Exploring Options for Institutional Accreditation in Canadian Post-Secondary Education
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Exploring Options for Institutional Accreditation in Canadian Post-Secondary Education Stephanie A. Oldford School of Public Administration University of Victoria August 2006 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project would not have been possible without the support of the entire staff of the British Columbia Council on Admissions and Transfer. Their encouragement and assistance has been invaluable to me in all aspects of the work. In particular, I would like to thank Finola Finlay for shepherding me through the many challenges of producing this report, as well as for providing editing and comments. In addition, I am extremely grateful to Frank Gelin for providing me with an ideal balance of leadership and latitude in acting as my client for this project. I would also like to thank Paul Goyan for piquing my interest in quality assurance and accreditation issues, and giving me the initial opportunity to explore these interests in the context of my career. The guidance of my supervisor, Evert Linquist, assisted me in the gestation of my ideas, and I would like to thank him for his encouragement, support, and patience. The support and encouragement of my family has been constant throughout my education, and I am extremely grateful for that. Finally, I would like to honour my grandmother, Leone Hopfner, who has been a source of inspiration to me throughout my life. Please address correspondence and requests for materials to: Stephanie Oldford BCCAT 709-555 Seymour Street Vancouver, BC V6B 3H6 Email: [email protected] Exploring Options for Institutional Accreditation iii Exploring Options for Institutional Accreditation iv FOREWORD In the fall of 1995, I registered for first year arts at Okanagan University College in Kelowna. My ambitions had not yet solidified and I was without any real direction. A course in political ideologies caught my interest. That professor set me on the path that would lead me to complete my bachelor’s degree at OUC in politics, philosophy, and economics. In the fall of 1997, the campaign for OUC to become a full university was in full swing. I was confused by the campaign’s motives, as I did not understand what was missing from OUC to make it anything less than a university. I was debating philosophy with my peers in the quadrangle, spending long hours in the library with Supreme Court decisions, participating in martial arts clubs and other social activities – this was everything I had expected a university to be. I found nothing to be lacking, save the odd periodical collection in the library. My impressions of the quality of my undergraduate experience were reinforced when I arrived at graduate school at the University of Victoria in 2002. I found myself well prepared for the heavy workload of the Masters in Public Administration program. In 2003, I participated in an academic exchange that involved summer studies at Sciences-Po Lille in France. My classes on the policies of the European Union were held in a building with no air conditioning, a limited library, and no place to purchase a cold drink or a coffee. Although my French school had none of the qualities that I had come to associate with an institution of advanced study, I learned more about the politics and policies of the European Union in that month than I had dreamed possible. In undertaking this project, I have learned that what constitutes “quality” in post-secondary education is difficult to define. My own experiences, of which I have given a brief account in this preamble, would support this conclusion. I have come to understand an institution of higher education as not consisting of bricks, books, equipment, or facilities. Rather, the institution of higher education is a dynamic living thing. This project seeks to provide advice toward a system for assuring and publicly verifying the quality of Canadian post-secondary institutions. However, I am aware that it falls miles short of providing a definition of institutional quality. Defining quality in an institution is as challenging an endeavour as defining quality in an individual human being. Throughout my research, I was reminded of Socrates’ statement in Plato’s Apology that “it is the greatest good for a man to discuss virtue every day…for the unexamined life is not worth living for men.” In extending this principle to institutions of higher education, fostering a culture of self- examination within institutions is one of this reports’ conclusions. Perhaps through coaxing our institutions toward the examined life, the true nature of their virtues may become more apparent to us all. Exploring Options for Institutional Accreditation v Exploring Options for Institutional Accreditation vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Michael Skolnik (2005) describes the traditional paradigm of degree granting in Canada as one where: “the authority to deliver degree programs was stringently restricted by provincial legislatures to a limited number of provincially chartered and provincially funded universities.” In four provinces, this monopolistic era has ended. In Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, and New Brunswick the degree-granting market has opened to new institutional suppliers. These provinces have also established mechanisms to ensure the quality of the new providers’ programming. The emerging category of atypical degree-granting institutions includes public colleges, polytechnic institutes, and private post-secondary institutions. New providers are generally not able to become members of the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC). However, in Canada, “which does not have a national system of institutional accreditation … membership in the Association coupled with the appropriate provincial legislation is generally accepted in lieu of institutional accreditation.” (AUCC, 2005a) Applying this convention can result in new providers being deemed as non-accredited, calling into question the recognition and portability of their degrees and credentials, despite having successfully undergone provincially established quality assurance reviews. Some graduates of new providers’ degree programs are already facing the repercussions of these credential recognition issues. In one example, a graduate of a Bachelor’s program at a BC college was informed by four Ontario universities that he would “not be considered for entry to post-baccalaureate teacher education programs because his undergraduate degree was from a non- AUCC institution.” (BCCAT, 2006) The British Columbia Council on Admissions and Transfer (BCCAT) is engaging in efforts to increase the level of awareness of emerging credential recognition issues in Canada. A recently published BCCAT report suggests that a viable long-run solution “may be the development of regional and/or national accrediting agencies.” (BCCAT, 2006) This project takes this suggestion as its starting point, and sets out on an exploration to discover models of institutional accreditation that may provide for inter-provincial recognition of credentials, through ensuring and validating the quality of Canadian post-secondary institutions themselves. Its overarching goal is to recommend as to whether Canadian jurisdictions should consider a new quality assurance regime, and to provide potential new models to consider in that context. The following report begins with a detailed account of the traditional Canadian degree-granting paradigm. Then it explains how this paradigm is shifting under pressures such as massification, competition, and globalization, toward a more highly differentiated set of institutional typologies that quality assessment mechanisms are struggling, and in some cases refusing, to incorporate. This report identifies the source of credential recognition problems as the “patchwork” nature of Canada’s various and uncoordinated quality assurance mechanisms. To a lay person, such as a prospective student, plain explanations of which institutions are recognized for what and by whom are difficult to find. For educational professionals, these explanations are difficult to provide. In short, Canada lacks a consistent and comprehensive approach to quality assurance that: • includes a majority of institutional types offering programs at the degree level; • enjoys the trust and support of post-secondary education stakeholders and the public; and, • leads to an easily understood and recognizable statement of quality that students, parents and institutions can utilize in making comparative decisions of quality. Exploring Options for Institutional Accreditation vii Three methods of exploration form the basis of this report: the first a comparison of alternative approaches, the second an assessment of current methods, and the third an appraisal of current attitudes and perspectives among stakeholders. The initial comparison launches from a discussion of Van Vught and Westerheijden’s (1994) general model of quality assessment, which identifies common procedural and organizational elements among different models. These common elements then form the basis for a comparison of three modes of quality assurance: assessment, audit, and accreditation. Key international examples of each of these modes are presented and their comparative strengths and weaknesses are discussed. This review suggests that a combination of models can provide the optimal mix of evaluation of both programs and institutions. In addition, this review allows for the identification of key pre-conditions for an effective quality assurance model. • Support or “ownership” by faculty and academic administrators,