Quality Assurance Systems in Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

ENHANCEMENT OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SYSTEMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION IN APEC MEMBER ECONOMIES
Executive Summary
At the Third APEC Education Ministers Meeting in April 2004, Ministers stated that
‘economies need transparent, accountable, regulatory, accreditation and quality assurance
systems’. Because of this national need, in all economies governments have a major role in
quality assurance, but the precise role and the level of involvement vary between economies
and over time.
However, there have been radical changes in higher education over the last 20 years that
have required consequential changes to the approaches to regulation and quality. Massive
increases in student numbers, total cost of higher education, the cross-border mobility of
students and graduates, and the cross-border mobility of education have all combined to
force the changes.
Economies have responded to these changes in many different ways and consequently, the
QA processes of the APEC region have many variations mainly to serve the unique national
contexts. In many economies modes of quality assurance are exercised by both the traditional
government bodies such as ministries and funding councils, and by a new crop of quality
assurance agencies.
Professional accreditation is also well established in areas such as medicine, nursing, law,
engineering and accounting. Considering the role of government and professional councils as
given, this survey intentionally gives more emphasis to the newer and emerging quality
assurance developments beyond the ministries and professional councils. A light attention to
the role of governments and professional councils does not mean that their roles have not
been considered. It only means that they have well established systems in place for achieving
what they intend to do. It is the emerging QA systems that need to look for practices and
successful models elsewhere. This report addresses those needs.
Diversities and Commonalities
The establishment, ownership, legal basis, governance, funding and the level of
independence of the QA agency vary among the economies. Correspondingly, the scope and
objectives of the agency and the characteristics of its Quality Assurance Framework differ.
Variations are seen in aspects such as:
Unit of Quality Assurance: Institution vs Programs
Nature of the QA Process: Mandatory vs Voluntary
Aspects considered for QA
Role of Institutions in Constituting the Review Team
Role of Agency Staff in On-site Visit
Disclosure of QA Outcomes
Implications of QA Outcome
Appeals Mechanism
Post-QA Follow-up
At the same time, whatever their approach to quality assurance in terms of the aspects listed
above, the quality assurance systems of the APEC region have the following common critical
core elements:
1. Review based on pre-determined criteria;
2. QA process based on a combination of self-assessment and external peer review; and
3. Final decision by the quality assurance agency.
ix