SAAIR 2019 QUALITY FORUM Internal and External Review Processes: The Quest for Quality

1. SAAIR 2019 QUALITY FORUM Internal and External Review Processes: The Quest for Quality National Reviews of Programmes UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG 3 July 2019 Olivia Mokgatle

2. Purpose of a National Review • Main purpose of the review is to evaluate programmes and make informed judgement: • in terms of the provisions of the Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework (HEQSF) – the fitness-of-purpose of the programme • as well as complying with criteria for design, delivery, output, impact and sustainability, derived from the CHE Criteria for Programme Accreditation – Re-accreditation process • Ensures that the programme is in harmony with the mission, vision and goals of the institution • The fitness- for- purpose of the programme

3. Purpose of a National Review.. Cont’ The review is conducted using the qualification standard - ensures that the programme meets the national benchmark (integrity and distinctiveness) Safeguard the interest of students and the general public Provides an indication the state of the programme within the national context

4. In the Main: • Expectations for standards: • The academic standards of programmes meet the requirements of the HEQSF. • The value of qualifications awarded to students at the point of qualification and over time is in line with sector-recognised standards • Expectations for quality : • Programmes are well-designed • Provide a high-quality academic experience • Student’s achievement to be reliably assessed. • From admission through to completion students are provided with the support needed to succeed in and benefit from HE

5. National review : a threefold exercise Institutional self-evaluation of the programme, including assessment of good practice, constraints, and areas for improvement. Evidence that the institutional programme meets all criteria for the achievement of the qualification standard HEQC decisions on re-accreditation, based on institutional self-evaluation and evidence provided by review panel site visits. Report on the national state of provision for the legal profession.

6. Approach • Peer review process – academic experts • Informed by: • Framework for National Review of Higher Education Programmes • Framework for Qualification Standards in Higher Education • Qualification Standard: Qualification standard: A national threshold; Standards provide benchmarks to guide the development, implementation and quality assurance of programmes leading to qualifications • Programme Accreditation Criteria • National Review Manual

7. Scope and priorities

8. Scope of the review • Re-accreditation of programmes leading to the award of qualification • All modes of delivery • Prioritisation of the accreditation criteria based on the review proposal e.g. Law Summit report • Academic community interests and concerns • Qualification issues across programmes • Programme issues across institutions • National policy imperatives • National status report

9. Value of a National Review • Confirmation of accreditation – existing programmes • Continuous quality in improvement • Reflection • Improvement plans

10. To what extend are these benefits: Sustained and maintained post- review? Remain localised to the programme under review? Replicated across the academic project? If reviews were to improve quality across the institution, Then……

11. Deming’s words.. A necessary ingredient for improvement of quality is the application of profound knowledge. There is no substitute for knowledge. Knowledge we have in abundance. We must learn to use it. Bad practices of management induce variation, high cost, and poor quality, with consequent loss of market.

12. Deming’s Theory of Profound Knowledge • Appreciation for a system • Knowledge about variation • Theory about Knowledge • Theory of Psychology

13. Deming’s Theory of Profound Knowledge.. • Appreciation for a system. A leader must understand the system he or she is attempting to manage. Without this understanding the system can not be managed or improved. System optimization requires coordination and cooperation of the parts which requires leadership. • Theory of Knowledge. Knowledge depends on theory. Information is not knowledge. Experience teaches nothing without theory. Practice makes permanent, not perfect. Copying examples does not lead to knowledge.

14. Deming’s Theory of Profound Knowledge. Cont.’ Knowledge about variation. Refers to Shewhart's concept of common or system causes of variation and outside assignable or special causes of variation. Relates to the Red Bead experiment and blaming people for variation caused by the system. Knowledge of Psychology. Leaders must understand human behaviour to motivate, coordinate and manage people to optimize the system

15. In Deming's Theory of Profound Knowledge he makes that ; true learning never takes place unless we place our credibility on the line. Or, unless we become a real part of the learning experience; to find if a concept is true, or if an idea works, we must act as though it works; follow through and learn from both the successes and failures of that action; this will lead to the spirit of continuous improvement. quality is a systematic process, and that the journey from the prevailing management style to quality requires the understanding of systems.

16. Implications.. • In Deming's Theory of Profound Knowledge, he makes the point that true learning never takes place unless we place our credibility on the line. Or, unless we become a real part of the learning experience. • That is, to find if a concept is true, or if an idea works, we must act as though it works, follow through and learn from both the successes and failures of that action • This will lead to the spirit of continuous improvement

17. Quality Improvement – Edward Deming(PDSA) Plan Do Study/Check Act The purpose of the PDSA cycle lies in learning as quickly as possible (thus learning is built into the quality process cycles); making adjustments accordingly to increase the chances of delivering and sustaining the desired quality improvements; the intended output of PDSA is learning and informed action- Reflective practice; successful application of the PDSA methodology may enable an institution to achieve its quality improvement goals more efficiently.

18. Common cause of failure to derive meaningful value from the PDSA Cycle Poor planning – e.g. lack of alignment between the approaches, interventions and the desired outcomes (lack of understanding of the nature and causes problems, contributing factors); (P) Failure to implement the quality improvement interventions as intended; D) (Failure to collect and/or study the data carefully to determine to cause/source of variation (limited opportunities reflect and learn); (S) Failure to take appropriate action based on what was learnt from the study phase ( wasted effort and resources); (A) Failure to close the quality loop.

19. Thank you!