Analysis of internal/external accreditation of DL … · Analysis of internal/external...

Analysis of internal/external accreditation of DL study programs in HE

(Report 1.2)

Suzana Loskoska, , Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, FYRM Viktorija Sulčič, University Primorska, Slovenia Danijela Milošević, University of Kragujevac, Serbia Radojka Krneta , University of Kragujevac, Serbia Ramo Šendelj, University Mediterranean, Montenegro Ivana Ognjanović, University Mediterranean, Montenegro Laura Fedeli, University of Macerata, Italy

2011

Table of contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1 1. Accreditation of DL study programs in particular countries: procedures, standards,

recommendations ............................................................................................................................. 2 Italy .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 The United Kingdom ........................................................................................................................................ 4 Norway ............................................................................................................................................................ 6 Netherlands ..................................................................................................................................................... 6 Canada ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 The United States of America .......................................................................................................................... 8 Malaysia .......................................................................................................................................................... 9 Australia ......................................................................................................................................................... 10

2. International Accreditation agencies ............................................................................................. 12 3. University internal regulations and recommendations for DL studies ...................................... 14

University of Macerata (Italy) ......................................................................................................................... 14 The Open University (OU) ............................................................................................................................. 15 University of Huddersfield (UK) ...................................................................................................................... 16 University of Wales Institute, Cardiff .............................................................................................................. 18

Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 22 References ........................................................................................................................................... 23 Appendix .............................................................................................................................................. 25

Appendix Telematic Universities .................................................................................................................... 25 Appendix QAA QAA Guidelines on the quality assurance of distance learning - March 1999 ....................... 28 Appendix ODL QC ......................................................................................................................................... 31 Appendix NADE ............................................................................................................................................. 36

Analysis of internal/external accreditation of DL study programs in HE

Introduction Accreditation is a process of recognizing that an institution conforms to certain established quality standards. During the accreditation process special accrediting body judge the applicant institutions in all general areas: curricula, staff, facilities, equipment and supplies, financial and administrative capability, students support, tuition and fees in relation to scholarly objectives, tuition and fees in relation to credit received, students accomplishment and complaints, and various other organizational processes. Accreditation usually runs in periodic cycle. International Accreditation Organization IAO [IAO, 2011] defined accreditation as the act of granting credit or recognition with respect to educational institutions that maintain suitable standards of education. According to IAO, accreditation is a system used to determine if institutions of higher education meet acceptable levels of educational quality. UNESCO anticipates that higher education institution has to provide the same quality standard for on campus and for distance delivering study programmes [UNESCO, 2005]. For a long time the distance education has not been recognized by the major accreditation agencies and therefore has been looked down upon by the traditional education establishment. Besides institutional accreditation that is focused on an institutional characteristics there are specialized accrediting bodies they pay special attention on a particular program within an institution of higher education. The comparison of different national accreditation and their approach to DL studies is presented in the chapters bellow. The international accreditation bodies are presented, as well. Besides, document contain several institutional regulations or recommendations for delivering and implementing DL studies.

2 Page

1. Accreditation of DL study programs in particular countries: procedures, standards, recommendations

Italy In Italy the system of accreditation of university degree programmes started in 2001. The procedures for the accreditation of degree programmes have been agreed upon by a technical team made up by The National committee for the evaluation of the university system (CNVSU), The Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR), The Conference of the Italian University Rectors (CRUI) and The National University Council (CUN). The procedure for the approval of university degree programmes is articulated in the 4 stages outlined here below [CIMEA, 2003]. Stage 1 - Drawing up of university teaching regulations (RDA)

Individual institutions lay down the rules for the teaching organization of their degree courses in the so-called Regolamenti Didattici di Ateneo (RDAs).

Stage 2 - Teaching regulations of degree programmes (RDC) The teaching regulations of each degree programme (Regolamento Didattico di Corso di studio-RDC) are determined by the competent teaching structure in compliance to the RDA as well as in the respect of teaching freedom and of teachers’ and students’ rights and duties. Individual RDCs define the organizational elements of the respective degree programmes.

Stage 3 - Consultations and approvals The proposal for the setting up of a new programme must be accompanied by the motivated opinions of a few advisory bodies: - University evaluation unit. The Unit gives its opinion on available resources and their

congruency with the objectives of the programme. - Regional coordinating committee (CRC). The CRC is made up of the rectors of the

universities located in the same Region, the president of the regional council and a representative of the students.

- Employers. Also the employers’ advice is compulsory. The consultation is meant to check the congruency of the educational proposals with the economic needs of the regional territory and the occupational opportunities that may be realistically offered to future graduates.

- National university council (CUN). CUN has to check the proposals with reference to the correspondence between the curricular content determined as compulsory by the decrees that have approved the various degree classes and the teaching activities provided for by the RDA.

- MIUR. Eventually, the service for university autonomy and students’ affairs of the Ministry of Education examines the proposals submitted by individual universities, checks their procedural correctness, the set of compulsory advisory opinions, and issues the decrees approving the respective university teaching regulations.

Stage 4 - Approval of RDAs Once completed the above process of consultations and control, the rectors of individual institutions approve by their own decrees the respective university teaching regulations; the RDAs are the internal legal bases allowing to actually start new degree programmes.

Other forms of accreditation in relation both to institutions and programmes do exist: 1. Degree programmes in engineering. The Council of the Presidents of the Italian Faculties

of Engineering has elaborated the SINAI (National system of evaluation and accreditation of degree programmes in engineering).

2. Master programmes in Business Administration. The accrediting agency is an independent association, ASFOR (Association for business management training). The chief objective of its accrediting process and of the granting of the label "accredited by ASFOR" is to clearly differentiate those Master programmes which satisfy a significant set of requirements -to be evaluated globally- from the thousands and thousands of programmes offered under the "Masters" denomination.

3. Accreditation of non-State institutions of higher education. In Italy, e-Learning in public higher education is not directly managed by government or any central administration body except for MIUR and CRUI foundation [eLene, 2011]. As far as e-Learning, MIUR’s tasks are:

- give guidelines; - accreditation of University Distance Courses by different providers; - promote European Lisbon Strategy and ICT innovation in education; - provide funds for strategic projects

CRUI Foundation is the managerial and executive branch of MIUR. As far as e-Learning in Higher Education, CRUI Foundation was manager of Campus One Project. The role of central government in regards to e-Learning is defined by establishing the norms and regulations of the sector and initiatives in each institutional body; it also seeks to provide initiatives for adoption of instruments and approaches necessary for online teaching. Decree 17.04.2003 on Telematic Universities (jointly established by Ministry of Education, Universities, and Research and the Ministry for Innovation and Technologies) set accreditation criteria and procedures for distance education courses at universities and private institutions (Appendix Telematic Universities).

“Università Telematiche”. What are they? Along with online courses provided in traditional universities distance learning is also offered by the so called “Università Telematiche”. They were born in Italy after the approval of the ministerial decree of April, 17 2003, they are higher education institutions that are able to release university degrees and post lauream certifications (PhD) that are fully recognized by the law (Italy, financial law, 2003) and run online with innovative technologies. There is a number of “Università Telematiche”, based in Rome, Milan, Florence, Naples, Benevento, Chieti, Novedrate. Students can follow all the courses online but they are obliged to give their exams in presence. Professor and researchers are hired in the same modalities as traditional universities.

4 Page

The United Kingdom There are several government bodies that are responsible for the accreditation of Higher Educational Institutions in the United Kingdom. Different bodies provide accreditation for different type of institutions, like:

• Universities and publicly funded Higher Educational Institutions

• Private Sector Colleges

• Distance Learning Colleges

• Professional Institutions and Associations University Accreditation Universities in the UK are created in the following ways:

• by Royal Charter – on the Recommendation of the Privy Council

• by an Act of Parliament – on the recommendation of the Privy Council

• by Registration as a Company Limited by Guarantee (a non profit organisation) – which is approved by the Privy Council

• by Registration as a Private or Public Limited Company with Share Capital (a profit making organisation) – which is approved by the Privy Council.

Whichever way that a university is created, the overall regulatory and accreditation function is the responsibility of the Privy Council [PRIVY, 2011]. There are many other publicly funded higher educational colleges and institutions that are regulated by the Privy Council. They may not have degree awarding powers, but they can establish a partnership arrangement with a UK university to deliver courses that will lead to degree(s) awarded by the partner UK university. The main Government Recognized Private Sector Accreditation bodies in the United Kingdom are:

• British Accreditation Council (BAC)

• Accreditation Service for International Colleges (ASIC)

• British Council (for English Language Courses) A university or other public sector institutions can seek accreditation from these bodies. For example, both private and publicly funded colleges and universities may decide to apply to the British Council to accredit all or some of their English language courses. The Government Recognised Distance Learning Accreditation body in the United Kingdom is The Open and Distance Learning Quality Council (ODLQC). It is not necessary for UK universities to be accredited by the ODLQC before they offer distance learning courses. They can simply apply to the Privy Council to seek a variation of their status to be able to deliver distance learning programmes. Once approved, they are able to conduct courses by distance learning.

Open & Distance Learning Quality Council (ODL QC) ODL QC is the UK guardian of quality in open and distance learning [ODLQC, 2011]. Set up originally by government in 1968, we are now independent. Accreditation is open to all providers of home study, distance learning, online or e-learning and other open learning or flexible learning courses. To achieve accreditation, each institution must show that it meet their standards. Accreditation states that a provider meets ODL QC Standards. To achieve accreditation, a provider must submit to regular assessment by ODL QC, and show that the education or training offered meets

those Standards. Once achieved, accreditation offers proof of quality, reassuring the learner, and bestowing marketing advantage and other benefits on the provider. Accredited providers pay an annual fee linked to turnover, and can use the ODL QC Quality Mark to show their achievement. Any well-run, ethical organisation is capable of meeting the Standards. If problems arise, the Council works with the provider to help them reach the standard required.

ODL QC Standards ODL QC Standards guarantee quality in all open or distance learning, including home study, correspondence courses, e-learning, blended and work-based learning. New Standards (Appendix ODL QC), were released in December 2005 and came into force on 1st April 2006. The Standards are subdivided into six sections

1. Outcomes 2. Resources 3. Support 4. Selling 5. Providers 6. Collaborative Provision

These standards apply to any ODL provision, though their implementation may differ from case to case. Some standards represent best practice; failure to meet them may not necessarily debar a provider from accreditation but will highlight an area needing improvement for continuing accreditation.

UK Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) In 1997, the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) [QAA, 2011] was established to provide an integrated quality assurance service for higher education in the UK. The QAA is not a governmental organization. As part of its development of a comprehensive quality assurance process for higher education, the QAA has produced a Code of Practice for Quality Assurance in Higher Education. in the form of a series of self-contained sections covering the management of quality and standards in all teaching and learning activities. In one of these the agency has developed guidelines on the quality assurance of distance learning (Appendix QAA). The guidelines, in their current form have the status of a section of the Code of Practice, but it is expected to be reviewed and become the basis for a code of practice for distance learning which will be incorporated into the wider QAA Code.

Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) [JISC, 2011] councils of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The mission of JISC is to provide leadership in the innovative use of ICT to support education and research. JISC funds a range of programmes, services and activities that promote and support the use of e-learning. The majority of JISC’s endeavors aim to identify how e-learning can benefit learners, practitioners and educational institutions, and to offer advice on its implementation.

The Higher Education Academy (HEA) The Higher Education Academy (HEA) [HEA, 2011] is a membership organization owned by Universities. Its mission is to help institutions, groups of disciplines and all staff to provide the best possible learning experience for their students. Together with JISC, HEA is currently benchmarking e-learning exercises with 27 universities within the UK. Three different benchmarking models are being tested.

6 Page

Norway Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education NOKUT [NOKUT, 2011] was established in 2002. NOKUT is a public agency and reports administratively to the Ministry of Research and Education. The primary responsibilities of NOKUT are: the evaluation, accreditation and recognition of programmes, institutions and quality systems and the recognition of foreign qualifications. NOKUT foresees a convergence between different forms of learning (i.e. distance, net-based, net supported and campus-based education). Several organizations are involved in the distance learning programmes accreditation and quality assurance in Norway. Norway Opening Universities (NOU) (www.norgesuniversitetet.no) is a national agency that promotes flexible and lifelong learning in higher education. The agency has not formulated quality criteria for e-learning, but has studied issues ranging from technical infrastructure to widening participation in several reports. The Norwegian Association for Distance Education (NADE) (www.nade-nff.no) is an organisation for institutions involved in e-learning and distance education. NADE published quality standards for distance education in 1993, with revisions in 1996 and 2001 (Appendix NADE). NADE’s criteria are divided into prerequisites, implementation, results and follow-up. These phases are further divided into: information and counselling, course development, education and organisation. The Norwegian Networked University (NVU) (www.nvu.no) is a cooperation project that includes six universities and colleges that focus on flexible learning. NVU has formulated internal quality criteria for e-learning. Like the NADE criteria, they are divided into prerequisites, implementation and evaluation. Target groups are administrators, course managers and course participants. The project comprises a checklist, advice and benchmarks for all three categories. (http://www.nvu.no/faggrupper/engelsk/main/)

The Norwegian Association for Distance Education - Quality Standards http://www.nettskolen.nki.no/forskning/18/kvalen1.htm

By the Norwegian Adult Education Act from 1 January 1993, the responsibility for assuring the quality of learning material, education and the practical execution of the instruction has been delegated to the individual accredited distance education institutions. NADE has been requested by the ministry to prepare guidelines for quality standards in distance education.

Netherlands The Accreditation Organisation of the Netherlands and Flanders (NVAO) (http://www.nvao.net) ensures the quality of higher education in the Netherlands and Flanders by assessing and accrediting programmes. NVAO's accreditation procedure consists of three consecutive steps: the self evaluation, the external assessment and the accreditation [4]. The first step in the accreditation procedure is the self evaluation. The institution and/or the programme is responsible for carrying out a self-evaluation of the programme(s) concerned. This process is concluded with a self-evaluation report which is sent to a quality assessment agency. The second step in the accreditation procedure is the external assessment. An assessment panel is responsible for the external assessment of the programme. The assessment panel assesses the quality of the self-evaluation (including the methodology used to realise it) and whether the programme fulfils the criteria of the NVAO's assessment framework. NVAO has been involved in the EADTU project E-xcellence, but is in general not concerned with quality in e-learning. The organisation states that its accreditation framework is capable of accommodating e-learning.

Canada There is no national system of educational quality assurance in Canada. Neither is there any national accrediting body to evaluate the quality of degree programmes, although a number of agencies and professional bodies perform this function for professional programmes at both undergraduate and graduate levels at some institutions. In the absence of a national accrediting body, university membership in the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) [AUCC, 2011] is generally taken as evidence that an institution is providing university-level programmes of acceptable standards. Degree programmes at university colleges, colleges, and institutes are subject to internal quality assurance processes similar to processes used for university programmes. Regarding DL study programs, for example, Ministry of Education, British Columbia, declared that the Vision for DL is to create a quality, dynamic and engaging learning environment that all students in the province can access. Instruction through e-learning methodologies offers possibilities for sophisticated, interactive, and engaging learning options that address the ideals for a BC Graduate, and shifts the classroom and learning beyond brick walls and fixed schedules. There is no specific procedure or requirements for accreditation of DL courses. The Degree Program Review Criteria and Guidelines [MAEBC, 2008] which was established and published by the Minister of Advanced Education in November 2006 contains outlines the requirements for submitting a proposal for a new degree program whether it is DL or not. One of the tasks for accreditation is Learning Methodologies/Program Delivery where the institution should demonstrate that it has the expertise and resources to support the proposed method of delivery and ensure its effectiveness. Criteria that will be used in assessing learning methodologies/program delivery:

• The delivery method(s) and quality assurance policies are appropriate to course content, the students involved and the proposed learning outcomes.

• Evidence that the institution has the expertise and resources to support the proposed method of delivery (both human and material that support the program and its students and provides processes for students’ feedback); and ensures its effectiveness or demonstrates a viable plan to put the necessary expertise and resources in place.

In this task learning methodology/methodologies to be used should be explained, i.e. there should be indicated which of the following methodologies will be incorporated into the learning environment of the new degree program, and how they will be used: Experiential learning, Distance education, Independent study, computer assisted instruction, etc., Lectures, labs, tutorials; and, Other. Also, Ministry of Education in British Columbia established the document named Standards for K-12 Distributed Learning in British Columbia, [DLBC, 2010] which contains standards intended to support educators in achieving visions and ideals for students taking some, or all, of their learning online. A second document, Standards for Digital Learning Content in British Columbia, [DCBC, 2010] provides detail on the attributes and use of digital learning content. The topics addressed by these two documents are:

1. Management of Learning: Course topics, goals, timelines, and expectations regarding assignments are communicated to students; Instruction to students about participation in activities etc

2. Fostering Social Learning: A sense of belonging and community for students is fostered, Student expression in online discussion is supported and builds a sense of collaboration.

3. Stimulating Cognitive Processes 4. Planning for Learning: A shared vision for distributed learning and e-learning is created.

Administration process, budget, and staffing are sufficient to support e-learning.

8 Page

5. Supporting Instruction and Learning: All teachers are qualified and trained, and instructional support is provided for staff. Staff are assisted in the creation of processes and content that foster student engagement.

6. Communicating About Learning: Structures that foster collaboration in an e-learning environment are created.

The United States of America The U.S. Department of Education does not accredit educational institutions and/or programs. However, the Secretary of Education is required by law to publish a list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies that the Secretary determines to be reliable authorities as to the quality of education or training provided by the institutions of higher education and the higher education programs they accredit. Accrediting agencies, which are private educational associations of regional or national scope, develop evaluation criteria and conduct peer evaluations to assess whether or not those criteria are met. Institutions and/or programs that request an agency's evaluation and that meet an agency's criteria are then "accredited" by that agency. The Accrediting Procedure consists of the following steps:

1. Standards: The accrediting agency, in collaboration with educational institutions, establishes standards.

2. Self-study: The institution or program seeking accreditation prepares an in-depth self-evaluation study that measures its performance against the standards established by the accrediting agency.

3. On-site Evaluation: A team selected by the accrediting agency visits the institution or program to determine first-hand if the applicant meets the established standards.

4. Publication: Upon being satisfied that the applicant meets its standards, the accrediting agency grants accreditation or pre accreditation status and lists the institution or program in an official publication with other similarly accredited or pre accredited institutions or programs.

5. Monitoring: The accrediting agency monitors each accredited institution or program throughout the period of accreditation granted to verify that it continues to meet the agency's standards.

6. Reevaluation: The accrediting agency periodically reevaluates each institution or program that it lists to ascertain whether continuation of its accredited or pre accredited status is warranted.

Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) is a private non-profit national organization that coordinates accreditation activities in the U.S. In 2002 CHEA published the paper Accreditation and assuring quality in distance learning [CHEA, 2002]. The paper identifies seven key areas which are routinely reviewed in distance education:

• Institutional mission

• Institutional organization structure

• Institutional resources

• Curriculum and instruction

• Faculty support

• Student support

• Student learning outcomes The paper also discusses the key areas in the context of three major challenges for quality assurance of distance education:

• Alternative design of instruction. Particular weight is given to this challenge in the following areas: curriculum and instruction, faculty support, student support and student learning outcomes. The accreditation relies on a cadre of academics specializing in alternative design both for site visits and the development of standards.

• Alternative providers of higher education. The focus here is on all seven key areas. Single mode providers with no physical facilities are scrutinized for instance for virtual equivalents to different student services.

• Expanded focus on training. Should the scope of accreditation be further expanded to include assuring the quality of independent and discrete learning activities?

Distance Education and Training Council (DETC) The Distance Education and Training Council (DETC) was founded in 1926 to promote sound educational standards and ethical business practices within correspondence education. It is a nationally recognized accrediting agency in the US. The council has produced a handbook for accreditation of distance education institutions including secondary, post-secondary and degree-granting education [DETC, 2011]. The standards are divided into 12 topical areas. The standards have a clear focus on widening participation, and emphasize the need to meet the individual differences of students with different backgrounds.

Malaysia The Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) [MQA 2011] has the main role of implementing the Malaysian Qualifications Framework (MQF) as a basis for quality assurance of higher education and as the reference point for the criteria and standards for national qualifications. The MQA is responsible for monitoring and overseeing the quality assurance practices and accreditation of national higher education. The main document referred for accreditation is Code Of Practice for Programme Accreditation (COPPA), available from the MQA website. COPPA is intended to be useful guides for providers of higher education, quality assurance auditors, officers of the MQA, policy makers, professional bodies and other stakeholders engaged in higher education. COPPA contains an overview of the Malaysian quality assurance system and guide the reader on the nine evaluation areas for quality assurance as well as the two levels of standards – benchmarked and enhanced standards – that underline them. In addition, the Code provides guidance to MQA panel of assessors on the assessment process for Programme Accreditation [MQA 2011]. Since all academic programmes in Malaysia shall be in line with the Malaysian Qualifications Framework's requirements, thus all academic programmes (ODL or conventional) are measured using the same performance indicators (PI)/criteria standards (Please refer to our Code of Practice for Programme Accreditation). The PIs/Standards were structured using 9 areas i.e: Area 1: Vision, Mission, Educational Goals and Learning Outcomes; Area 2: Curriculum Design and Delivery; Area 3: Assessment of Students; Area 4: Student Selection and Support Services;

10 Page

Area 5: Academic Staff; Area 6: Educational Resources; Area 7: Programme Monitoring and Review; Area 8: Leadership, Governance and Administration; and Area 9: Continual Quality Improvement. COPPA mentions distance learning only as Method of delivery, but had produced a guideline on distance learning in 2000, and revised version of GUIDELINES TO GOOD PRACTICES FOR OPEN AND DISTANCE LEARNING (GGP-ODL) in September, 2011. and available from MQA website. The GGP:ODL document is intended to serve as a guideline for Open and Distance Learning (ODL) providers to prepare their programme for accreditation audit purposes by further explaining 9 areas and how they should be made for DL. MQA intends to make the GGP to be open, wide and as inclusive as possible, thus, the GGP:ODL will only serve as a general guideline. In other word, there will be no specific quantitative requirements such as the minimum number of actual classes conducted, number of programme moderator and so forth. This to ensure the ODL provider to proactively acquire the relevant knowledge and skills in planning, developing and implementing its ODL programme(s) before embarking to ODL business. The GGP:ODL guidelines serve many parties namely dedicated ODL institutions, dual mode HEPs offering both face-to-face and distance learning programmes, faculty /departments / units offering individual distance learning courses and individual faculty members independently offering distance learning courses. These guidelines are developed with the collaboration of stakeholders.

Australia Quality assurance in Australia’s higher education system is based on a strong partnership between the Australian Government, state and territory governments and the higher education sector. The following are the principal elements of the quality assurance framework for higher education. The Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) (www.auqa.edu.au) conducts quality assurance audits of higher education institutions. The focus of these audits includes teaching, learning, research and management. AUQA also conducts quality assurance audits of state and territory higher education accreditation authorities. There is no specific entry for e-learning but the entry for IT and library includes good examples of learning management systems and e-library. ACODE, the Australasian Council on Open, Distance and E-Learning (http://www.acode.edu.au/) is the peak Australasian organisation for universities engaged or interested in open, distance, flexible and e-learning. ACODE's mission is to enhance policy and practice in open, distance, flexible and e-learning in Australasian higher education. ACODE is an Associate Member of the International Council for Open and Distance Education (ICDE). ACODE seeks to influence policy and practice at institutional, national and international levels through:

1. disseminating and sharing knowledge and expertise 2. supporting professional development and providing networking opportunities 3. investigating, developing and evaluating new approaches 4. advising and influencing key bodies in higher education 5. promoting best practice.

ACODE's document "Benchmarks for the use of technology in learning and teaching in universities" (Appendix ACODE) provides eight benchmarks for assessment, with several performance indicators, measured using five different grade scales. The method was developed as a self-assessment guideline or as a collaborative benchmarking exercise in order to support the continuous quality improvement process. The ACODE approach focuses on the following benchmarks :

• Institution policy and governance for technology supported learning and teaching.

• Planning for, and quality improvement of, the integration of technologies for learning and teaching.

• Information technology infrastructure to support learning and teaching. • Pedagogical application of information and communication technology. • Professional/staff development for the effective use of technologies for learning and teaching • Staff support for the use of technologies for learning and teaching. • Student training for the effective use of technologies for learning. • Student support for the use of technologies for learning.

12 Page

2. International Accreditation agencies

There are different, so called “international accreditation organizations/agencies” but very often they work more on consultative level than as a real accreditation agencies. An example of a consultative organization is International Council for open and Distance Education (ICDE), founded in 1938 in Canada. ICDE has members from over 50 countries worldwide and it is in formal consultative relations with UNESCO (ICDE 2010, 6). From 1988 ICDE’s permanent basis is in Norway. ICDE’s key activities are the organization of conferences and meetings. Since 1999, ICDE has sought to recognize outstanding achievement in open and distance education through the Prize of Excellence award. By Prize of Excellence institutions and individuals are awarded. In USA, International Education Accreditation Authority (IEAA) works mainly in USA and it is in charge for national and regional accreditation. IAO – International Accreditation Organization (http://www.iao.org) is an internationally recognized and independent accreditation body, presented worldwide (USA, Germany, Malaysia, Bahrain, Oman, Egypt, Abu Dhabi, Singapore, Dubai, Kuwait, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, India, Philippines, and Italy). IAO collaborate with regional/national bodies that are in charge to take care of the quality assurance in particular countries. IAO offers accreditation for traditional institutions that offering full-time, campus-based education and for non-traditional educational institution that offer an online/distance learning/mobile/PDA technology supported study, as well. IAO use so called Points Profile System metrics (IAO), where certain points are assigned to every answer submitted in the application form, which are then rated to calculate a final score to each category. The Points Profile System is designed to detect strengths and weakness to match the international standards. The final matrix gives the overall picture of an institution’s quality and standards and also recommends the changes to improve on each dimension:

● Organizational Management

1. Operational status – the period of time that the applicant institution has been in existence

2. Mission/ Vision

3. Governing board/ Management Team

4. Institution Structuring

5. Policies and Public Information

6. Research & Scholarship

7. Campus/ Online area/ Medium

8. Financial resource and management

9. Administrative resource management

10. HR management

11. Marketing

12. Campuses/ Partner Institutions

● Academic Management

1. Academic Programs (secondary/ UG/ PG) or taught degrees and research degrees)

2. Schools/ Field of Studies

3. Curriculum

4. Admissions

5. Flexibility

6. Faculty

● Institutional Performance

1. Alumni Performance

2. Measure of students success

3. Standards Certifications

The IAO accreditation process goes on four steps:

1. step: Orientation – provide an overview on the core requirements of accreditation and its complete procedure and can be done through the Internet or over the phone.

2. step: Application Forms and Affidavit – the institutions submit their details (structure, functions and other key factors allowing evaluation) through an application form. After that the institution is required to fill and submit a detailed application form that covers details, like institution's mission, the programs offers, information about faculty etc.

3. step: Candidacy Status – the institution is evaluated based on IAO profiling system. The IAO will award institutions with an accreditation Candidacy and provide the unique points profile.

4. step: Towards full Accreditation – IAO evaluate educational system for full accreditation through physical location and/or online education provision system, through student involvement and through the IAO's proprietary variable.

Another interesting international organization is CDEA – Committee for Distance Education Accreditation, listed in the UNESCO Higher Education Institutions Registry (HEIR). CDEA works on standards and services related to Open and Distance Learning. CDEA does not audit academic standards of courses or qualifications, since there exists no agreed international standards for qualifications, curriculum and academic content. Academic elements are regulated by country or region to assure that institutions are operating within the overall national and/or state legislation and guidelines which are applicable. CDEA accreditation is valid for 3 years. CDEA accreditation measures:

• quality and standards of services

• responsibility and reliability of delivery of services.

CDEA accreditation audit process includes an assessment of:

● recruitment policies and methods, marketing, publicity and promotion

● counseling services, printed materials and online content

● admission process, fee payments, contractual arrangements

● student support, computer based training delivery methods

● integration and maintenance of systems and services, record keeping, and archiving

● commitment to high quality educational values, customer service and business practices.

Under the laws and statutes of the Republic of the Philippines, an International Distance Education League (IDEAL), an international nonprofit non-stock corporation, was established. The IDEAL corporate governance structure at founding is comprised of representatives from international distance learning universities and colleges, cross-border institutions, training organizations, and educational supportive agencies, businesses, and non-governmental agencies. IDEAL has established accreditation standards that are focused on faculty, library resources and learning materials, instructional methods and learning environments and on quality assurance structures (IDEAL 2010, 8–9).

14 Page

3. University internal regulations and recommendations for DL studies

University of Macerata (Italy) Distance learning at University of Macerata is supported by CIEM (CAIM + CELFI), the e-learning, multimediality and computer science centre of services. From 2005 CELFI is the institute that is in charge of providing the necessary resources (human and technical) in the process of:

1. implementation of the learning management system; 2. online tutors training; 3. teachers’ support for technical issues (LMS, video making etc.); 4. coordination activities to check tutoring of online courses.

Currently online courses are being run at the following faculties: Faculty of Education, Faculty of Political Science, Faculty of Law, Faculty of Cultural Heritage, Faculty of Letters and Philosophy, Faculty of History. The profile of the online tutor is highly demanding. Online tutors are trained through a specific post-lauream course and they continue a lifelong training along their involvement at University of Macerata. Tutors are required to:

- be a subject matter expert; - have the relational skills to manage the online communication and interaction (synchronous

and asynchronous); - have the technical skills to manage tools inside the LMS; - to be active and conscious user of different media.

As an example of rules connected to the online quality control we will describe the regulamentation at the Faculty of Education: Professors who are in charge of running online courses are asked to develop: 1. Basic activities related to students first orientation

- prepare a personal profile to be uploaded in the LMS (text + photo); - for each course he/she has to create a short either text or video presentation; structure the

whole course into modules; insert a descriptive page with the necessary information about the course objectives, the course structure, the assessment criteria, the text books and the teacher/tutor contacts (e-mail + availability for face to face supporting meeting or phone calls); clarify the impact that the online activities will have on the final evaluation.

2. Supplementary activities to foster online students involvement using different tools within the LMS

- interactive asynchronous activities in which students are asked to fulfill task in small groups (forum, collaborative writing, chat);

- online synchronous meeting (chat, video chat ) with groups of no more of 25 students at a time;

- additional recorded audio-video lessons (podcast, vodcast). Online courses are continuously monitored by the staff of CELFI to check technical and didactical issues, all online tutors are coordinated by an expert who keep the online students/tutor relationship under control.

The Open University (OU) The Open University (OU) (www.open.ac.uk) is the UK’s only university dedicated to distance learning. It was founded in 1969, and the first courses began in 1971. Today the OU has around 150,000 undergraduate students and over 30,000 postgraduate students. Qualifications awarded by the OU are recognised by academic institutions throughout the UK, the European Union and the rest of the world. The OU include several undergraduate and postgraduate schools. Some of the schools have several accreditations. For example, the Open University Business School is accredited by three different accreditation organizations1: AACSB (The Associaton to Advance Collegiate School of Business2), AMBA (Association od MBAs3) and EQUIS (European Quality Improvement System4) The OU defines quality in education as: fitness of learning materials or services to enable students to achieve desired standard of performance, in short “fitness for purpose”. Standard is defined as a description of the level of achievement expected of successful students. The OU specifies four important DE quality aspects (ibidem, 33):

• Academic content (correct argument and correct description)

• Pedagogical method (effective learning material)

• Media product (compared to commercial products)

• Quality of service (delivery on time and software that works) The OU uses three types of quality processes:

• Quality control, a process that operates post production or delivery to determine that everything works

• Quality assurance, a process applied during production to assure fitness

• Quality enhancement, a process that assures improvement The OU courses go through internal quality processes where quality standard is defined as a description of the level of achievement expected of successful students. The quality standard comes from the definition the OU quality in education "fitness of learning materials or services to enables students to achieve desired standard of performance" [Åström 2008]. The OU internal quality evaluation process based on three type of evaluations:

• Learning materials (from printed texts to multimedia materials)

• Learning services (resources in the virtual library, laboratory experience, helpdesk etc)

• Student support (tutoring system). The last external quality evaluation process of the UO programmes was made in 20095, by Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA).

1http://www8.open.ac.uk/europe/mba 2http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/ 3http://www.mbaworld.com/ 4http://www.efmd.org/index.php/accreditation-/equis 5http://www.qaa.ac.uk/reviews/reports/instReports.asp?ukprn=10007773

16 Page

University of Huddersfield (UK) The University of Huddersfield published a handbook for QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES FOR TAUGHT COURSES in September 2010 [Huddersfield, 2010]. This handbook provides a short guide to the procedures which the University’s Teaching and Learning Committee and Senate have adopted for the validation and annual evaluation of courses, including those validated by external bodies, and for the review of teaching and research and of academic support services. This book also contains and section with regulations about flexible and distance learning proposals. Parts of this sections is presented in continuation of the text.

The validation of flexible and distance learning proposals 1 General Considerations This section describes the processes involved in the validation of Flexible and Distance Learning (FDL) proposals. FDL is a mode of delivery whereby teaching content (on-line and hard copy), academic mentoring, assessment and all other pedagogic and pastoral functions are provided and maintained by University staff for students who study (usually part-time) at locations remote from the University. 2. Administrative Procedures for Validation The initiative to consider the validation of a course of Distance Learning study must be taken by the School responsible for that subject area. The proposed financial and resource arrangements must be approved by the Dean of the School. Courses, including their mode of delivery, must be validated before recruitment can commence. 3. The Validation Process The course documentation should address the following issues:

1. Rationale for the course - should be provided which explains the difference between the proposed course and that of other courses within the Department and the School. The rationale should consider the relationship of the proposed course to the University's Teaching and Learning Strategy, clearly identifying the responsibilities of each category of staff. If the course is also delivered in a conventional face-to-face mode, the rationale should explain why it is considered appropriate to deliver the course by distance learning and why it is appropriate to deliver it through the particular means (e.g. internet or hard copy) proposed.

2. Admissions policy - Any variations to University-based admission requirements or specific provision for identifying applicants to whom Distance Learning is an appropriate delivery mechanism should be detailed, including, where appropriate, minimum levels of C&IT proficiency and English language competence.

3. Target Market - The target market for the course should be described, including the location of the students and the plans for promoting the award.

4. Delivery and support of the course - The student materials being provided should be described, whether they are being developed in-house or bought in, how they will be updated and of the legal issues (in particular those of copyright) which have been considered. The means of delivery of the teaching and library materials must be described in detail, as must any implications for potential students in terms of requirements for access to IT equipment, specific levels of software and so on. The arrangements for providing students with feedback should be provided, including whether students will attend tutorials and through what medium (e.g. online, face to face) and whether or not they are compulsory. The arrangements by

which students will be able to communicate with University staff should be defined. If student collaborative learning will be a feature of the course, a statement of how it will be achieved should be provided, including a description of facilities such as electronic discussion groups, live chat rooms and group work. The specific technical support which may be proposed for staff and/or students should be described. It should be made clear if no technical support will be provided for students, especially if the course will be delivered over the Internet. CVs of academic staff members involved in the delivery should be provided along with details of any provision proposed for staff development in respect of the producing and updating of distance learning materials (if in-house) and/or the use of technology. Proposals for the provision of the necessary time for academic staff to support delivery of the course and the development and updating of student materials (if in-house) should be described. This could include the basis upon which academic members of staff will have their timetables credited with teaching hours. Details should be given of any Departmental/School requirements for hardware and software. A statement of the requirement for technical and administrative support staff to be involved in the course should be provided. A draft student handbook should be submitted, which should include detailed explanations of what students can expect from the course, what support they will receive, and of progression and assessment criteria.

5. Assessment and quality assurance - Arrangements for quality assurance and external examiners should be defined. The means of assessment should be described where they will differ from an internally-delivered course, and any specific arrangements which are proposed because of the Distance Learning delivery.

4. Annual evaluation 4.1 The annual evaluation report should conform to the standard pro forma approved by the University, which will be amended to include a section in which the specific issues arising from Distance Learning delivery must be discussed. The report will be considered by the School delivering the course at its annual evaluation meeting. 5. Revalidation 5.1 Revalidation is a mechanism through which the Senate reviews and assesses the quality of provision of University courses. The University’s Teaching and Learning Committee is responsible for ensuring that each approved Distance Learning course is subject to re-validation at least once every five years. 5.2 The course team will submit documentation which will be scrutinised by means of a revalidation event held at the University which will be organised by Registry on behalf of the University’s Teaching and Learning Committee. 5.3 Revalidation of Distance Learning courses will concentrate on the following: i) evidence of continuing demand; ii) appropriateness of delivery medium and learning resources; iii) feedback from students; iv) consideration of annual evaluation reports; v) student progression and achievement statistics; vi) procedures for quality assurance; vii) rationale for the School’s continuing involvement. The documentation submitted to the panel should focus on issues listed above and should incorporate critical appraisal where appropriate. 5.4 The revalidation event will consist of discussions between the panel and representatives of the course team.

18 Page

5.5 The Assistant Registrar or nominee will prepare a report of the event. The report will be approved by the University’s Teaching and Learning Committee. 6. Validation of individual modules to be delivered on a distance learning basis 6.1 The School must secure confirmation from the Head of Registry that the extent to which delivery of a course is undertaken by means of distance learning does not require the course in its entirety to be subject to a full distance learning validation event. 6.2 The School appoints an external referee or scrutineer with appropriate subject expertise and experience in distance learning models to look at the module, its learning materials and its assessment. The nomination of the scrutineer must be approved by the Head of Registry in advance of any involvement in the validation. 6.3 The referee or scrutineer submits a written report on the proposal for consideration by the SAVP. The report should cover: is the module coherent in terms of its content and aims? do the proposed e-learning processes/arrangements comply with the QAA Code of Practice and University regulations? is the proposed assessment appropriate and secure? are the mechanisms for students to express their views and share experiences with others sufficient? 6.4 The written report and the full set of learning and assessment materials must be submitted for approval by the SAVP. 6.5 Following approval by the SAVP, the paperwork must be forwarded to Registry for final approval on behalf of the UTLC.

University of Wales Institute, Cardiff Validation of programmes delivered by distance learning General Programmes and stand-alone elements of credit bearing study delivered by distance learning, whether derived from existing “traditionally” delivered or ab initio programmes, are required to undergo the full process of scrutiny described herein [WALES 2011]. The process consists of Initial Approval and Validation, paralleling the process for traditional programmes, but is necessarily more complex. The process is designed to ensure that proposals will result in quality delivery, managed student experiences and output standards which are at least sufficient for the needs of students and are equitable in relation to more traditionally delivered programmes. Quality assurance procedures to allow on-going scrutiny of distance learning programmes (annual monitoring, modification mechanisms, periodic review, etc) are given elsewhere. Initial Approval Any programme or credit bearing study element, which is to be developed for delivery by distance learning, must first receive Initial Approval from the Vice-Chancellor’s Board. The purpose of this process is to ensure that no undue effort and expense is incurred on the development of the programme and programme materials for projects, which may be deemed by the Vice-Chancellor’s Board to be not required or undesirable. Such Initial Approval may be applied for by submitting the requisite completed pro-forma for consideration by the Vice-Chancellor’s Board. Fundamental to the submission are that:

● the proposal is consistent with UWIC’s Mission Statement Aims and with its Policy on Distance Learning ;

● reliable market research has been undertaken which demonstrates that distance learning delivery is the most appropriate option, and that there is a market need;

● it is demonstrated that there is sufficient benefit to UWIC with regards to financial consideration and reputation, and that any risks are identified as being tolerable;

● initial appraisal demonstrates that the proposing School(s) has or can obtain the expertise and facilities to deliver the programme or element to appropriate quality and standards levels.

● the proposed methods of delivery (electronic, etc) are properly identified, and that any local arrangements have been considered.

Validation Process The validation process differs from that of the validation of conventional delivery in that it is necessary to approve, additionally, both delivery techniques and distance learning materials. Since it is unlikely that all materials for a programme – e.g. a 36 module degree – will be available at the time of (initial) validation, the validation process for distance learning programmes is likely to be staged. Indeed, because techniques and materials associated with distance delivery are in a constant state of improvement and development, it may be undesirable to present all materials at the outset. However, in order both to promote the timely development of materials for progression purposes, and to ensure at least minimal “stepping stone” qualification outcomes for the participating students, the validation process will not be instigated for whole programmes unless the learning materials and assessment methodologies for at least one stage of the programme are available for scrutiny. In the case of an honours degree programme, for example, a stage may be defined as twelve 10-credit modules within a particular level, leading to a defined exit qualification. Validation Panel The composition of the Panel shall be similar to that associated with the validation of more traditionally delivered programmes, except that there must be membership representing experience in relation to the delivery to and assessment of, students via distance learning, appropriate to that which is proposed. That is: Chair - member of UWIC academic staff with previous experience of chairing validation events (a minimum of) 2 members of UWIC academic staff not from the School or Schools proposing the programme (a minimum of) 2 people from (normally) academic institutions other than UWIC with subject expertise in, or closely related to, the subject area of the proposed programme. The remit of the Panel shall be to determine:

1. whether the programme as described in the programme document is appropriate in principle to be recommended to commence, subject to any conditions imposed being fulfilled to appropriate stated timescales; and

2. if the Panel determines that the programme should be recommended to commence, (with or without conditions), whether the learning materials presented for the particular stage of the programme are sufficient in quality and to satisfy the learning requirements of participants, and hence whether the programme should be recommended to commence to the stage covered by those learning materials, subject to any further conditions imposed being fulfilled to appropriate stated timescales; or

3. whether the programme should not be permitted to commence. Documentation/Materials to be Submitted The following is required:

1. The Programme Document - The requirements for the programme document follow the generality of that for other programmes; however because of the nature of the delivery, there

20 Page

are additional requirements. The programme specification and supporting documentation must highlight the following aspects:

a. entrance requirements in relation to access to study facilities/resources; b. an overview of the learning and teaching/delivery mechanisms to be employed

defining the terms used and mapping these through the programme; the methods for developing, updating and approving delivery mechanisms and facilities; the facilities which participants must have, or have ready access to in order to undertake the programme; including student information “receiving” arrangements and student access to learning resources;

c. programme management details including details of the tutor system, contact arrangements and availability of staff, fallback arrangements in the event of a breakdown of normal delivery/assessment/communications methods, student guidance mechanisms, peer group support and library/computing resources;

d. the procedure for verifying the continued effectiveness and appropriateness of the learning materials;

e. details of the arrangements for, personnel involved in, and contracts associated with any third party participation associated with delivery and/or assessment;

f. the arrangements for the internal validation of the academic content of any web-based resources (and how these will continue to contain current material) where ownership resides outwith UWIC, and the procedures for verifying Web Sites to which access is required by students;

g. the measures, which will be used to ensure and demonstrate the authenticity of the students’ work;

h. the methods by which student representation will take place; i. full details of any “weekend”/ “summer school” arrangements, including timing,

location, learning outcomes and activities; 2. The Programme Handbook which must comply with the requirements of the Academic

Handbook and those of the UWIC Charter Systems Manual, and be tailored to the mode of delivery, to include a description of the full range of communications channels available and required for ensuring adequate provision for student guidance and tutorial and peer group support (e.g. email, postal, third party).

3. The Learning Materials - All proposed learning materials for the stage of the programme under scrutiny must be available to the Validation Panel at the time of the validation event. This must be in the form that such materials will be presented to students and may involve the Panel in:

a. examining materials, including those to be used for assessment purposes, in the form of hard copy/text;

b. participation in demonstrations of, and sight of delivery materials and assessment materials associated with, computer/electronic – based delivery;

c. meetings with persons associated with third party delivery/assessment; d. other related examination/scrutiny; e. scrutinising notes of guidance to students.

Guidance Notes for Validation Panels The generality of the Guidance Notes for Panel Chairs and for Panel Members, as given in the Academic Handbook entry ‘Validation of New Programmes’ apply to the validation of distance learning programmes.

In particular and in addition for distance learning modes, the Panel will need to consider the following issues in detail:

● the appropriateness of the mode(s) of delivery to the aims, philosophy and learning outcomes of the programme and how these will be met;

● how the programme will conform to the academic standards associated with the level of the award demonstrating how it will meet relevant external benchmarks;

● the mechanisms to assure consistency in style and level of the learning materials; ● the appropriateness of the range of learning materials and the extent to which they will provide

students with sufficient opportunities to acquire the stipulated learning outcomes; ● the adequacy and appropriateness of the resources available to support both programme

administration and student learning appropriate to the mode of delivery (including the arrangements governing student access to appropriate learning facilities including library and computing);

● the effectiveness of the Programme Management arrangements; ● the adequacy of the academic and pastoral support and guidance available to students and

the mechanisms for securing student feedback; ● the appropriateness of the chosen assessment methods to the specified learning outcomes; ● the procedures for developing, approving and modifying the learning materials; ● any relevant legal restrictions on the use of certain materials or their transmission (particularly

in relation to the overseas context); ● the process for determining and reviewing the continued currency of the learning materials

and provision for the costs associated with the production, briefing and training associated with revising materials;

● the provision and support for appropriate staff development including the provision of support/training in the preparation and design of learning materials.

22 Page

Conclusions This analysis includes several European countries, as well as countries from other continents that have special regulations for accreditation and quality assurance for DL programs and online courses. Besides, the international accreditation agencies are also covered. Analysis shows that procedures for e-learning quality assessment and accreditation of DL study programs and online university courses in European countries varies a lot at the national levels, starting from non-existing to well defined regulations. A very good example is UK's QAA, which has drawn up guidelines on the quality assessment of distance learning, represented in the Appendix. In Italy, Ministry of Education, Universities, and Research has task of accreditation of University Distance Courses and there are special Criteria and procedures for the accreditation of online courses in the public and private Italian universities defined for Telematic Universities, also presented in the Appendix. None of these, however, nor any of the other countries, include e-learning quality as a regular or integral part of national quality reviews. It is also noticeable that no emphasis is placed either in the standards and guidelines established by ENQA, the European body for cooperation among the national quality assurance organizations, on quality in e-learning while in the U.S, CHEA has drawn up guidelines for accreditation and assurance of quality in distance learning. The Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) recognize distance learning as method of delivery, but has produced additional document Guidelines to good practices for open and distance learning (GGP-ODL) released in June, 2011. Besides, mainly all countries have national bodies with specific responsibility for promoting distance learning or e-learning in higher education. Some of these have established general quality criteria for e-learning. In Norway, NADE published quality criteria for distance learning. JISC and HEA from UK, are jointly benchmarking e-learning exercises with 27 universities within the UK by testing three different benchmarking models. The Australasian organization ACODE has published extensive benchmarks with the aim of influencing policy and practice at institutional, national and international levels, and in the U.S., the DETC has published a handbook for accreditation of distance education institutions. As for the internal regulations at the university level there is also wide diversity. The survey describes several dual mode study institutions: University of Macerata, University of Wales institute, University of Huddersfield, and Open University, as DL institution. The OU has developed an extensive system for quality assurance of its own activities. It is interesting that in external quality reviews carried out by the QAA, the OU is assessed using the same national quality criteria as other British institutions of higher education.

References

● Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education. Paris: UNESCO. Available: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001433/143349e.pdf (8. 6. 2011).

● Åström Eva. 2008. E-learning quality – Aspects and criteria for evaluation of e-learning in higher education. Report 2008:11R. Solna: Högskoleverkets – Swedish National Agency for Higher Education.

● ICDE – International Council for Open an Distance Education. Available: http://www.icde.org/

● ICDE Annual Report 2010. Available: http://www.icde.org/ICDE+Annual+Report+2010+and+Progress+Report.b7C_wBjU0P.ips

● CDEA – Committee for Distance Education Accreditation. Available: http://aiea-edu.org/

● IDEAL – International Distance Educatuib Accreditation League. Available: http://www.ideal.ph/

● IDEAL. 2010. Blueprint for Distance Education Institutional Audit. Available: http://ideal.ph/sites/default/files/ideal_blueprint_for_accreditation.pdf

● IEAC – International Education Accreditation Commission. Available: http://www.ieacommission.org

● IEAA – International Education Accreditation Authority. Available: http://www.eduaccreditation.org/

● IAO – International Accreditation Organization. Available: http://www.iao.org/

● Kilfoil, Wendy, R: 2007. Acquiring Accreditation in Distance Learning. Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning.

● QAA – The Quality Assurance Agency for higher Education. Available: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/default.asp (29. 5. 2011).

● The Open University (OU). Available: http://www8.open.ac.uk/europe/ (29. 5. 2011).

● [IAO, 2011] http://www.iao.org/iao/accreditation-process.asp ● [UNESCO, 2005] Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education. Paris:

UNESCO. Available: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001433/143349e.pdf (8. 6. 2011).

● [ IEAA, 2011] http://www.ieaas.org/

● [OU, 2011] http://www.open.ac.uk/

● [AUCC, 2011] http://www.aucc.ca/

● [MAEBC, 2008] Degree Program Review Criteria and Guidelines, http://www.aved.gov.bc.ca/degree-authorization/documents/degree-program-criteria.pdf

● [DLBC, 2010] Standards for K-12 Distributed Learning in British Columbia, February 2010. http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/dist_learning/docs/dl_standards.pdf

● [DCBC, 2010] http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/dist_learning/docs/digital_learning_standards.pdf

● http://www.study2u.com/distance-online-learning-guide/worldwide-accreditation-bodies/

● [MQA 2011] Malaysian Qualifications Agency, http://www.mqa.gov.my/

● [NOKUT, 2011] http://www.qrossroads.eu/quality-assurance-and-accreditation/norway---nokut-39

● [PRIVY 2011] http://www.privy-council.org.uk/textonly/page27.asp

● [CIMEA, 2003 ] http://www.cimea.it/files/213_112.pdf

24 Page

● [eLene, 2011] http://www.tlcentre.net/resource_files/resources/105/institutional_environment_ITALY.pdf

● [ODLQC, 2011] http://www.odlqc.org.uk/

● [QAA, 2011] www.qaa.ac.uk

● [JISC, 2011] www.jisc.ac.uk

● [HEA, 2011] http://www.heacademy.ac.uk

● [Huddersfield, 2010] QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES FOR TAUGHT COURSES, September 2010, http://www2.hud.ac.uk/shared/shared_regwg/docs/regulations_handbooks/qataughtcourses/handbook.pdf

● [WALES 2011] Academic Handbook 2008/09 – Volume 2 - 03.4 Validation of Programmes delivered by Distance Learning – modified 22.09.08, http://www.uwic.ac.uk/registry/academic_handbook/AH2_03_04.pdf

● [CHEA, 2002] http://www.chea.org/pdf/mono_1_accred_distance_02.pdf

● [DETC, 2011] http://www.detc.org/accreditationhandbook

Appendix Appendix Telematic Universities

Ministerial Decree April, 17 2003 (Ministry of Education and Ministry of Innovation and Technology) Criteria and procedures for the accreditation of online courses in the public and private Italian universities and in the institutions declared able to deliver universities degrees (art. 3, decree 3 November 1999, n. 509)

Art. 3 General definition of distance learning

(major issues related to quality) 1. The online courses are characterized by:

a) d) the use of interoperable and modular contents that can be personalized according to the characteristics of the audience and the learning delivery;

b) e) the continuous monitoring of the impact on learning both through tracking modalities and frequent assessment and auto-evaluation opportunities;

2. the didactical organization has to enhance at the maximum extent, and in the respect of the specificities of contents and learning objectives, the potentialities of the Information & Communication Technology and specifically:

a) the multimediality: by exploiting the effective integration among different media to foster a better comprehension;

b) the interactivity with the materials in order to foster personalized learning path and optimize the learning process;

c) the human interactivity: by exploiting all the communication online technologies in order to foster the creation of collective learning environments;

d) the adaptivity, that is, the chance to personalize the sequence of the learning path on the basis of the students’ performance and their interaction with the online contents;

e) the interoperability of the subsystems (used or created during the usage of the technological systems) in order to reuse and integrate the different resources.

Art. 4

Criteria and requisites for the courses’ accreditation (major issues)

1. The online courses’organization has to: a) make the following explicit: modalities, study plans, the rules of the services through a

Service Card (Every university creates its own card following the requisites, you can see an example here:http://www.unisu.it/unisu/carta-servizi.pdf) that shows the didactical methodology and the different levels offered: the Card itself has to be available online before the beginning of the activities and it will have to: • identify the technological standards and the descriptive labels such as contents’

metadata used to describe the online didactical materials, tracking users’ bio data and fix tracking parameters;

• point out time and modalities with which the tracking will be archived for evaluation or certification of the students’ learning paths similarly to the procedure of face to face students;

b) the didactical materials and the offered services have to be certified by a deputed commission composed of academics;

c) the privacy of personal data has to be guaranteed by adopting all the needed measures fixed by the current law;

26 Page

d) the maximum flexibility in the access to the course has to be provided for what concern the choice of having the complete annual credits in one year or in more than one.

Art. 5

Committee of experts 1. A Committe of expert with the needed and appropriate technical/professional requisites in the field of technological innovation and e-learning is set. The Committee is constituted of seven members among which three are to be appointed by the Ministry of Education, University and Research and three by the Ministry for Innovation and Technology. The President is agreed among the Ministries. The President and the members of the Committee keep their position for three years and can be confirmed just for one more time. 2. The Commitee expresses, on the basis of the set criteria and requisites (art. 4), its opinions in relation to the requests of online courses’ accreditation.

Art. 7 Terms of validity of the accreditation

In order to check the requisites (art.4) the Ministry of Education, University and Research makes regular inspections almost every three years ,and also on the Committee demand, to a sample of universities.

Technical Attachment to the decree

(synthesis) 1. Requisites of the learning process 1.1. delivery and access modalities e-learning is a synergic process made of integration between didactical materials and services provided to users; the academic institution has to guarantee to users (students, professors and other profiles involved) a set of services: - advanced communication systems to foster interaction among students and among students and teachers; - different kind of supporting services and tutoring; - quality and comprehensiveness of information and learning materials (online material has to be updated and selected according to parameters of authoritativeness, comprehensiveness and quality; - the opportunity to access materials (text, image, animations, audio, video) in a flexible way without software’s and connection problems; Those access’s modalities have to be designed in a way to: - support students motivation along their learning path creating a social and collaborative learning context; - propose an adequate schedule to the students’ characteristics. The following requisites are considered relevant for quality: - the students organization into groups managed by expert tutors (subject matter experts and communication experts in e-learning). Students in groups collaborate to the development of projects, discuss in forum and support each other; - a support for students in their study planning activity, that support is provided by an online agenda that will help students to manage: personal study, tasks and assessments in itinere; - synchronous activities: objectives, preparatory activities and timetable. 1.2. Modalities of assessment. - tracking of the learning activities made by the system;

didactical monitoring and continuous feedback provided by tutors (quality and quantity of students interactions, deadlines etc), reports and tracking data have to be made accessible to both students and teachers; - assessment to be done in itinere also for students self evaluation reasons; - final exam run in presence and in which online activities have to be considered as part of the final evaluation. The evaluation will have to take into consideration: - the results of a certain number of mid term assessment’ s activities; - the quality on student participation in online activities (frequency and quality of the contributions); - the result of the final exam in presence. 1.3. Tutoring modalities. The online tutor has to be an expert both in technical/relational issues and a subject matter expert, their tasks are defined in the Service CARD and made explicit to users before the courses start. The interactivity, that has to be provided and developed by tutors, is defined in three aspects: - students’ guidance/consultancy; - monitoring of the whole student group; - coordination of students. The activities can be developed through the creation of adequate virtual interactive spaces (synchronous and asynchronous) such as forum, web conference, live sessions or direct communication via e-mail. 2.1. Characteristics of the platform The following aspects have to be considered:

- a technological platform “Learning Management System (LMS)” able to deliver contents with standards (Learning Objects in xml) to track and retrieve students’ data on their access (e.g. tracking ADL, SCORM 1.2);

- an highly interactive web system (e.g. ADSL, UMTS, Satellite live); - the opportunity to make reports and develop online administrative procedures (e.g. to enroll to

the course); - to provide the access to special need students with disabilities according to the

recommendation of the “White Book” promoted by the inter-ministerial commission on the development and use of information technologies for the weak categories.

2.2. Characteristics of the platform for the content management A Learning Content Management System (LCMS) architecture has to be provided:

- - authoring and content indexing; - - online archives and standard protocols for metadata sharing (e..g. SOAP XML);

2.3. Characteristics of the platform for the synchronous activities Synchronous activities will have to be run trough a virtual class system useful both for tutoring activities and for seminars, meetings and conferences.

28 Page

Appendix QAA QAA Guidelines on the quality assurance of distance learning -

March 1999 The guidelines have been produced at the request of the distance learning community in the United Kingdom, which has recognised not only that the continued development of this form of higher education and its worldwide acceptance depend upon rigorous quality assurance, but also that there are many areas in which the usual ways of doing things for 'on-campus' provision are not necessarily appropriate in the context of distance learning. These guidelines do not assume that distance learning is a separate and unique form of higher education around which there are clear, let alone fixed, boundaries. Nor is it assumed that all distance learning has uniform characteristics. Nevertheless, a large and diverse body of current provision, although often described using different terms, is readily identifiable. The guidelines have been developed with the assistance of a working group initially convened in 1997 by the former Higher Education Quality Council (HEQC), and continued by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). They build on the generic Guidelines on quality assurance produced by the HEQC in 1996 and on institutional quality audit reports, undertaken in the first instance by the HEQC and latterly by QAA. In the preparation of the guidelines the working group has also drawn on advice from colleagues with an active involvement in, and experience of, a variety of forms of distance learning, and has taken into account existing guidelines and codes, both generic and specific to individual institutions. These guidelines are concerned with arrangements made by UK universities and colleges to provide programmes of study by means of distance learning, whether in the UK or overseas. The guidelines focus on those aspects where the 'distance element' presents a special challenge to the assurance of quality of provision and the security of academic standards of programmes of study and awards. Definitions and dimensions of distance learning The terms used to refer to four dimensions of distance learning are as follows: Materials-based learning. This dimension of a system of distance learning refers to all the learning resource materials made available by the programme provider to students studying at a distance. The range and diversity of materials provided can be great. It may include printed, audio or audio-visual material, experimental equipment and material on the world wide web and other electronic or computer-based resources. Materials forming the basis of study may also be drawn from local public providers or resources accessible locally - as with local libraries, local book suppliers or information on the world wide web. The scope of materials provided may range from statements simply of syllabuses and learning outcomes to complex collections of multi-media materials structured to support self-study. The methods for distributing materials to form the basis of study include personal delivery to students by traveling teachers, dispatch to the student through the post, distribution through electronic communication and personal collection by the student from a distribution point. Programme components delivered by traveling teachers. This dimension refers to staff of the providing institution traveling on a periodic basis to the location of the student to deliver components of the programme. The delivery may be concentrated into a period of intensive classroom-based study for a group of students or be arranged on a scheduled basis for an individual student. The scope of the functions carried out by traveling teachers may include initial orientation; delivery of learning materials; intensive teaching of the programme; tutorial support; student development and guidance; assessment; and gathering feedback. The operations of traveling teachers may be supported and supplemented by a local agent. Learning supported locally. This dimension involves the providing institution employing persons specifically to undertake certain defined functions for the local support of students following the programme. It may involve administrative tasks for which a local agent is contracted and/or specified

teaching functions for which a local tutor is engaged. An example of the latter might be the provision of residential weekend workshops or the like. Learning supported from the providing institution remotely from the student. This dimension refers to defined support and specified components of teaching provided remotely for individual distant students by a tutor from the providing institution. The forms of communication between the tutor and student may include postal correspondence in print or by audio or video-cassette, telephone, fax, email and the Internet. It may be solely between tutor and individual student or may include voice, video or computer-based conferencing. The scope of the teaching may be limited to defined components of the programme or form a larger and more open-ended component.

The structure of guidelines The guidelines are arranged under six headings, each dealing with an aspect where quality assurance is likely to require attention in a particular way when study is by distance learning:

● System design; ● Programme design, approval and review; ● The management of programme delivery; ● Student development and support; ● Student communication and representation; ● Student assessment.

Each section contains generic precepts and outline guidance. The precepts identify those key matters which an institution might reasonably be expected to be able to demonstrate that it is addressing effectively through its own relevant quality assurance mechanisms. The purpose of the accompanying outline guidance is to offer suggestions on quality assurance and control which institutions can use, elaborate, and adapt according to their own needs, traditions, cultures and decision-making processes. The guidelines Guideline 1: System design - the development of an integrated approach

1. Higher education by distance learning should be underpinned by principles relevant generally to higher education. An institution intending to offer distance learning programmes of study should design and manage its operations in a way that applies those principles and, at the same time, takes full account of considerations specific to teaching its students at a distance.

2. The provision of programmes of study by distance learning should form part of an explicit strategy for achieving an institution's stated aims, and the distance learning system or systems should be designed and developed in ways that will give effect to the strategy.

3. Prior to offering programmes of study by distance learning, an institution should explicitly design and test its system for administering and teaching students at a distance and plan for contingencies in order to meet its stated aims in terms of academic quality and standards.

4. An institution should safeguard its position in respect of the law in any country in which it is proposed that programmes of study should be made available by distance learning.

5. A providing institution's plans for offering programmes of study by distance learning should be financially underwritten for the full period during which students will be studying on them and at a level that safeguards the quality and standards to which the institution is committed.

Guideline 2: The establishment of academic standards and quality in programme design, approval and review procedures

1. The providing institution is responsible for ensuring that programmes to be offered at a distance are designed so that the academic standards of the awards will be demonstrably comparable with those of awards delivered by the institution in other ways and consistent with any relevant benchmark information recognised within the UK.

2. In designing distance learning programmes of study, and any component modules, a providing institution should ensure explicit and reasoned coherence between, on the one hand, the aims and intended learning outcomes, and, on the other, the strategies for teaching at a distance, the scope of the learning materials and the modes and criteria of assessment.

30 Page

3. A providing institution is responsible for ensuring that the design of distance learning programmes of study provides a learning opportunity which gives to students a fair and reasonable chance of achieving the academic standards required for successful completion.

4. A providing institution should have processes for approving distance learning programmes of study which, while underpinned by principles relevant to all educational programmes, take specific account of the requirements of the system of distance learning adopted and of the opportunities provided for scrutiny.

5. A providing institution's processes for the approval of programmes of study, and any component modules, should include an element of scrutiny external to the institution.

6. An institution should ensure that programmes of study and component modules once designed, and in use, are monitored, reviewed and subject to re-approval regularly; in particular an institution should ensure that the content of all learning materials remains current and relevant and that learning materials, teaching strategies and forms of assessment are enhanced in the light of findings from feedback.

Guideline 3: The assurance of quality and standards in the management of programme delivery 1. The providing institution is responsible for managing the delivery of each distance learning

programme of study in a manner that safeguards the academic standards of the award. 2. The providing institution is responsible for ensuring that each distance learning programme of

study is delivered in a manner that provides, in practice, a learning opportunity which gives students a fair and reasonable chance of achieving the academic standards required for successful completion.

Learning, although at a distance, should be treated as an activity involving all participants in the system, in which monitoring, review and feedback to those who manage the programmes of study are used regularly to enhance all components of teaching, learning and the system of delivery. Guideline 4: Student development and support

1. In respect of students taught at a distance, a providing institution should give explicit attention to its responsibility for supporting and promoting autonomous learning and enabling learners to take personal control of their own development. An institution should set realistic aims, devise practical methods for achieving them, and monitor its practice.

Guideline 5: Student communication and representation 1. A providing institution should meet the need of its students who are studying at a distance for

information that is particularly full and clear about the nature and expectations of their programme of study; the relationship between achievement and assessment, academic progress and accumulation of credit; the characteristics of the distance learning system and how students interact with it. The information provided should be conveyed in a way that enables them to make informed decisions about their own education, and to monitor their progress against clear expectations of achievement.

2. A providing institution should monitor the effectiveness of information provided to students and, in the light of its findings, take steps to enhance its provision.

3. An institution should determine what means of student representation are appropriate and realistic for students on distance learning programmes of study and should provide these students with accurate information about them.

Appendix ODL QC Open & Distance Learning Quality Council (ODL QC)

Standards OUTCOMES

1. Each course includes a clear statement of what the learner can hope to achieve on successful completion.

2. The methods, materials and support offered by the course are sufficient to achieve the intended outcomes.

3. Each course starts from a clearly stated level of ability and facilitates learner progress to a greater level of ability.

4. Statements that the level of ability inherent in the outcome can be matched to a nationally-agreed level of qualification are supported by appropriate evidence. When courses lead to degrees then those degrees are properly validated.

5. Where time limits for course completion are imposed by the provider, they are clearly stated, along with any possible extensions to this and related cost implications.

6. Any assessments set by the provider during or on completion of a course are appropriate and adequate to ensure a proper assessment of the learner’s ability and achievements to date, and the results communicated to learners.

7. Examinations should be properly marked or assessed, with procedures for ensuring security in their setting and assessment, monitoring the quality of those assessments, and providing appropriate feed back to the learner. Learners should be made aware of the procedure whereby assessments can be challenged, and whether resist are possible.

8. Documentary confirmation of outcomes is available where appropriate to all learners on course completion.

9. Where the outcome of a course is the declared competence to sit examinations offered, or be otherwise assessed, by another external organisation, the learner is informed of this, and of the respective responsibilities of provider and applicant, prior to enrolment.

10. The course and its objectives are placed in a wider educational, vocational & professional context.

RESOURCES

A. All resources supplied are appropriate to the needs, knowledge and experience of a stated group of learners.

B. The provider takes all reasonable steps to ensure that course materials are effective and do not contain significant errors of fact, misleading or out-of-date information, concepts or approaches.

Course materials are reviewed within specified time periods to ensure they remain effective and up-to-date. If a new course is introduced, or significant amounts of new material are introduced into an existing course, the effectiveness of such material is properly assessed in advance. Where there is any doubt that such material can be adequately assessed by other means, it is used in a pilot study or otherwise tested on potential students, with the latter’s knowledge.

C. Course materials are designed for a specific and clearly stated level of learner support, and suitable opportunities for such support, where intended, are built into the material.

D. Course materials are structured to facilitate individual study & the development of study skills. Typical features of good quality self-study course materials, regardless of the delivery medium, include:

• appropriateness to the overall purpose of the course; • the ability to deliver the declared outcome of the course; • presentation in an appropriate and convenient-to-use format • careful pacing;

32 Page

• subdivision into appropriate units, lessons or modules; • an indication of the time a learner of average ability might expect to spend on each unit; • a sequential exposition, with new material building on previous material; • the use of a variety of approaches, including summaries, visual material, and illustrative

examples as appropriate, to illuminate particular concept • facilitation of different learning styles; • regular opportunities for reflection, review, practice and self-assessment; • the inclusion of clear instructions to guide the learner through the material • appropriate assignments which facilitate the learning process and offer opportunities for

assessment. In addition, features of good quality course material delivered on screen include:

• making effective use of the technology • ease of navigation to all other appropriate points in the materials; • a way of identifying the position of the current screen in a module, and the whole course; • the ability to bookmark and annotate the materials; • time taken to load screens is minimised; • the page to screen ratio is close to unity

The use of language in course materials is appropriate to the intended learners. In particular, care is taken with language if courses are described as being appropriate to those whose first language is not English. A clear outline of the course as a whole is provided with the first set of materials.

SUPPORT

A. The provider maintains and demonstrates a clear commitment to helping learners achieve their educational goals.

B. The learner has overall responsibility for his or her own learning, and is informed that the provider’s role is supportive.

The provider offers to make a study agreement with the learner, which specifies: • the nature and scope of the course; • the mutually-agreed anticipated outcome of the course, including any individual variations; • the services to which the provider is committed; • any disclaimers which protect the provider against changes in external circumstances which

prevent him from delivering those services or realising the intended outcome; • the rights, obligations and commitments expected of the learner; • the financial agreement between the learner and the provider; • any allowance for special needs.

C. Support offered is sufficient to meet the reasonable needs of learners, encourage the learning process and facilitate successful completion of the course.

In particular: • Guidance on study skills is provided for all learners. • Tutorial support is normally integral to all provision. Where this is not the case, the course

material or other provision is capable of achieving its stated outcomes without such support, and the absence of such support is clearly indicated in all publicity and course material.

• Where tutor support is offered, a good tutor will: - have a sound understanding and up-to-date knowledge of their subject; - know how learners learn, and help their students to learn how to learn; - communicate enthusiasm for the subject, and for learning, to their students;

show sensitivity to individual differences in ability and learning styles; - understand the special requirements of open and distance learning; - communicate clearly, consistently, conscientiously, constructively and quickly with

their students; - encourage their students at all times; - provide feedback on overall progress in relation to the agreed outcome of the course; - make effective use of feedback from learners to enhance their own performance as

tutors. • Assessments are designed to support and encourage the learning process, as well as to

monitor and establish the level of ability acquired by the learner. • If a significant element of the provision is technology-based, the provider ensures that the

learner understands the system requirements, and has access to appropriate technical advice. • Appropriate administrative and academic advice and guidance is available to all learners. All

enquiries from learners are handled promptly and sympathetically by a competent person. • Career counselling and placement services, if offered, do not make exaggerated claims. • Access to appropriate supplementary resources is facilitated. • Face-to-face or hands-on training is provided wherever it is a necessary to achieve the stated

outcome of the course.

D. Support is offered on a prompt, timely and wherever possible personal basis Access to tutors is on a sufficient, regular, individual and flexible basis, which is known to both tutors and learners. Appropriate schedules for the submission and return of tutorial assignments are adopted and communicated to learners. Turnaround times are kept to a minimum.

E. Support offered is appropriate to the level of the course. Peer group interaction and support for distance learners is encouraged and facilitated wherever possible through newsletters, new technologies or other means. Mentoring, and mentoring schemes, are encouraged and facilitated.

F. The provider has adequate procedures to handle any difficulties between the learner and the

provider, and learners are made fully aware of all the avenues open to them to resolve those difficulties.

For example, if difficulties arise between a learner and a tutor, and an alternative tutor is available, this alternative is offered to the learner. Similarly, wherever possible, a learner has more than one point of access with the provider (for example through a tutor, or through an admissions officer or the principal), so that difficulties between particular individuals, should they arise, do not impede the learning process. In cases of serious difficulty, if no alternative is available, ODL QC can act as an access point. G. Learners are encouraged to complete their courses. Progress is monitored, and learners are

provided with prompt and helpful comments on their progress in relation to learning expectations and goals.

In particular: • Early contact with a learner is initiated by the provider whenever difficulties occur arising from

the non-submission of assignments by the appropriate deadline, or the submission of unsatisfactory work. Providers are encouraged to investigate cases of learner withdrawal from a course.

• Care is taken to support and encourage learners who submit unsatisfactory work; learning support is only withdrawn after all reasonable efforts have been made to overcome their problems.

34 Page

• If the provider has significant doubts that the learner is ready to undertake a particular examination or piece of practical work, the learner is advised of those doubts. In cases where any risk to third parties is involved, the provider must reserve the right to prevent the learner from undertaking that piece of work, and the learner must have been informed of that right prior to enrolment.

• All feedback maintains an appropriate balance between encouragement and realistic appraisal, and does not raise false expectations in the minds of learners.

SELLING A. The provider, its staff, representatives and agents, conduct all promotional activity in a fair and

ethical manner, follow commonly accepted best practices, and comply with all relevant legislation. B. All advertising or promotional material gives a clear, accurate and balanced view of the provider, its

personnel, its provision, the objectives and outcomes of that provision or the ease with which they can be obtained. All information included is real, current, and verifiable.

C. All enquiries from potential applicants are handled promptly, appropriately and sympathetically. In particular, staff engaged in promotion do not offer educational advice unless competent to do so.

D. Providers selling through home visits take particular care to avoid the possibility of miss selling. E. The applicant is made aware of his or her responsibility to assess the suitability of the course, and

in particular in relation to their own needs, qualifications, capabilities and aspirations, before enrolment.

F. Providers offer sufficient information to enable each learner fully to assess the suitability of a course, including an opportunity to discuss it with the provider prior to enrolment.

G. Prior to enrolment on a particular course, the prospective learner is made properly aware of all terms and conditions relevant to that course, either in the prospectus or similar material, by correspondence, or in discussion with the provider.

H. Access requirements imposed by the provider for any course are appropriate, kept to the necessary minimum and published.

I. Enrolment when completed is confirmed to the learner, who then has a pre-defined period within which to withdraw from the course.

PROVIDERS

A. The provider maintains and demonstrates a strong commitment to educational values. B. The provider is financially responsible and can meet its obligations to learners. C. The provider adopts widely accepted norms of good ethical business and employment practice. D. Where the provision occurs in another country, the provider ensures adherence to all relevant legal

requirements. E. All staff and tutors are suitable for their positions, and possess appropriate qualifications and

experience. F. All tutor support is of high quality. Where a provider employs more than one tutor, steps are taken

to ensure that tutor support is consistent throughout the provision. G. Learner records are sufficient, accurately maintained and up to date. Learners’ concerns about the

confidentiality of their records are respected. H. Sufficient resources are available to ensure that every learner receives an adequate individual

service I. The provider adheres to all ODL QC Standards in Open and Distance Learning, and complies with

all reasonable requests made by the Council. J. The provider is committed to continuous improvement.

COLLABORATIVE PROVISION A. Any provision delivered by two or more organisations is covered by a written agreement, which

clearly specifies the respective rights and division of responsibilities between the partners.

B. One organisation (the “principal provider”) has legal responsibility for delivery of the provision, and the learner is made aware of this.

C. The principal provider has in place procedures, which ensure that all aspects of a provision meet ODL QC standards.

D. ODL QC Accreditation is specific to a particular service and a particular named aspect of a provision. Providers must avoid statements which imply that their accreditation extends to services not explicitly covered.

E. Providers should not promote courses as their own if they are not.

36 Page

Appendix NADE Quality matrix developed by NADE Overview of quality areas and quality factors

Conditions and Constraints

Implementation Results Follow up

Information and Counselling

1 External constraints Organisation Partners

2 Channels Content

3 Student body Other results

4 Evaluation Customer relations

Course Development

5 External constraints Organisation Target group Staff Partners

6 Supervision, co-operation,follow-up and guidance of authors Choice of media Formative evaluation

7 Course description Materials meeting requirements Teaching aids

8 Evaluation Customer reactions Updating and/or revision

Course Delivery 9 External constraints Organisation Students Materials Teachers Partners

10 Two-way contact Teaching and guidance Exams and tests

11 Students' achievements of goals Course completion Learning results

12 Evaluation Customer relations

Organisation 13 External constraints Organisation Partners

14 Management Communication Future orientation

15 Achievement of goals Financial results Repute

16 Evaluation Reporting

Analysis of internal/external accreditation of DL … · Analysis of internal/external...

Documents

Transcript of Analysis of internal/external accreditation of DL … · Analysis of internal/external...