Review - Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ecommendations, commendations and affirmations. The executive summary is posted on the Ontario College Quality Assurance Service website, and follow-up reports on progress against the recommendations are also posted with it. The audit methodology is similar to that used by Australian Universities Quality Agency. In terms of the private sector in Ontario, the audit methodology is less clear, but compliance against the Private Career Colleges Act and regulations are the basis for audit. The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities undertakes site visits as part of the registration process to ensure that facilities meet requirements. Ongoing monitoring through audit and site visits in the past was said to be undertaken annually, 48 but is now taken on a risk management basis. Risk factors were identified as: • newly registered private career colleges (PCCs) • PCCs that submitted problematic audited financial statements for the Ontario Student Assistance Program • PCCs with a large international student population • PCCs providing truck driving/heavy equipment training • PCCs offering dental hygiene programs • PCCs with a high volume of student complaints • PCCs that have a history of non-compliance. These have now been enhanced into the next iteration of the risk framework which includes the following indicators: • illegal operators (historical and known) • financial viability • chronic violators • targeted programs • renewal issues • international students • advertising issues • information from other regulatory/government bodies. In New Zealand, the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZAQ) monitors the performance of tertiary education organisations through regular quality audits. The audit evaluates the organisation’s performance in relation to a quality standard. The standard that applies depends on the type of education organisation. The audit process takes 12 to 16 weeks and includes the following steps: • organisation submits documents for desk audit, including quality management system documentation, self evaluation report and provider update form • NZQA visits site • tertiary education organisation is provided with draft report for confirmation of factual accuracy • NZQA sends final report and possible request for action plan • tertiary education organisation sends action plan • Formal effort—means that individual initiatives and experimentations with improvements may be seen in and around the college, and these are motivated explicitly by the key quality criteria. • Organised effort—means that quality process initiatives begin to be planned and tracked, work methods are systematically rooted in the quality criteria, and the college has begun to develop performance metrics and norms. • Mature effort—means quality processes have been embedded in the college’s culture, continuous improvement is a way of life, and organisational learning about and commitment to quality assurance and improvement is fully established (Ontario College Quality Assurance Service, 2008, p.21). 48 The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities, 2005, p.60. Comparisons of international quality assurance in vocational education and training Page 40 of 115
• NZQA notifies and publishes outcome. If there is a dispute over the accuracy of the report or the process, the organisation may apply for an independent review of factual accuracy. The reviewer will review the audit file and make a recommendation. Post audit, if the standard is not met, an action plan is required to address the findings. Depending on the seriousness of the requirements not met, the auditor may: • accept the action plan and check its implementation at the next audit • request evidence of implementation of the action plan over an agreed time period after the audit is closed. This could involve an onsite visit to verify the evidence, and is treated as an audit with specific focus. Summary reports are published on the organisation’s page on the NZQA website. A detailed report is also prepared, but is for the organisation concerned and NZQA. Once the audit cycle decision is made, the organisation is notified by letter of the month and year of the next audit. The letter includes a record of the basis for the decision. If the organisation disagrees with the decision, it can apply for a formal review of the audit cycle. Managing audits is based on a risk management approach. Audit cycle decisions are made against a set of published audit cycle criteria to ensure consistency. 49 The length of cycle could be less than a year, one year, two years or three years. However, New Zealand is moving away from the audit model which focuses on compliance with the relevant standard, and taking a review approach to monitoring and continuous improvement. This new model is due for implementation in late 2009 and is based on the premise that the provider is responsible for their own quality assurance. The periodic external evaluation will focus on how the provider has conducted their self-evaluation and how they are ensuring their own compliance to the standards. The evaluation approach will be focused on outcomes and key contributing processes. 50 In Singapore, the WDA’s approach to continuous improvement review is documented in the Singapore Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) system and National Skills Recognition System (NSRS) Guide to continuous improvement review (2009). The guide notes that all training organisations are subject to audit during their registration period and that the focus is on: • internal quality assurance system • adult educator management system • outcome evaluation system • WSQ/NSRS related administrative system • viability of organisation • being free from breach of terms and conditions. Emphasis is placed on training organisations to demonstrate that they practice continuous improvement in ongoing delivery of training and assessment under WSQ and NSRS. Training organisations are to undertake a self-assessment and develop an action plan for gaps identified. This self-assessment and plan is submitted and provides the focus for the site visit which takes about half a day. If further action is required, then training organisations may need to submit an additional action plan. Training organisations are risk rated from A to E according to the strength of the quality management system and level of implementation by staff. 49 NZQA at www.nzqa.govt.nz 50 NZQA, 2008, p.5. Comparisons of international quality assurance in vocational education and training Page 41 of 115
Page 1 and 2: Attachment A Comparisons of Interna
Page 3 and 4: Acknowledgements The project team w
Page 5 and 6: Executive summary Project purposes
Page 7 and 8: Course and qualifications accredita
Page 9 and 10: Any comments related to the evaluat
Page 11 and 12: Context: what influences the nature
Page 13 and 14: Systems The characteristics of thes
Page 15 and 16: o quality improvement—linking the
Page 17 and 18: As well each of the countries has d
Page 19 and 20: Table 1: Context summary Constituti
Page 21 and 22: Although the German federal governm
Page 23 and 24: There has been a strong emphasis on
Page 25 and 26: A consultation paper has been relea
Page 27 and 28: Qualifications and competency units
Page 29 and 30: Regulatory monitoring and reporting
Page 31 and 32: • financials • protection of st
Page 33 and 34: For Singapore, approval criteria co
Page 35 and 36: In Ontario’s private career colle
Page 37 and 38: • competency standards and curric
Page 39: Development and Design. This criter
Page 43 and 44: The Regulatory monitoring and repor
Page 45 and 46: In Scotland, the emphasis on intern
Page 47 and 48: As this report was being prepared,
Page 49 and 50: For private providers in Ontario, t
Page 51 and 52: Implications A review of the variou
Page 53 and 54: small degree of state supplementati
Page 55 and 56: Leney Tom, May Tom, Hayward Geoff,
Page 57 and 58: Glossary ACE AMAP APEC APS AQF AQTF
Page 59 and 60: Appendix 1: The European Quality As
Page 61 and 62: Quality criteria Indicative descrip
Page 63 and 64: Indicator Type of indicator Policy
Page 65 and 66: Indicator Type of indicator Policy
Page 67 and 68: Training organisations • AQTF 200
Page 69 and 70: Appendix 3: Canada, Ontario Canada
Page 71 and 72: local college board of governors, m
Page 73 and 74: Quality assurance approach Ontario
Page 75 and 76: Ontario—private sector Overview A
Page 77 and 78: Or • have 48 months of occupation
Page 79 and 80: oad consultation. These replace key
Page 81 and 82: orders to colleges that are not con
Page 83 and 84: Comment Ontario participates in the
Page 85 and 86: ones: • The tasks of the Federal
Page 87 and 88: Overall, the system defines norms t
Page 89 and 90: drive the results, well-developed e
Page 91 and 92:
Appendix 5: New Zealand Overview Th
Page 93 and 94:
Key aspects of QAS1 include: Defini
Page 95 and 96:
National Qualifications Framework a
Page 97 and 98:
Institute for technology and polyte
Page 99 and 100:
Appendix 6: Singapore Overview In S
Page 101 and 102:
Quality assurance approach on a reg
Page 103 and 104:
Appendix 7: United Kingdom England,
Page 105 and 106:
• corporate governance • admini
Page 107 and 108:
These standards are regulatory. Qua
Page 109 and 110:
The website (which is relatively ne
Page 111 and 112:
egard to policy that this generates
Page 113 and 114:
training needs. It defines standard
Page 115:
changes to UK regulatory practice a
show all

Review - Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?