The Quality Reform in higher education

Background

A comprehensive reform touching all aspects of higher education - degree structure, grading system, QA system, governance, funding, internationalisation, student guidance and assessment

The comprehensiveness of the reform would be of interest in itself; in addition, an external evaluation has found it successful, particularly as far as the educational aspects are concerned.

The two main reasons for the reform are
1) to achieve increased quality in higher education and research, and
2) to implement the Bologna Process. A Royal Commission was appointed already in April 1998 to examine the system of higher education in Norway - an additional mandate following from the Bologna Declaration was given in 1999. A green paper was submitted in May 2000

All documentation is in Norwegian: white papers on the Quality Reform, 2001 and 2002, Bills (proposals for legal amendments, new law, 2002 and 2005, respectively), and annual budgets for the Ministry of Education and Research, particularly that for 2002, in which the new funding model is explained.  The evaluation reports on the Quality Reform, can be ordered from the website of the Research Council of Norway, http:/forskningsradet.no

Aims and targets

The aim was a thorough reform of higher education in Norway - in terms of study programmes/degree structure, better quality of higher education, better follow-up of students and better quality assurance, more varied forms of student guidance, assessment and evaluation, more internationalisation, better retention and completion rates, and more institutional autonomy.

Targets include:

• New degree structure with bachelor's and master's degrees following the "Bologna" 3 + 2 model (2002, compulsory for all students entering HE as from autumn 2003)  
• New grading and credit point systems according to the ECTS model (change from 20 to 60 points per year and introduction of grades A - E + F)  
• More systematic quality assurance, incl establishment of a national quality assurance agency (NOKUT) as from Jan 2003  
• More ambitious internationalisation targets, incl establishment of centre for internationalisation of higher education in 2004  
• New, more result-based funding model for HEIs from 2002  - New, more result-based system of financial support to students (2002)  
• Increased institutional autonomy (202)  

• Changes in governance at the institutional level (2005)

Strategy and actions

In the implementation phase, stakeholder involvement was very strong - through sector representation in the 19 (ministerial) projects on specific issues relating to the implementation (on funding, internationalisation, staff policy, structure of study programmes, etc.), through meetings and continuous dialogue with the sector, and through close monitoring.

There was a minority government when reform was launched through a white paper in 2001, and the Storting (i.e. parliament) requested five more white papers on specific issues. These were presented by a new government in spring 2002 and dealt with
1. exceptions to the new degree structure,
2. recruitment of academic staff,
3. higher education in the arts,
4. Sami higher education, and
5. teacher education.
The two acts on respectively public and private higher education were amended in 2002, and a new act on higher education, concerning both public and private higher education, was decided in 2005. Two new government agencies have been established, one for quality assurance (NOKUT, 2003) and one for internationalisation (SIU, 2004). In addition, new reporting and monitoring requirements and procedures have been introduced for the higher education institutions as a consequence of the new funding model and to follow up the reform implementation ("new public management").

Monitoring and evaluation

There has been an external evaluation of the reform in the period 2003 - 2007 by the Rokkan Centre of the University of Bergen and NIFU STEP, following a call organised by the Research Council of Norway. The results of the evaluation were published through 10 reports in 2006 and a final report in January 2007.  - Regular monitoring of the reform implementation takes place through budgetary procedures, including reporting and annual governance meetings between the Ministry and the higher education institutions, and through other meetings with the sector on specific topics

Funding/Cost effectiveness

increased number of credits obtained per student per year

Sustainability/Transferability

Outcomes/impacts

Achievements

Graduation: Increased
Employability: Increased though hard to know whether to attribute to labour market situation or to reform.

Success factors

Key factors for success:  - a willingness to change among HE staff  - a good relationship between the Ministry and the management of HEIs  - the comprehensiveness of the reform  - the financing of reform efforts

Unintended impacts

With more time spent on teaching, to really provide the intended new teaching, as well as better follow-up and new evaluation and assessment methods of students, many academic staff, particularly at the universities, report that they have less time for research than before.

Strengths and weaknesses

In addition to the success factors mentioned in box 18 above, the importance of stakeholder involvement in the implementation phase should also be underlined. The main challenges ahead are to ensure sufficient time for research while retaining the achievements in education, and promote better strategic work at the HEIs, particularly regarding internationalisation and the development of study profile.

Curricular reform

Three cycle system
Qualifications frameworks
Recognition
Mobility

Funding reform

New models of funding
Grants and loans

Governance reform

Autonomy for Universities
Internal accountability for universities
External accountability of universities
Innovation and knowledge transfer

Management reform