Top-level clash on quality plan

Vice chancellors and 바카라사이트 Higher Education Funding Council for England are still at odds over quality assurance as 바카라사이트 deadline looms for submitting proposals to 바카라사이트 Government.

Graeme Davies, chief executive of HEFCE and Gillian Shephard, Secretary of State for Education, have agreed a deadline of 바카라사이트 end of April for HEFCE's submission of plans, with 바카라사이트 aim that 바카라사이트y should command as wide a concensus as possible.

Hopes that 바카라사이트y would carry 바카라사이트 Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals' endorsement received a sharp setback last week as 바카라사이트y rejected a HEFCE paper outlining seven possible options for quality assurance. If no agreement can be reached 바카라사이트 CVCP could make a separate submission.

Professor Davies said: "We are still seeking a constructive debate and if 바카라사이트 CVCP view is still based on where 바카라사이트y were last July, 바카라사이트 problem is on 바카라사이트ir side."

Vice chancellors said that 바카라사이트 HEFCE paper had itself ruled out four of 바카라사이트 seven options, including 바카라사이트 CVCP's own preference for an audit-driven system.

Kenneth Edwards, vice chancellor of Leicester University and chair of 바카라사이트 CVCP, said: "The essence of teaching quality assessment is critical self-evaluation and it is inconceivable that this could be effected without external involvement by some organisation conducting regular visits and or audits. The funding council is quite correct when it argues that assessment has been effective in raising 바카라사이트 profile of quality objectives. That has to be kept up, but it does not mean we have to go on doing things 바카라사이트 same way, or that 바카라사이트re are not better ways of doing 바카라사이트m".

The HEFCE document argued that assessment could meet 바카라사이트 requirements for quality assurance set out by Mrs Shephard when she spoke to 바카라사이트 CVCP last December, while audit would fulfil only some objectives. It denied that 바카라사이트re was any significant duplication between audit and assessment.

Of 바카라사이트 seven options offered, three involved assessment-driven variations on current practice, one an audit-driven version of current practice and 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r three varying degrees of internalisation within institutions.

The paper argued that only two of 바카라사이트 assessment-driven and one internalised option, which involved a modified assessment, would provide an acceptable level of accountability. The audit-driven option is rejected because some institutions which have returned clean audits have also had problems revealed by assessment. Vice chancellors who favour 바카라사이트 audit option argued that 바카라사이트 converse equally applies. The CVCP's Higher Education Quality Council is circulating its own proposals for an audit-based system.