The keys to advancing Quality Assurance are to, first, strike a balance between Internal/External and Improvement/Accountability emphases; second, recognize the value of various Quality Assurance approaches, for different purposes; and, third, acknowledge the trade-offs and tensions inherent in various approaches. The changes implied by Quality Assurance must start at the local level, i.e., individual courses and programs of study such as Engineering Education. The task of documenting such changes and, thereby, recognizing the impact of Quality Assurance policies and practices (Accreditation and Evaluation or Assessment) makes it necessary to use different metrics at different levels of a higher education institution. This is where the value of the conceptual framework described in this chapter can be seen, since it acknowledges a wide range of Quality Assurance approaches, thus providing a means of engaging all stakeholders in a constructive way about how to define quality, how to document it, and how to make needed improvements.
[1]
P. Ewell.
Chapter 3: To Capture the Ineffable: New Forms of Assessment in Higher Education
,
1991
.
[2]
P. Ewell.
To Capture the Ineffable: New Forms of Assessment in Higher Education
,
1991
.
[3]
Marguerite Clarke,et al.
The Impact of Higher Education Rankings on Student Access, Choice, and Opportunity
,
2007
.
[4]
Peter J. Gray.
Viewing Assessment as an Innovation: Leadership and the Change Process
,
2009
.
[5]
A. Hoecht.
Quality Assurance in UK Higher Education: Issues of Trust, Control, Professional Autonomy and Accountability
,
2006
.
[6]
Patrick T. Terenzini,et al.
Assessment with Open Eyes: Pitfalls in Studying Student Outcomes.
,
1989
.
[7]
K. Arrow.
Higher education as a filter
,
1973
.