Išorinio kokybės užtikrinimo kaita: Lietuvos aukštojo mokslo atvejis

Abstract

Straipsnyje analizuojama išorinio kokybės užtikrinimo kaita. Atskleidžiama kokybės užtikrinimo samprata, apibūdinama trijų užsienio šalių kokybės užtikrinimo kaita, analizuojant veiksnius paskatinusius pokyčius, pateikiami Lietuvos išorinio vertinimo ypatumai ir galimos kaitos kryptys

Today nearly all European countries have established national quality assurance systems. Nearly all systems involve four main elements: quality assurance agency, self-evaluation report, peers review and public report on evaluation results. Central and Eastern European countries (Lithuania among them) are still using accreditation practices and focusing only on minimum standards, using narrow and specific criteria while disregarding the overall educational context, impinging on academic freedom, being a restraint on innovation and quality enhancement. Increasing autonomy of higher education institutions and responsibility for the activities stimulate changes in external quality assurance looking for right balance between autonomy and control. This article is aimed at formulating the answer to the question – what changes of external quality assurance should be introduces in order to stimulate internal quality assurance processes and promoting autonomy of higher education institutions. The formation of universal quality assurance model was highly influenced by the alterations in European higher education area. Although all the systems comprise the same elements, they use difference quality assurance procedures that differ in aims and objects. Examples of United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland highlighted the move towards audits of internal quality assurance systems in higher education institutions. Today Lithuania pursues two types of external evaluation – programme evaluation and institutional review. The aims of both types of evaluations involve accountability, quality enhancement and provision of information. As every evaluation is led by accreditation decision it is obvious that accountability is dominant. We could state that quality assurance in Lithuania is a political tool aimed at control of higher education. [...]