dc.contributor.author |
Kilfoil, W.R. (Wendy Ruth), 1952-
|
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2011-11-16T08:47:54Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2011-11-16T08:47:54Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2005 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
Kilfoil, W.R. 2005, 'Quality assurance and accreditation in open distance learning', Progressio, vol. 27,no. 1 & 2, pp. 4-13. |
en |
dc.identifier.issn |
0256-8853 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/10500/5049 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
This article examines key concepts in quality assurance and
accreditation, and then compares the situation in the United
States of America (US), the United Kingdom (UK) and South
Africa, with a view to understanding the implications for open
distance learning (ODL). The concepts to be discussed are:
quality assurance, accreditation, quality assessment, quality
audit, quality control and quality management system, on the
one hand, and accountability and improvement, on the other.
The Distance Education and Training Council in Washington DC
and the Middle States Accrediting Agency form the basis for
the US discussion and the Quality Assurance Agency is centres
to the UK discussion. In the South African context, the article
discusses the criteria of the Higher Education Quality
Committee (HEQC) of the Council on Higher Education and
those of the National Association of Distance Education and
Open Learning Organisations in South Africa (Nadeosa). The
experience of the University of South Africa (Unisa) in obtaining
accreditation in 2002 from the Distance Education and Training
Council (DETC) inWashington DC will give substance to some of
the discussion. |
|
dc.description.sponsorship |
This article examines key concepts in quality assurance and accreditation, and then compares the situation in the United States of America (US), the United Kingdom (UK) and South Africa, with a view to understanding the implications for open distance learning (ODL). The concepts to be discussed are: quality assurance, accreditation, quality assessment, quality audit, quality control and quality management system, on the one hand, and accountability and improvement, on the other. The Distance Education and Training Council in Washington DC and the Middle States Accrediting Agency form the basis for the US discussion and the Quality Assurance Agency is centres to the UK discussion. In the South African context, the article discusses the criteria of the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) of the Council on Higher Education and those of the National Association of Distance Education and Open Learning Organisations in South Africa (Nadeosa). The experience of the University of South Africa (Unisa) in obtaining accreditation in 2002 from the Distance Education and Training Council (DETC) inWashington DC will give substance to some of the discussion. |
en |
dc.language.iso |
en |
en |
dc.publisher |
Unisa Press |
en |
dc.subject |
Open distance learning |
en |
dc.subject |
Distance Education and Training Council |
en |
dc.subject |
Middle States Accrediting Agency |
en |
dc.subject |
Quality Assurance Agency |
en |
dc.subject |
Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC) |
en |
dc.subject |
National Association of Distance Education and Open Learning Organisations in South Africa (Nadeosa) |
en |
dc.title |
Quality assurance and accreditation in open distance learning |
en |
dc.type |
Article |
en |