
Directorate appoints site review panel
IAC does not recommend site
visit
Reports to AC who make
recommendation to HEQC
HEQC makes decision,
Directorate communicates it
Extension of provisional
accreditation
Notice of intention to withdraw
accreditation Accreditation
Institutional response
Institution accepts decision and
proceeds accordingly
Institution does not accept
decision and submits
representation
Existing provisionally accredited institutions
Programmes
• Candidacy phase for new programmes
• Existing programmes – HEQF alignment, deemed accredited (structural coherence, names etc) – link to institutional accreditation
• Re-registration – summarised report on current status of programmes to DHET.
Appeals
• Representation within 21 days, re-evaluate, back to AC and HEQC
• Can re-apply after 12 months
• New appeals process:
• Appeals Cttee, meets 2x per year (1x)
• Composition: - • CHE member (not also HEQC) – chair• ED QA• 2 HEQC members ( on AC)• 1 IAC member
• If appeal lodged, appeal and all original reports and submissions evaluated by 2 independent reviewers, recommendation to Appeals Committee
• Document processes for:– representations, – new sites of delivery, changes of mode,
changes of name, – complaints– notice of, and withdrawal of, accreditation
Summary
• Mandatory site visit for new institutions
• Linking programme and institutional accreditation
• Institutional accreditation – self-accreditation