Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Comparative analysis explores governance characteristics of quality assurance agencies in Europe and Latin America, highlighting differences in accountability and independence.
This contribution examines recent transformation in the institutionalization of a new mode of governance in the field of Higher Education. We identify three characteristics of the institutional design of public Quality Assurance Agencies (QAAs) that operate at the national level in the field of higher education. In order to do so, we examine three de jure dimensions to explore the capabilities of regulatory agencies, based on their legal frameworks: (1) the agency’s capacity to act independently from political principals, specifically, its relationship with the executive; (2) the agency’s accountability towards society and stakeholders ; and, (3) the scope of policy and regulatory responsibilities the agency is granted. In addition, we also explore the role of representativeness and expertise in QAAs decision-making bodies, something particularly relevant in quality assurance. Our empirical analysis is based on formal agencies’ constitutive norms and regulations for more than 40 countries in Europe and Latin America. The analysis introduced allows us to compare the characteristics of these agencies in different higher education policy regimes across Latin America and Europe, and to discuss their variations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Juanatey et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: