Research Repository

Quality improvement, quality assurance, and benchmarking: comparing two frameworks for managing quality processes in open and distance learning

Inglis, Alistair (2005) Quality improvement, quality assurance, and benchmarking: comparing two frameworks for managing quality processes in open and distance learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 6 (1). ISSN 1492-3831

Full text for this resource is not available from the Research Repository.

Abstract

Managing quality processes become critically important for higher education institutions generally, but especially for institutions involved in open and distance learning. In Australia, managers of centers responsible for open and distance learning have identified two frameworks that potentially offer ways of conceiving of the application of quality processes: the Quality Framework published in Inglis, Ling, and Joosten (1999); and the Benchmarking Framework published in McKinnon, Walker, and Davis (2000). However, managers who have been considering applying one or other framework within their institutional contexts have had to face the issue of how they should choose between, or combine the use, of these frameworks. Part of their dilemma lies in distinguishing among the related functions of quality improvement, quality assurance, and benchmarking. This article compares the frameworks in terms of their scope, institutional application, structures, and method of application, and then considers what implications the similarities and differences between the frameworks have for their use.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: ResPubID10006; quality improvement, quality assurance, benchmarking, open learning, distance learning
Subjects: FOR Classification > 1301 Education Systems
Faculty/School/Research Centre/Department > VU College
Faculty/School/Research Centre/Department > School of Education
Depositing User: VUIR
Date Deposited: 20 Mar 2012 04:10
Last Modified: 20 Mar 2012 04:10
URI: http://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/eprint/2788
ePrint Statistics: View download statistics for this item
Citations in Scopus: 13 - View on Scopus

Repository staff only

View Item View Item

Search Google Scholar