A Brief Introduction to Quality Assurance in Distance Education

The QA movement is closely associated with business practices. The jargon of QA involves terms such as consumers, service, products and efficiency. Traditionally tertiary education has often considered such an approach as inappropriate, but as a society's willingness to accept institutional assurances that “all is well” fails many universities have to re-think themselves in terms of a service industry accountable to their customers who ultimately pay the bills.

 Motivation 

"Why is the institution considering the development of a formal QA system?" Many institutions have prospered for decades and established a good reputation without consciously introducing such a system. However, the environment in which institutions are operating can be undergoing some dramatic changes affecting the well-being of the organisation and there are considerable advantages to be gained from having a formal system in place.

(i) Accreditation/accountability

Reflecting changing attitudes within societies many governments have been reviewing the operation of education institutions in terms of value-for-money. Unhappy with institutional assurances that all is well governments have introduced some form of external inspection based on the assumption that a QA system should exist. Institutions are expected to be able to demonstrate that the system has been established and is functioning effectively in improving quality. Future levels of external funding are often linked to the results of such inspections.

(ii) Competition

Education markets are opening up to greater competition from local and foreign institutions as well as private organisations. This is particularly the case where the customer-base has access to the Internet for which no legislative or geographic boundaries apply. In such an environment quality becomes a marketing advantage, but this requires the institution to be able to demonstrate that quality. A QA system provides the means to do this.

(iii) Economic

While existing practices may have inherent quality these may not always be the most efficient or effective methods. Financial pressures from traditional sources may force institutions to re-engineer their educational approaches to reduce costs whilst maintaining or improving the quality of service to students, etc. A QA system can provide means by which quality can be measured and different approaches compared.

 Recognising the different levels and meanings of quality 

Harvey and Green grouped quality into five different definitions:

• quality as exceptional

• quality as perfection or consistency

• quality as fitness for purpose

• quality as value for money

• quality as transformation

When someone talks about quality they do not necessarily include all five meanings and so it is important to be clear in investigating quality to be clear as to exactly what is meant.

"We are a high quality organisation producing quality cars!" is a statement that could as easily be made by Mercedes as by Suzuki. However, no-one would propose that the products involved are of the same quality of engineering. Both companies are targeting different customers with different expectations. While a Suzuki owner may aspire to own a Mercedes he/she can still consider his/her Suzuki car a quality purchase if it performs economically and with minimal maintenance. A Mercedes owner may consider his/her car of poor quality if the paintwork tarnishes after a year. The expectations are different and this is often, but not always, related to cost.

The same comparisons apply in education. Everyone has their list of “high quality” universities, but not everyone expects to attend them. For example:

• Failing to go to Oxford or MIT does not mean that someone's tertiary education gained elsewhere is not of high quality.

• Few distance education institutions can afford to create courses of the type produced by OUUK, but this does not mean that their teaching is of poor quality.

• The presence of internationally respected researchers does not necessarily equate to high quality teaching.

 Leadership 

Introducing a QA system usually challenges the status quo. Generally most staff are resistant to changes in the status quo especially when it comes to questioning their own performance. Even when staff acknowledge the need for something to be done about the quality of service provided by the institution to students, etc. they often have second thoughts about implementing any QA system when they realise the costs involved in terms of time and effort. While QA may identify ways in which savings could be made through efficiency, in general it requires allocation of further resources to implement associated procedures.

QA practices are not something that management require the rest of the organisation to introduce and implement. The introduction of formal QA systems rarely succeeds unless senior management

• show commitment - especially in the face of resistance amongst staff

• accept the need for additional resources

• lead by example

 Establishing a vision 

As mentioned above each organisation must identify in terms of quality the nature of the product that it intends to produce. This requires that it understands exactly what its targets are in terms of, amongst others:

• its source of students

• the type of staff employed

• the emphasis to be made on teaching and on research

• its financing

• its status within the local and international educational contexts.

Usually all of this will be encapsulated in the institution's mission statement. It is not sufficient for management to agree on this statement; all staff must be fully involved, must understand the implications of each element and must be committed to the realisation of the vision. Where appropriate each individual section of the institution should be encouraged to establish its own vision in terms of how it can help achieve the main mission.

This mission statement then becomes the start- and end-point of all discussions about quality. For example, there is no point in developing a high quality and hi-tech distance education course if the vision refers to presenting affordable courses to the poorer sections of the community who have little access to the technology.

 Developing your own approach 

In developing a formal QA system for the first time it may be tempting to search for one already in use by another, similar institution. This approach has certainly helped a number of institutions to a quick start. However, no two institutions are the same and the contexts within which they operate often differ dramatically. In addition, ownership by staff of any system is crucial and acceptance of an imported system can be difficult in the long term.

While learning from the approaches adopted by others can be helpful it is important that as part of the QA system the institution regularly undertake a complete review of what it has adopted in order to determine whether it is the best solution or needs adaptation to meet its needs.

The involvement of external experts in the development and evaluation of any QA system can be useful. In particular they may be used as a focal point for the institution in organising its own internal review and to act as a 'mirror' upon which the organisation can reflect on its progress.

 Acknowledging that quality exists 

The QA movement didn't create quality. It is important when applying QA principles in any institution to acknowledge that current practice already involves quality. If nothing else this acknowledges the efforts and professionalism of staff and of their work so far. In addition, identifying the existing quality characteristics provides a base-point against which to compare future performance.

 Indentifying stakeholders 

Fundamental to the QA approach is the customer or stakeholder. This refers to anyone who is affected by what happens in the process under consideration. For example, in considering the production of graduates it is not just the student who is a stakeholder, but also the future employer, government, other academic institutions, professional organisations and society in general that are affected by what a university produces as a graduate.

Ideally an institution will involve all stakeholders in evaluating the process and the product so as to learn their expectations and impressions of what is happening. However, the extent that stakeholders are involved may be influenced by the context within which the institution operates.

 Continuous improvement 

QA is not about setting a fixed target and establishing procedures to ensure that this target is met forever. It's about acknowledging that quality can always be improved and establishing procedures that ensure that staff are continuously questioning how processes are working with a view to making them better.

As progress is made new aspects may become apparent which require different approaches. As the context within which the institution operates changes what applied before may no longer be suitable. It is only through regular critical appraisal that the institution can identify the need for change.

The continuous nature of QA is perhaps its biggest problem. The need to comply with QA procedures on a regular basis is one of the main causes of ritualisation. Staff can become negative about the system seeing it as an ever-present burden. It may therefore be more effective if procedures were adjusted over time to reduce the level of interference in the normal routine and to increase the level of trust in the staff to individually ensure quality.

 Performance indicators 

There is a strong emphasis in QA on quantitative measures of quality. Statistics on pass rates, earning salaries of fresh graduates, staff-student ratios, etc. can quickly dominate the system. However, healthy statistics do not always guarantee a quality product or that all continues to be well within the system. It is important to use quantitative performance indicators with some scepticism especially where qualitative feedback suggests that problems might exist.