No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
Comparing the Involvment of Academic Librarians in the Cycical Review Process for Graduate Programs in the Humanities and in the sciences
Abstract
In Ontario, all graduate programs at publicly assisted universities must be reviewed on a cyclical basis at least once every eight years. This paper adopts a corpus-based approach to investigate and compare how academic librarians are integrated into the cyclical review process for graduate programs in the Humanities and graduate programs in the Sciences. Findings reveal that these two broad disciplinary cultures differ in the way and the degree to which they recognize libraries and involve librarians in the program review process.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
The period of 2010 to 2014 marked a relatively stable stage in the evolving
quality assurance system for Ontario postsecondary education, particularly
following massive changes after 2000. The current system consists of three
frameworks overseen respectively by three quality assurance agencies -- the
Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance, the Ontario College Quality
Assurance Service, and the Postsecondary Education Quality Assessment Board,
each serving different purposes. This paper uses van Vught and Westerheijden’s
(1994) general model of quality assessment and Jeliazkova and Westerheijden’s
(2002) Phase Model of quality assurance systems development as heuristic
tools for the analysis. The following four areas are discussed: formalized
quality mechanisms with diversity; the arms-length tripartite relationship with
a distinction between self-regulation and government regulation; mixed phases
of quality assurance development and the maturing process; and gaps in the
system. It is argued that within fifteen years, a comprehensive and relatively
mature quality assurance system with diverse but rigorous mechanisms has been
developed for Ontario postsecondary education although a few deficiencies exist,
including the continued lack of coordination within the system. The evolution
of the system appears to reflect a path trajectory of governance structure
development of the Ontario postsecondary education system as well as be a result
of interactions between the local and the global.
The ways in which university quality assessments are developed reveal a great deal about value constructs surrounding higher education. Measures developed and consumed by external stakeholders, in particular, indicate which elements of academia are broadly perceived to be most reflective of quality. This paper examines the historical context of library quality assessment and reviews the literature related to how library value is framed in three forms of external evaluation: accreditation, university rankings, and student surveys. The review finds that the library’s contribution to university quality, when it is considered at all, continues to be measured in terms of collections, spaces, and expenditures, despite significant expansion of library services into non-traditional arenas, including teaching and research, scholarly communications, and data management and visualization. These findings are contrasted with the frequently invoked notion of the library as the heart of the university.
Currently, there is a trend toward massification of higher education, whereby a greater proportion of the population is enrolling in studies beyond high school. Canadian universities are now serving more than 1 million full- and part-time students and this number is expected to continue to increase (Statistics Canada, 2010). How is it possible, then, to maintain, enhance, and assure quality of university education when we are faced with increasing student enrolments without corresponding increases in faculty, space, government funding, and other necessary instructional resources?
QAF, UUDLEs and GDLEs: What Ontario's New Quality Assurance Framework Means for Academic Librarians, Ontario Library Association Super Conference
- K Nicholson
- D Thomas
- C Stephenson
Nicholson, K., Thomas, D., & Stephenson, C. (2011). QAF, UUDLEs and GDLEs: What
Ontario's New Quality Assurance Framework Means for Academic Librarians, Ontario Library
Association Super Conference 2011. Retrieved from
http://works.bepress.com/karen_nicholson/15/