Search Results

This document constitutes the regulatory framework for higher education in England required under section 75 of the Higher Education and Research Act 2017 (HERA). It replaces the previous regulatory framework for higher education in England which operated under part 2 of the Further and Higher Education Act 1992 and part 3 of the Higher Education Act 2004. It was first issued by the Office for Students (OfS) on 28 February 2018.

The audience for this regulatory framework is: Students, and bodies representing the interests of students, on higher education courses provided by English higher education providers; Providers of higher education in England and bodies representing the interests of such providers; Others including, but not limited to, employers, charities and research bodies that are not themselves providers.

This regulatory framework states how the OfS intends to perform its various functions and provides guidance for registered higher education providers on the ongoing conditions of registration. The OfS will have regard to it when exercising its functions. The framework is composed of five parts: Part I: the OfS's risk-based approach; Part II: sector level regulation; Part III: regulation of individual providers; Part IV: validation, degree awarding powers and university title; Part V: guidance on the general ongoing conditions of registration.

Excerpt from publication. Show less

The Minister for Education and Training has asked the Higher Education Standards Panel to advise on options to improve the transparency of higher education student admissions policies, while minimising regulatory impact. The Minister intends to improve the accessibility and comparability of information about the diversity of course entry pathways by ensuring greater transparency of admissions processes and standards. The Minister is concerned about the capacity of some students to complete their courses. The Minister has asked the Panel for advice on what more needs to be done.

Edited excerpt from publication. Show less

The new demands of mass systems of higher education and the emerging environment of global academic competition are altering the traditional institutions for assuring academic standards in universities. As a consequence many nations are experimenting with new instruments for academic quality assurance. Contemporary government control of academic quality assumes three primary forms: 'oversight' or direct regulation; 'competition' or steering of market forces; and 'mutuality' or professional self-regulation structured by the state. The challenge confronting all nations is to design a policy framework that effectively balances the forces of the state, the market, and the academic profession to assure academic standards in universities. Based upon the strengths and weaknesses observed in 14 policy analyses of innovative national instruments of professional self-regulation, market-based regulation, and direct state regulation for assuring academic quality in universities, we outline the essential components of a national framework for assuring academic standards.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

In the face of increasing costs and lackluster outcomes, traditional higher education is under increasing pressure to prove its value proposition. Meanwhile, new providers have 'unbundled' the components of a postsecondary degree or certificate, offering stand-alone courses or sequences of courses, targeted job training, and assessments and certifications, often at much lower cost than existing institutions. These models cannot deliver all of what a traditional college or university does, but they can provide affordable, flexible, and customizable opportunities to learn. As unbundling in higher education has accelerated, reformers have asked whether there is a role for federal aid dollars to play in facilitating access to these new opportunities. This, in turn, has raised questions as to whether the traditional approaches to regulating postsecondary education at the state and federal level are well suited to this new ecosystem.

That the existing quality assurance system is ill-designed for this new world is abundantly clear. Less clear, however, is what should replace it. Simply lowering barriers to entry such that federal money can flow to a much wider array of providers would invite waste, fraud, and abuse. Thus, this policy brief outlines potential regulatory approaches and tools - many of which would work well in combination - that policymakers could use to facilitate access to this unbundled market while protecting consumers and taxpayers.

Excerpts from publication. Show less

The agencies responsible for tertiary education quality assurance in Australia and New Zealand have established regulatory regimes that increasingly intersect with tertiary institution policy management. An examination of university meta-policies identified good practices guiding university policy and policy management. Most Australian and half of New Zealand universities have developed meta-policy, or policy on policy, with the most comprehensive articulating policy definitions, range and application of policy instruments, categorisation, approval authorities and policy cycle stages. Sound meta-policy provides an essential framework for good policy-making, and is the key to the development of positive policy outcomes. Increasing tertiary sector regulation provides a contemporary imperative to embrace university meta-policy as one mechanism to embed good practice policy process to facilitate these improved policy outcomes.

Published abstract reprinted by permission of the copyright owner. Show less

The 'Standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG)' were adopted by the Ministers responsible for higher education in 2005 following a proposal prepared by the European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education (ENQA) in co-operation with the European Students' Union (ESU), the European Association of Institutions in Higher Education (EURASHE) and the European University Association (EUA). Since 2005, considerable progress has been made in quality assurance as well as in other Bologna action lines such as qualification frameworks, recognition and the promotion of the use of learning outcomes, all these contributing to a paradigm shift towards student-centred learning and teaching. Given this changing context, in 2012 the Ministerial Communique invited the E4 Group (ENQA, ESU, EUA, EURASHE) in cooperation with Education International (EI), BUSINESSEUROPE and the European Quality Assurance Register for Higher Education (EQAR) to prepare an initial proposal for a revised ESG 'to improve their clarity, applicability and usefulness, including their scope'.

The revision included several consultation rounds involving both the key stakeholder organisations and ministries. The many comments, proposals and recommendations received have been carefully analysed and taken very seriously by the Steering Group (SG). They are reflected in the resulting version of the ESG. Moreover this version also reflects a consensus among all the organisations involved on how to take forward quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area and, as such, provides a firm basis for successful implementation. The ESG are used by institutions and quality assurance agencies as a reference document for internal and external quality assurance systems in higher education. Moreover, they are used by the European Quality Assurance Register (EQAR), which is responsible for the register of quality assurance agencies that comply with the ESG.

Excerpts from publication. Show less

In this lecture, the author argues the need to think about the Australian tertiary system moving from one which included a higher education system for the intellectual elite, and a vocational education system focused on practical skills, to one that provides a more comprehensive tertiary system for everyone. In this lecture, the author elaborates on the argument that tertiary education in Australia has not properly adapted to this new environment and therefore requires a reconceptualisation. As this lecture coincides with the radical de-regulation of higher education in the 2014 Commonwealth Budget, the author assesses these measures and whether they assist with the reconceptualisation of tertiary education.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less

Quality assurance (QA) regimes have become an increasingly dominant regulatory tool in the management of higher education sectors around the world. By one estimate, nearly half the countries in the world now have quality assurance systems or QA regulatory bodies for higher education. This paper explores the emergence and spread of QA regimes, the coalescence of regulatory logics around qualifications frameworks, and the broad confluence of such approaches in terms of their impact on the historically contested relationship between the state and university. By focusing on the interlocking regulatory logics provided by QA, the article explores how such approaches impose quasi-market, competitive based rationalities premised on neo-liberal managerialism using a policy discourse that is often informed by conviction rather than evidence.

Abstract from publisher's website. Show less

The article by Olalekan Arikewuyo [available in VOCEDplus at TD/TNC 113.452] in this issue of the journal provides a thought-provoking insight into the historical development of the private higher education sector in Nigeria. Of concern to many Australians would be the volatile political climate and changing government policies described in the paper which would at one point support the provision of private higher education, then in the next breath, not. Based on the published article, this commentary provides some insights on the similarities and differences between the private higher education sector in Nigeria and Australia.

Excerpt from published abstract. Show less

This discussion paper has been prepared to stimulate new conversations about the quality assurance of online higher education in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) economies. By taking stock of recent research and building on recent global and regional initiatives to promote the role of quality assurance in online education, the paper aims to contribute to a shared understanding of the challenges faced by economies in the APEC region and to identify new opportunities. The focus is on the system or policy level of higher education, identifying areas of institutional practice as part of a quality culture and providing models of current practice. Specifically the paper: (1) provides a broad overview of the perceptions and variability of online education in the APEC region; (2) identifies the benefits of regional, domestic and institutional frameworks for assuring the quality of online education; (3) advances an integrated approach to the quality assurance of online learning in higher education; (4) promotes a shared understanding of a 'quality culture' within institutions; and (5) provides models of quality assurance of online education to inform the development of a toolkit that will assist APEC economies adapt and manage potential risks associated with new forms of higher education delivery. The toolkit and its domains was developed in collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders to stimulate conversations and help guide the development of consistent approaches to the quality assurance of online education at the policy, regulatory and institutional level.

Edited excerpts from publication. Show less