1. Creating Cultures of Quality within Asia Pacific Higher Education Institutions
Deane Neubauer
APHERP Co-Director
Leadership Institute
July/August 2017
CCU Leadership Institute 2017

2. The Commonality and Exceptionalism of “Quality”
Everybody has “some” idea of what it is, but few total agreements about it
Virginia Smith: “I know it when I see it…”
The Western Association of Schools and Colleges Senior Commission experiment of (See: U.S. Higher Education Accreditation Old and New: The Emergence of a New Paradigm,” Evaluation in Higher Education, Vol. 2, No. 2, December 2008: 23-49)
CCU Leadership Institute 2017

3. Increased Importance of Quality in International HE “Marketplace”
in the contemporary world of higher education massification where the numbers of institutions, the numbers of students they serve, the complexity of the programs they invent and produce are all growing at unprecedented rates, some definitive standards are required
Marginson and Sawir (2005) the more HE becomes a form of “commodity” exchanged within global spaces, the more some form of currency is required—this leads on the one hand toward rankings and all this entails, but also to the continuing search for recognized notions/measures of quality
CCU Leadership Institute 2017

4. The GUNI Approach
Global University Network for Innovation Conference: Accreditation for Quality Assurance: What Is At Stake?”
Sanyal and Martin:
Providing excellence
Being exceptional
Providing value for money
Conforming to specifications
Getting things right the first time
Meeting customers’ needs
Having zero defects
Providing added value
Exhibiting fitness of purpose
CCU Leadership Institute 2017

5. Primary Dimensions of a Changing Global Context
Privatization and “incorporation” movements
Changing in funding patterns and sources (anecdote about U.S. state of Louisiana)
Autonomy
Rapidity of expansion (linkage between capacity and quality)
Rise of national and regional QA bodies
Diversification of HE systems
Curricular changes and alignment issues
Proliferation of multi-campus systems
CCU Leadership Institute 2017

6. The Task At Hand
If the foregoing gives a preliminary sketch of some of the major elements of context then,
How do institutions go about developing a workable self-understanding of quality?
How do institutions translate the formalist elements of QA into actual practices to improve quality?
How do institutions go beyond the kinds of things that are proposed within QA standards and measures to assure themselves that quality is present?
How do institutions deal with providing quality in the context of a constantly and continually changing HE institutional environment?
CCU Leadership Institute 2017

7. Some Examples We Have Pursued
Personnel review (faculty, department administrators, division administrators, vice chancellors (or vice presidents), CEOs –presidents, chancellors, provosts, etc.)
Instituting “system level” review in addition to campus level review for complex multi-campus systems
Faculty recruitment, review, retention, dismissal—who does it?, how often?, checks and balances, and so on.
Academic program review (how often?, how conducted?, rewards, sanctions, etc.)
Overall institutional review—role of faculty, students, administrators, outside stakeholders, and peer review.
Alignment of decentralized internal review by the HEIs, with more centralized external review often at the Ministry level—what value is added to quality by these two levels of review? (Hawkins 2011).
CCU Leadership Institute 2017

8. Thanks We are all ears…..(and eyes I guess)
CCU Leadership Institute 2017