Menu
The Quality and Value component is a main building block in the learn-and-work ecosystem. A well-functioning ecosystem requires credential providers to award high-quality, valuable credentials. It also depends on employers’ trust in the quality of credentials that job applicants present. Quality is a concept, therefore, that touches the entire ecosystem.
Most economically developed nations recognize that a strong pool of skilled workers is needed to sustain and develop their economies. With rapid advances in technology, workers need lifelong learning and just-in-time learning (reskilling, upskilling). Advances in the knowledge base, especially in science and technology, require that the developers of new knowledge—such as higher education institutions and research organizations—produce high quality outcomes in both learning and research.
In traditional higher education institutions, quality has been viewed broadly. It has been seen to involve all institutional functions and activities, including: teaching and academic programs, research and scholarship, staffing, students, building, facilities, equipment, services to the community and the academic environment.
Quality assurance focuses on the process to achieve quality. It seeks to convince internal and external constituents that a credential provider has processes that consistently produce high-quality outcomes. Quality assurance also makes accountability for quality explicit at various points within an institution since quality is the responsibility of everyone in the organization. Quality assurance is a continuous, active, and responsive process which includes strong evaluation and feedback loops. Effective communication is essential to a successful quality assurance system. At its core, quality assurance asks the question, “How does an institution know that it is achieving the desired results?”
In the quality assurance literature, the characteristics of quality are primarily expressed in the language of the employers who hire institutions’ graduates. The following are characteristics often identified for quality:
The literature also cites a distinctive set of institutional characteristics and behaviors that increase the likelihood that the above outcomes will be realized. These characteristics include:
Two stakeholder groups are particularly active in the quality and value components of the learn-and-work ecosystem: state policymakers and accreditation entities. The “value” aspect of quality and value is often associated with economic and employability measures. State policymakers are especially interested in return on investment (ROI) for various credentials offered in their states, particularly the growing number of non-degree credentials. States are focusing on high value credentials that lead to future employment or further education.
Much of the current support for quality assurance rests on the assertion that higher education needs a strengthened system of accountability. Many concerned parties, particularly those outside institutions (e.g., state and federal officials, parents, industry leaders), believe that a consistently high level of collegiate learning is no longer guaranteed and that institutions must actively engage in assurance processes. Advocates of quality assurance view accountability as necessary not only to satisfy external constituents but as a precondition for improvement, especially in undergraduate education. Advocates of quality assurance also are concerned that the current system of accreditation in the U.S. does not do a credible job of guaranteeing quality, especially given the time and resources devoted to the process. Though several changes have been proposed in U.S. accreditation to address the system’s weakest features, proposed changes have not been well received by institutions across the board, particularly private institutions, and reforms have stalled. Advocates of quality assurance also assert that a rigorous quality assurance system assists both in considering broader questions about the definitions of and evidence for quality, and in clarifying an institution’s mission and purpose.
Assuring quality is only a part of what is needed to satisfy accountability demands; many higher education commentators believe however that this is the best place to start. They believe the present time may represent the last chance for the academy to help shape a workable future framework for quality assurance, accountability, and improvement. If internal forces mitigate against the establishment of quality processes, external stakeholders will force their own version on the academy.
Gaston and Van Noy note that quality must be closely aligned with equity in the credentials marketplace. Key reasons are growing political polarization, increased focus on racial justice, and public health concerns associated with the pandemic. While some academic leaders believe circumstances require them to prioritize one above the other (quality versus equity), many see both as essential. With growing concern about quality (e.g., employer dissatisfaction with new employees, increases in postsecondary education costs, breakdowns in accountability, institutional closures) and inequities (e.g., economic barriers, discriminatory testing, unequal access to technology, variances in the quality of schools), both must be priorities. During the pandemic, “Quality has suffered and inequalities have become more conspicuous.” Addressing quality, value, and equity together can help boost social mobility. “Individuals who obtain credentials with recognized value can gain access to successful careers and satisfying lives. And there are benefits for society as well.”
There are many global efforts to address issues of quality and value in credentialing. Organizations playing major leadership roles include UNESCO, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the Global Forum on International Quality Assurance.
American Council of Education. (2016). Quality Dimensions for Connected Credentials.
Credential Currency: How States Can Identify and Promote Credentials of Value, Education Strategy Group & Advance CTE, September 2018
Defining Quality Non-Degree Credentials for States, National Skills Coalition, September 2019
Gaston, P. and Van Noy, M. (2022) Credentials. Understand the Problems. Identify the Opportunities. Create the Solutions. Stylus.
Hanson, A. (2021, July 2). Examining the Value of Nondegree Credentials. Strada
Lumina Foundation.(September 2019). Unlocking the Nation’s Potential: A Model to Advance Quality and Equity in Education Beyond High School.
National Conference of State Legislatures. (2022, September 8). Credentials of Value
https://www.ncsl.org/research/education/credentials-of-value.aspx
Understanding Quality: The Role of States in Supporting Quality Non-Degree Credentials, National Governors Association and Workcred, 2020
UNESCO (2005). Guidelines for Quality Provision in Cross-border Higher Education. https://vdocument.in/unesco-quality-assurance-guidelines.html?page=1 Van Noy, M. and Michael, S. (2019, July). Non-Degree Credential Quality: A Conceptual Framework to Guide Measurement. Rutgers Education and Employment Research Center
Wilger, A. (1997). Quality Assurance in Higher Education: A Literature Review. National Center for Postsecondary Improvement, Stanford University
Wilson, F.S. (2019).Congresswoman Wilson introduced the Quality Higher Education Act. https://wilson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congresswoman-wilson-introduces-ther-qualikty-higher-education-act
For the ecosystem to function effectively, all parts of the system must be connected and coordinated.
