How the Triangle of Bologna Quality Assurance, a National Legal Framework and Internal Quality Enhancement Supports Institutional Improvement

Seeu Review 12 (1):113-124 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The Republic of Macedonia has been a part of the Bologna process since 2003. The Ministry of Education, law and policy makers and higher education institutions have actively engaged with its main concepts. In parallel with this, since the adoption of the law on higher education in 2008 and the reform of the Accreditation and Evaluation Board, there have been numerous changes and amendments culminating in the fast-tracked adoption of a new law at the beginning of 2015. Some of its solutions created a huge debate among the academic community, other intellectuals and students themselves, resulting in the postponement of that law and a kind of legal vacuum. In such turbulent circumstances, individual higher education institutions had to consider how and to what extent to adopt and develop relevant standards and guidelines, comply with the legal framework and promote good practice. The aim of this paper is to present how these three aspects, Bologna standards and guidelines for Quality Assurance, a national legal framework and an institutional approach are being reflected, merged and implemented at a relatively young higher education institution. It questions the impact of these three elements on each other and how one institution’s drive for improvement is affected. This is done through a qualitative analysis of the three-fold perspectives. The conclusions and recommendations are expected to be of use to policy makers in the country and region as they evaluate how international trends and good practice fit into the socio-economic and political conditions of RM and similar countries. At the same time, it can demonstrate how far institutional quality assurance and progress can be implemented and recognized in the country itself and by some international stakeholders. It can also prove that the South East European University is a national leader in this field as RM has no functioning QA evaluation system, while SEEU has managed to create a well structured and operating one, based on international and institutional experiences.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,440

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Quality Assurance in Legal Translation: Evaluating Process, Competence and Product in the Pursuit of Adequacy.Fernando Prieto Ramos - 2015 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 28 (1):11-30.
The concept of quality in clinical research.Dorota Śwituła - 2006 - Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):147-156.
The life and diverse contributions of dr L. M. luran.Mohamed Zairi - 2013 - In Morgen Witzel & Malcolm Warner (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Management Theorists. Oxford University Press. pp. 219.
Medical fallibility and the autopsy in the USA.Jack Hasson - 1997 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 3 (3):229-234.
Quality of life--a response to K C Calman.A. Cribb - 1985 - Journal of Medical Ethics 11 (3):142-145.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-05-17

Downloads
19 (#805,206)

6 months
2 (#1,206,545)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references