Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine how the Japanese and Taiwanese national quality assurance (QA) agencies, National Institution for Academic Degrees and Quality Enhancement (NIAD-QE) and Higher Education Evaluation and Accreditation Council of Taiwan (HEEACT), transform their respective frameworks in response to social demands, and analyze and compare the respective approaches for the key concepts of autonomy, accountability, improvement and transparency.

Using a qualitative document analysis approach, this paper initially examines the higher education system, major policies and QA developments, after which the methods associated with the QA restructuring transformations are outlined in terms of motivations, expectations and challenges. Finally, the NIAD-QE and HEEACT evaluation policies and frameworks are compared to assess how each has prepared to respond to emerging challenges.

During the QA framework restructuring, both the NIAD-QE and HEEACT struggled to achieve autonomy, accountability, improvements and transparency. While the new internal Japanese QA policy is assured through the external QA, the Taiwanese internal QA, which has a self-accreditation policy, is internally embedded with university autonomy emphasized. The QA policies in both the NIAD-QE and HEEACT have moved from general compliance to overall improvement, and both emphasize that accountability should be achieved through improvements. Finally, both agencies sought transparency through the disclosure of the QA process and/or results to the public and the enhancement of public communication.

This study gives valuable insights into the QA framework in Asian higher education institutions and how QA has been transformed to respond to social needs.

This paper aims to critically investigate the past hype of internationalization of higher education institutions (HEIs) and its complex international, national and local processes under the influence of globalization.

In particular, the authors employed the knowledge–policy–power interface framework through a scoping review in order to reexamine the political dynamics among international, national and local higher education actors in driving the internationalization of HEIs in the context of South Korea between the 1990s and the 2020s. The perspective taken by this research brings much-needed nuance to the analysis by focusing on the complex dynamics of external factors and key actors and their responses in the process of internationalization.

This research found three characteristic dynamics of internationalization of Korean HEIs: uncritical acceptance of external pressures for internationalization; unbalanced formal and informal participation at the national level and different ways HEIs absorb change. In short, this research discussed how the powerful government, which has been stirred by external forces, shaped the limited knowledge discourse on internationalization while triggering power games among various HEIs. The research highlights that the characteristics of HEIs and the voices of all stakeholders should be better accounted for so that internationalization can proceed in diverse ways from the ground up to enhance and assure educational quality.

The research limits itself by analyzing the political dynamics in driving the internationalization of HEIs in the context of South Korea only through scoping review. However, the attempt to disentangle the underlying political dynamics through its original framework is worthy unlike previous more traditional models that cast policy-making as a uniform cycle proceeding rationally through the policy process regardless of the issue.

These findings enable a better analysis of the key dynamics of how HEI internationalization policies in Korea were understood, planned and implemented. Without examining the political dynamics among various factors as well as the responses of significant actors to HEI internationalization, the current challenges and remaining tasks in translating higher education policy into practice cannot be thoroughly assessed.

Most importantly, the multilayered political dynamics that come together to shape the content and directions of policies in a certain national context should be taken into account in the process of policy-making. Such recontextualization would provide a better understanding of the underlying dynamics that lead to certain consequences of and challenges in translating higher education policy into practice, especially for those who face the challenge of balancing between state-driven policies and ever-diversifying needs and demands of HEIs.

As there is a lack of understanding of the critical context of the knowledge–policy–power interface despite the significant influence of political dynamics in the process of internationalization, this research reexamined the internationalization of HEIs in Korea by providing a better understanding of the political dynamics between knowledge and power that influence the directions and contents of policy dialogues and documents.

This article provides an overview and analysis of 50 years of European policies, actions, and challenges to align its higher education and research, as well as lessons learned from this for similar initiatives elsewhere.

The study builds on a comprehensive overview and study of policy documents and scholarly literature to identify by decade the main policies and actions and the related challenges towards a European Higher Education and Research Area.

The findings make clear the key rationales, challenges, shifts and lessons to be learned from 50-year European policies for the alignment of higher education.

Its value lies in the historical overview and analysis of current initiatives, in particular the European Universities Initiative (EUI), to provide a historical and geographical context, which might give insight for similar initiatives elsewhere.

In 2022, the International Network for Quality Assurance (QA) Agencies in Higher Education (INQAAHE) published the new guidelines by adding three QA modules in response to the changing higher education landscape. The paper aims to investigate the transformative focus of quality assurance in higher education globally as well as Asian response to three new QA modules according to the INQAAHE ISGs.

The research conducted a quantitative approach for data collection. An on-line survey was conducted to perceive QA practices, perceptions toward new emerging QA modules and challenges encountered. In total, there were 26 responses from 18 territories with 22 QA agencies. A total of 13 out of them have a national qualifications framework in place.

Three are three major findings in the study. First, national policy and criteria and standards in distance education have been developed in the majority of Asian nations. Second, non-signatories of the Tokyo Convention had a higher proportion of having related policies, regulations and criteria in CBHE and distance education. Third, national policies and regulations; and lack of professional staff are two common challenges implementing QA in new types of providers.

The findings are of value for policymakers, QA agencies and universities to advocate the new QA model as a systematic approach in response to changing higher education landscape in the post pandemic era.

Before the turn of the century, taking overseas students was more about a diplomatic issue dominated by the state in China, for which reason this section is relatively independent within the higher education system. However, evidence from a series of new policy documents and their impacts suggests that international student mobility (ISM) has been intensively shaped by the central government in the desire to promote its national strategy, namely the belt and road initiative. ISM policy, although with a significant proportion marketized, was introduced for a clear purpose of cultural diplomacy. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Looking beyond the debate of market-driven vs state-dominated, this paper attempts to provide a thorough understanding of this changing pattern based on examination of key changes of policy statements along with official data analysis.

This paper argues that the new pattern must be understood against a context of a hierarchy of higher education institutes in contemporary China: a sector led by a small number of prestigious universities generously funded by the central government with a large number of ordinary universities underfunded and eager to generate income. Prestigious institutes enroll international students to satisfy performance indicators listed by policies like “Double First-rate”; other universities, benefiting from the reputation and momentum generated by the top ones, take self-funded students for profit.

By making good use of both performance indicators and market motives, the country managed to move a state-dominated ISM policy in the twentieth century into the existing state-steering marketization model and made China a major destination for overseas study.