External Audit as a Catalyst for Institutional Development – A South African Perspective EAIR Conference: August 2009 Presenter: Martin Oosthuizen Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Port Elizabeth South Africa

Outline First Cycle of HEQC Audits Assumptions on Design of External Quality Assurance (EQA) Systems Nature of HEQC Audit Approach HEQC Audit of the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU): September 2008 Prospects for the 2 nd Audit Cycle 3

1. First Cycle of HEQC Audit audits completed (15 Public; 10 Private) 8 more by

2. Theoretical Assumptions – Design of EQA systems External Audit as impetus for institutional development? Evolution of EQA systems from more externally-oriented focus on common standards and system-building to self- regulation and authentic quality development  Regulatory context  Characteristics of HE system  Attitudes of institutional leaders 5

6 PURPOSE & ENLIGHTENMENT A conceptual framework for analysing approaches to quality (Luckett: 2005) Communicative action Internal Strategic instrumental action Pedagogic rationality External POWER & CONTROL Collegial rationality Managerial rationality Bureaucratic rationality Facilitative rationality improvement Accountability 2 nd HEQC CycleHEQC NMMU Audit

Principles/ Objectives for HEQC Audit: “Improvement”: Primary role of audit: systematic, continuous quality development “Accountability”:  Linked to comprehensive transformation process of SA HE  National picture of quality arrangements  Common set of audit criteria 7 3. Nature of HEQC Audit Approach

Audit Scope & Criteria: Strong accountability orientation Extensive ScopeScopeScope Prescriptive and detailed criteria Fitness of purpose: Congruence of institutional mission with transformation objectives Self-accreditation status Thus: Dominant Mode – Bureaucratic Rationality Quality Models 8 3. Nature of HEQC Audit Approach

9 Fitness of purpose of mission, etc. in response to context Links between planning, resource allocation and quality management Research Teaching and learning Community engagement Benchmarking, User surveys and impact studies Area 2 Area 1 Audit Areas Scope

NMMU South Campus South Campus New Comprehensive University (2005) Academic Challenges:  Academic Identity  Student access and success  Academic Programme Planning Audit Portfolio required by June 2008, based on Self-evaluation process NMMU Self-evaluation NMMU Self-evaluation HEQC Audit of NMMU

NMMU Summerstrand campus NMMU

Reaching for Excellence Conduct of SE Process

13 NMMU Self-evaluation Audit Objectives:  Contribute to defining new institutional identity  Understand quality challenges  Realistic and implementable strategies for building on areas of strength and improving areas of weakness. Audit Approach: Integration of Audit into Strategic Planning Process excellence

14 Conduct of SE Process Audit Steering Committee and Task Teams: Audit Steering Committee coordinated work of task teams to address specific audit criteria 2 phases:  Sept 2007 – Jan 2008: SE reports by task teams Useful information; Little self-evaluation  Jan – June 2008: Consolidated report More evaluative Few inputs from university community

Delving for Evidence

Stimulation of quality awareness But lack of ownership - why?  Tight time-frame  More guidance on doing SE  View of audit as externally imposed  Exhaustive nature of criteria  Criteria: Confluence of threshold standards and good practice – unattainable…..  Lack of clarity on material evidence 16 Contribution to Quality Development at NMMU

Effectiveness of site-visit:  Positive Diverse institutional viewpoints Assessment of quality policies and practices from other institutional contexts Consistency of approaches and practices Test understanding of quality policies, processes across institution 17 The Audit Visit

Effectiveness of site-visit:  Negative No panel members from comprehensive university Limited opportunity for discussion Impressionistic judgements Audit findings: Mainly confirmed SE report But some unexpected findings: Academic leadership 18 The Audit Visit

Towards a more facilitative approach  Scope: More limited Linked to priorities facing HE sector Flexibility – provide for institutional initiative and priorities Prospects for 2 nd Audit Cycle Quality Models

 Criteria: Less standard: diverse typological landscape; mission differentiation Less detailed More consultative approach to development Start to develop benchmarking guides for specific aspects Prospects for 2 nd Audit Cycle

21 Process: Re-consider the nature of audit visits. Consider sectoral projects that create capacity to develop authentic institutional approaches. Link such audit projects positively to state funding support – HE budget (earmarked funding). Develop networks of professional support to assist institutions in quality development Shorter audit cycles or more iterative process within a cycle? What will the “politics of quality” allow? 5. Prospects for 2 nd Audit Cycle

22 Thank You Martin Oosthuizen Centre for Planning and Institutional Development Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Port Elizabeth, South Africa + 27 (0)